A few days ago, the FCC voted 2 to 1 to repeal the rules of Net Neutrality.

Net Neutrality basically means that all information shared on the Internet is treated equally, and that some websites can't run faster than others.
Once Net Neutrality is repealed, big cable companies, like Comcast, AT&T, T-Mobile, Time Warner and Verizon, whose former lawyer ajit pai is now in charge of the FCC, shame on trump, can force websites and companies to pay a ransom, and if they refuse, their websites will be slowed down to a halt, so nobody can get into the website. This could happen to Vizzed, too!

Luckily, it doesn't go into effect until sometime in August or September. We still get a chance to give our comments.

I'm feeling very bad right now, knowing that we may have only a few months left before big cable starts holding entire websites hostage, enforcing censorship, and controlling what you can browse. We may still have a chance to save the Internet, but I think it's quite low, considering the current condition of the Government.

Two problems here...

1. "Considering the current condition of the government" As opposed to the condition it was in when the idea first surfaced? You realize that this is how these things go, right? An idea that the public doesn't want comes up, gets shot down, and gets put to vote as many times as is necessary to make it go through? Then if all else fails, we have the supreme court tell us we have to accept it regardless, because democracy. :V

2. "save the internet". That's wayyy too dramatic. The internet won't die as a result. It may be less pleasant, but it won't die. And besides, even if it was killed in the states (which is where this affects people) the world is so much bigger than the U.S., and the internet is all over the world. Let's not think too highly of ourselves and forget that we make up an almost negligible amount of the Earth's population. With or without us, the world is fine.


As for this idea: all we look at when we think of things like the government censoring things online is the negatives, but let's face it, there are upsides too. Do I support it? Not at all, but it won't ruin the internet for me. I only use it for legal things, so if illegal actions are stopped, yay for them. If my enjoyment is sapped from the net, I'll go offline more. Heck, it'd be healthier for me. xD

So yeah, hopefully this doesn't happen, but if it does... meh.

All I've managed to find on this is the fact that they've voted to kill Title II, not Net Neutrality itself. I haven't researched it extensively, but my understanding of it is that they were using Title II, which was put in place to try and break up the old Bell Telephone monopoly, to enforce Net Neutrality rules. Killing Title II is not killing Net Neutrality. While there've been no promises that they're going to put Net Neutrality back in place another way, it's still possible to reinstate Net Neutrality.

Either way, it's still not that big of a deal. While, in principle, I'm against censorship and extortion, I'm also against government intervention in private business in principle. The only difference is who's extorting and censoring. Big business controls the Internet, big business censors and extorts. Government controls the Internet, government censors and extorts. It's a losing battle without more private competition in the market.

To me the SOPA was more dangerous than Net Neutrality  

For those that do not know SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act) was a bill brought up mainly by California and New  York congress representatives. But the wording was highly controversial. The Bill had wording in it that even sharing a video could be punished. For example, this bill is to make sharing videos, games, and music that is not yours punishable by fine or prison.That means if you were to share a video with your friends on social media you may have gotten in trouble. Also the bill had wording in it that would have gave government the right to censor the internet. 

Sites like You tube, this site, and others could have been highly effected. Thankfully that bill failed as only 55 members of congress voted for it. The bill was brought back a few years ago but again did not get enough votes. 

So yeah I would say bills like SOPA are far more dangerous