Reply to post: Re: States' rights! States' rights!

FCC boss slams new Californian net neutrality law, brands it illegal

bombastic bob Silver badge
Meh

Re: States' rights! States' rights!

the U.S. Constitution is clear when it comes to interstate commerce. Long ago the decision was made that communications networks are (by definition) a form of 'interstate commerce', beginning with telegraph and telephone services. Even 'last mile' is under FCC jurisdiction, and this is where Cali-fornicate-you law would be superseded by Federal law. That's generally how it's done.

Besides, "net neutrality" is such a MISNOMER anyway, it doesn't describe what 'they' are really trying to do with it. The single biggest thing seems to be prioritization of some packets over others, particularly when it's paid prioritization. The end result is that everyone ends up having the same mediocre level of service, despite what you can afford to get. And so the "everyone is just another brick in the wall" militant-gummint-control-freak-socialist-types, who *FEEL* that *NOBODY* should *EVER* be able to "get something better for more money", want to PUNISH achievers by essentially DENYING them "the better level of service" that THEY can afford!

That's all it is. ENVY, and 'equalizing outcomes' on the backs of the achievers... with the notable exception, of course, of EXEMPTING those who MAKE the laws and their crony friends and contributors, because *THEY* will *ALWAYS* have *THEIRS* through special favors and exceptions, whereas 'the rest of us' must LIVE with that crap. It's _ALWAYS_ "the masses" aka "just another brick in the wall" minions, regular folk, who will pay for it somehow.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon