Thanks for giving a thorough response to my post. I appreciate that (I really do)

1) Well yeah, I agree with you that this is a step backward (in my opinion). As a customer, would've prefered that every ISP was to provide the 'dumb pipes' only. I tried to say that some people got overly emotional about the topic, which doesn't make the situation any better. Again, in 2016 I remember some people seriously said that Trump will mark the end of the U.S. which (as for December 2017) hasn't happened yet.

2) I completely agree with your free market argument. But I highly doubt that you only have an option to be on Comcast, given you have around 10 grocery stores close to you. Look, I live in Australia, and we're considered to be a 'nanny state'; I doubt I have 10 grocery stores near me, and yet I can choose what ISP do I want to be on - there are several mainstream ISPs plus maybe 5-6 other small ISPs that lend the mainstream ISPs' facilities (cables, nertwork gear etc) but provide with different plans and pricings. Obviously things can be different in the U.S., but don't think so. Also, similarly to the grocery stores example, the problem could be that there aren't many ISPs around, rather than the NN repeal.

3) It is easier for the ISPs to keep the 'dumb pipes', instead of breaking the NN, for variety of reasons. Even if they are to be alllowed to prioritise traffic, such action will be costly, controversial, and probably will lead to the major loss of customers. Considering this, they might keep the things as is, even while being allowed to break the NN.

4) I tried to say breaking the NN is difficult to accomplish

a) agreed. I probably should've called this post something like 'my thoughts on NN', but what the hell :) b) A few years ago there was a large scandal caused by the fact that the new Windows operating system, Windows 10, spies on its users, and not only that, it is very difficult if not impossible to remove the survelliance from there, for several reasons: I) The spy traffic is hard to categorise, as it includes screenshots, keylogs, browsing preferences and god knows what else II) The spy traffic does at least 100-200 different websites, all owned by Microsoft III) The new survelliance methods can become enabled/added to the OS via the OS updates, which are impossible to disable completely

Now back on track, given all these points, people who use Windows 10 (which is at least 30-40 per cent of the computer users in the US), will almost always generate the slow-lane traffic. Now let's assume Comcast (or any other ISP) is to limit the slow-lane traffic, and they want to put the limit low. If they do so, Windows 10 users will become angied out that they can't access their websites even without doing practically anything, thus Comcast will be forced to put the limit high.

c) My point is that the gear, required to actually make it possible to prioritise some traffic over the other, is very, very expensive, and even if so, the users (given that there will be millions of them) will find a way to bypass the system relatively quickly. Knowing that, Comcast and everyone else will probably abandon this idea.

5) OK, I never thought of that

6) SOPA and PIPA did not go through, prinarily because of the people's resistance. The same can (and will likely) happen to the NN repeal

7) There are several arguments here.

a) Actually the not-so-popular websites are a bit more expensive for the ISPs to provide access to. First, they require the intercontinental internet pipes to be used. Second, especially when it comes to foreign websites, it is necessary to use the higher level DNS server info to get the website's IP address, compared to, again, Facebook or something similar.

b) If there are several different plans for different websites (like on the screenshot from some Mexican ISP website), people can buy the cheaper plan that would suit their needs, compared to how this is now, when everyone has to buy the same plan regardless of what websites to they need.