So from my understanding of it, "Net Neutrality" is the concept that Internet Service Providers (like Verizon and Comcast) shouldn't be able to "discriminate" in how they treat Internet traffic, like prioritizing traffic to big commercial websites like Amazon and Disney Plus, for instance. This prevents the creation of "bundled" Internet service plans, which, depending on how they're adopted, could separate the Internet user population into different, smaller groups of people who have access to only certain parts of the Internet. There are also other types of discrimination under the concept of Net Neutrality that have to be banned, too, like privileging Internet traffic from certain types of machines (like iPhones), different types of users, etc. Often this is talked about in the context of privacy, control over data, fair playing fields and marketplaces of ideas, etc.
However, in the United States, the Net Neutrality concept is rarely invoked to question the existence of an Internet service provider market at all, even though if you take "Net Neutrality" to its logical conclusion, you must abolish any and all financial barriers to accessing the Internet, and make it an essentially free and uniform service for everyone. Otherwise, you will always have different classes of people who will have better Internet access and quality than others, and that's nowhere more apparent than in the failure to bring broadband to rural communities where the user base isn't considered large enough to justify the infrastructure development.
So is that really what Net Neutrality means? And does that mean everyone should have free high-speed Internet access (or legislation towards lowering Internet service costs)? Or should there always be better quality for people who pay more? Or something else?
Also, it's worth noting that private U.S. Internet service providers also outsource a ton of their work overseas. Over the years, the software development for a lot of the infrastructure behind the scenes of all our telecommunications has been globalized and outsourced overseas (or "offshoring" as it's also called), especially to India. So perhaps legislation or a public Internet monopoly could put a stop to that, too.
Poll choice is non-binding.
