Net Neutrality is a bad idea *cashes checks from AT&T*. Over at TechLiberation, Adam Theirer makes solid points regarding government’s inability to effectively regulate network industries *gets Cisco swag*. There’s not even an actual problem here, just an irrational jumping-to-conclusions *free FiOS for life*. Only children jump at shadows, and assume they are monsters *free Netflix? DOCTOR WHO. FOREVER.*
Adam’s piece boils down to three points. First, government has an abysmal track record for this kind of regulation. It hurts industry without protecting the public interest. Second, markets work better. Not perfectly, but better. (Pointing this out obviously makes all libertarians corporate shills.) To illustrate this second point, consider this, a typical minute on the internet:
Imagine all the millions of connections, conversations, creations, ideas, and exchanges this one minute represents. Imagine how heavily the regulatory hand would clamp down. Try this as a comparison; use Google to search for the U.S. Trademark Office site; now use the government’s internal search engine to find … anything helpful. Go on, I’ll wait. Which system was better? Rinse, and repeat with Yahoo!, or Bing, or another search engine.
Adam’s last point is there’s no constitutional basis for Net Neutrality regulation. That’s adorable, because politicians of both parties haven’t worried about that for at least a hundred years.