What do you think of the tone of the debate, and the appearance of pro-Net neutrality spokespeople like and Alyssa Milano?
Tauke: I think it's one of the stranger debates I've ever been involved in. It's almost like we're debating what is beauty and how do we define it and regulate it? The problem is that everyone has a different definition of Net neutrality. If you look at the four major companies that are supporting the Net neutrality arguments, there are three distinct definitions of what Net neutrality should mean.
The question becomes which way do you think the market will better develop? If government sets policy today that dictates how the market develops? We think it should develop in the free market space, and government regulation should come in when a problem becomes apparent.
He's right on the money here. Most net neutrality advocates don't even seem to know what they are advocating, let alone understand the current legal or technological structure of the Internet in the U.S. (or elsewhere). They just think the telcos are somehow trying to take control of the Internet, block their access to websites, redirect them to different sites than they request, and intentionally degrade their service to make things slow, and they need to be stopped.
Hat tip: Matt S., the Only Republican in San Francisco.