It is not that hard if you actually understand the history of the rules. The article forgets to mention that there were much stronger regulations in place during the 90s -- like DSL services being required to share their physical infrastructure with competitors. It forgets to mention the episode where Comcast tried to charge residential customers an extra fee just for the privilege of using VPN applications. It also focuses more on edge services than on the larger issue of net neutrality: deploying new protocols and Internet applications without having to negotiate with ISPs for permission to do so.
That’s an interesting part in there about how only one company in history really did something that NN would have prevented, and the FCC quickly fixed that anyhow. The other often sited examples like Comcast temporarily limiting torrent traffic for network management reasons - is a valid reason to do so even under 2015’s NN ruling (really, even under NN an ISP can throttle for network management reasons).
So the question I have is why did FAANG, Reddit, and all of tech media jump so heavily into panic mode regarding NN repeal? It seems very unlikely their priorities sync up with mine.
ESP when you consider that FAANG has been in censorship mode of content with little concern for obviousness since 2015, expanding their data mining, and swinging their weight into would-be competitors. Your article makes good points, and it makes me think my skepticism of the corperate directed outrage against NN repeal is justified.
FAANG companies have a very obvious interest in a net neutrality resolution. The ubiquity of the coverage of this particular bit of regulation is the FAANG companies flexing their PR muscle.
It's hard to read this and walk away supporting net neutrality.