The way the author compares adoption rates of Cable vs DSL is disingenuous. They are not comparable, because not everyone who can subscribe to cable internet is within range of quality DSL signals. There are limitations that slow adoption that do not come from regulation of any kind.
You can not be "for" net neutrality but "against" Title II in the current context, as striking down Title II without creating separate neutrality legislation eliminates all legally codified net neutrality, and the current administration has zero interest in doing that.
The author is afraid that nn regulation would kill investment needed for increasing bandwidth.
Is that true? One principle I have is that when we have a controversial issue in the US, we should look at how other countries are handling it.
My understanding is that most developed countries have strong nn policies, and they have been expanding broadband a lot faster than the US. Anyone have the numbers to check if I am right?
You can not be "for" net neutrality but "against" Title II in the current context, as striking down Title II without creating separate neutrality legislation eliminates all legally codified net neutrality, and the current administration has zero interest in doing that.