So, I've searched a lot around the web, trying to figure out what all the buzz with net neutrality is about. However all the articles I've found are clearly, heavily biased, so for the sake of the people like me, could some of you guys give clear, concise arguments from both sides? All arguments will be put down in this post over time, allowing for folks like me to get all the details with non of the bias. Tl;dr present arguments for or against net neutrality in comments, will make mega thread based off those posts. P.S I would appreciate it if you guys penned down your own arguments and counter arguments so I could add them to the post MAIN PRO-NEUTRAL ARGUMENTS: Argument: Net Neutrality prevents throttling by ISPs i.e keeps the net neutral, hence the name. Counter-Argument: At the same time it makes it harder to for innovation to happen in the marketplace. We should instead let the market do as it will to evantually create lower prices and better efficiency for the consumer. Argument: ISPs hold a massive monopoly on the market, net neutrality keeps them under control. Side note: this is a heavily disputed argument that is only valid in certain cases. Analyze your options and come to personal conclusions. MAIN ANTI-NEUTRAL ARGUMENTS: Argument: The average consumer didn't even notice the shift from Net Neutrality and back again. This clearly isn't affecting anyone. Counter-Argument: That doesn't mean it hasn't happened. Evidence of ISP throttling has appeared all over the place, and it probably won't stop. Argument: Net Neutrality (in the form of placing ISPs under Title II regulations) isn't necessary. we already have antitrust laws in place to stop this kind of behavior.