I'm not totally decided where I stand on this net neutrality thing.
My biases:
-- The interest and all the cool tech along with it was developed by innovative private companies, not the govt.
-- Govt regulation is more typically a bad thing than good thing, but can be either.
-- I'm a T-Mobile user and their "free video streaming" (essentially compressing and de-prioritizing streaming content) which lowers the quality, but makes it available in unlimited quantities for a low price, goes against net neutrality tenets, but is good for the consumer who chooses T-Mobile.
I do feel slightly that 'net neutrality' is a solution in search of a problem. Prior to 2015, was Comcast charging extra to view Google relative to Yahoo. Of course not? What makes everyone think they will start doing that now? And I say that knowing full well that Comcast execs are complete corporate dbags.
Did the 2015 net neutrality do anything to address the problems of local monopolies on internet service? Not as far as I can tell. So why this fear of reversal leading to more monopoly?
In other aspects of life, there is definitely different pricing for peak services and peak periods. Want a drink after happy hour ends? You pay more. Want to use your washing machine at 5pm in Phoenix instead of 2am in Phoenix? You pay more per kwh. Why should internet utilities be held to a different standard?
Since when is full speed Netflix a god-given right? First world problem if I ever heard it. Would you rather have your 4k netflix not pixelate for 1 second or some grandma in the boonies able to call EMS via her VOIP phone line? QOS rules make sense for local networks and for bigger ones too. Why punish these companies for trying to optimize traffic over the multi-billion dollar networks they build, maintain, and support for ALL costumers? If the customer isn't happy for whatever reason, the are free to cancel service.
Again, solution in search of problem. Better things for politicians to worry about.