That's an interesting perspective. Do you not think in times of war greater access to information is a great advantage of the internet? I'm curious as to why you would think that in wartime restricting information might be a good thing (other than persisting the propagation of propaganda!)
He doesn't think that; he thinks that Net neutrality is the first step on the road to government censorship of the Internet. I'm not sure by what mechanism.
Exactly, but also remember, an exploit is an exploit, whether someone uses it or not. If by passing Net Neutrality laws, govt can take over the Internet, then govt can take over the internet at war time even without net neutrality laws.
Net Neutrality laws simply make it easier for govt to use this exploit. A lot of HN audience is sympathetic to Canada or UK style restrictions on News channels, where govt is the final arbiter of whether a news channel is spreading lies or not. In America, the people are allowed to do that, and sure people paid a lot of money to listen to lies by NYT that Hillary was on her way to White House (I have even defended NYT's 2016 coverage to my pissed off liberal friends who wanted to cancel their subscription after the elections), but it's their choice. We can't allow govt to control media in the name of 'fairness'.
How does enforcing net neutrality enable censorship? What does one thing have to do with the other?
And what about the (in my opinion, more realistic in the United States) risk of private corporations such as Internet service providers restricting what their users see? Especially when you consider in how many cases your choices are one ISP or else no Internet access at all?
I don't think that at all, I think you misread my argument. I'm saying that I'd trust the economic incentives to keep information flowing than to trust the political incentives. A company which delivers information to people who want it will make more profit over a company which does not do this.
> I'm saying that I'd trust the economic incentives to keep information flowing than to trust the political incentives.
The economic incentives are for the last-mile ISP monopolies to keep being last-mile ISP monopolies, throttling traffic in cases where it suits there interests.
