What can you get to within a 15-minute walk of your house?
A recent YouGov survey asked Americans what they think they should be able to get to within a 15-minute walk of their house.
Of these choices, I can currently walk to all of them from my apartment, aside from a university (no biggie, I'm not currently studying, although there is a Tafe within walking distance), a hospital, and a sports arena.
How many can you get to with a 15 minute walk from your house?
You‘re missing the point. They want the police to act in these instances, that’s what they‘re there for. They don‘t want infrastructure providers to play the role of the police, as that sets a precedent that providers can just decide which websites they want to provide to you. It’s step one to a future where the internet you get will only be facebook, youtube and twitter.
That‘s what they‘ve been doing for years, decades even. Just because it hit the „right“ website this time doesn’t mean this particular net neutrality violation should be ignored. On the contrary, it would be hypocritical for them to argue for net neutrality for years and then be like „oh well, those KF people suck so this time we‘re fine with it“. And why does it matter if anyone is suing? Is net neutrality only for those who have the motivation and/or means to sue?
I think the reactions to their article actually demonstrate very well why this blog post needed to be made. If we‘re willing to immediately give up on net neutrality because in this case it would have benefited a bad actor, we might as well not argue for net neutrality at all. Pointing this out is important and I don‘t think it‘s tone deaf.
I‘m not saying you did, but many people in the linked thread do so by endorsing the actions of the ISP. And in my opinion, those reactions demonstrate why this article is not pointless or tone deaf. Because many people just don’t realise that net neutrality with exceptions doesn‘t exist.