In the future without any of the 2015 regulations in place (tomorrow and thereafter), "net neutrality" Title II supporters will just continue to act as if ISPs are just putting off the throttling and blocking for a later date, et cetera. The facts are simple: the internet was (and will be) just fine without the overregulation of "net neutrality" Title II, and its advocates will most likely refuse to admit that, no matter how much time passes without any negative changes to the way the internet works.

There are no ISPs that actually have plans to throttle or block for profit or political reasons, or make website packages, and there would be no reason for them to because it would just make customers angry and in turn hurt profits and shareholder relations. All those ideas were created by the "net neutrality" advocates themselves while they lobbied for support of potential Title II regulations on the internet years ago.

So yeah, TLDR; As time goes on without the extreme regulations called "net neutrality", its supporters will continue to act as if the internet is destroyed, despite it being just fine (if not better) without the regulations in place.

• Age: 36

• Sex: Male

• Height: 6 ft

• Weight 200 lbs

• Race White

• Duration of complaint 1 week

• Location (Geographic and on body) Throat and lungs

• Any existing relevant medical issues (if any) None

• Current medications: Augmentin, Levalbuterol, Prenisone

A week ago I aspirated some pasta. Definitely felt it travel deep down into my airway and then get stuck. Tried different methods of laying down and coughing or "vibrating" my airway to get it to come up but it did not.

What happens to food like pasta after you aspirate it? Does it break down and get eliminated by the phlegm or is it stuck down there for weeks until the body attacks it and (hopefully) breaks it up? Does something like a cooked pasta ever break down when it gets stuck in the lungs?

Orzo is a very long shaped pasta (see pic of the actual pasta I cooked https://imgur.com/a/2vog8QQ ) that I feel could get lodged in the airway down there and is causing constant irritation in my lungs making me cough non-stop.

I am currently on prednisone and augmentin my prime care called in for me I also have tried using my expired levalbuterol inhaler but nothing is working so far... Can I do anything else? Should I do anything else like push for bronchoscopy? I'm worried about permenent lung scarring from all this coughing and irritation.

How else can I reduce my sensation to cough and why am I coughing so much since the aspiration?

Have there been any studies on what happens to food after aspiration?

This is gold: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/01/att-ceos-net-neutrality-plan-calls-for-regulation-of-websites/

The same companies that are asking for net neutrality for years suddenly have a change of tune when they should be included in regulation talks.

This is what I said for so many months. They are interested in net neutrality against ISP's to protect their monopolies. They want absolute zero regulation when it comes to their services.

In case some people don't understand, Google or Facebook are not mere simple websites. They own massive data centers with hundreds of thousands of servers. They have their own network, their own switches, routers, and massive amounts of network blocks. They control more Internet packets than all Internet service providers on earth combined.

They are not simple websites !!! They have far more Internet infraestructure than Verizon or Comcast together and they reach far more people and manage more significant chunks of Internet eyeballs. Youtube alone is a % of the worlds Internet traffic, but they pretend to be just a website to skip regulation.

NO !!!! They have also filtered, censored and prioritized their services before. They SHOULD be regulated just like ISP's. Their size and reach is more dangerous than any ISP because Comcast or Verizon only affect the US, those companies affect the world.

I find it incredibly dishonest from those companies to deny any regulations when it comes to them but are trigger happy to ask regulations for other companies that are smaller than they are and have less reach. It is the correct thing to do if we want a free, honest and open internet. We need innovation, and we can't do that if small players don't have a chance. By small, I mean you and everyone else that wants to start a new venture online.

The US Internet is under threat from ISP's, yes. But the world's Internet is also under threat from those companies that have such a reach now that they don't give smaller competitors a chance to grow. Remember, AT&T was a monopoly and they were forced to break up by the government. What some people don't understand is that they and standard oil didn't even have the market share than some of those companies have today and nobody is asking to break them up (while Google is already afraid so they created Alphabet to pretend different legal structures). But at least you should ask for the same regulations in regards to net neutrality. You will see how quickly they change their tune if people ask to include them in net neutrality regulations. Suddenly they will go against net neutrality which means it was never about you. It was about them and protecting their business.

The Internet belongs to all of us, not just some US silicon valley companies.

I've received two emails, one from my state senator and one from my district congressman, thanking me for my support of net neutrality. Funny thing is I never expressed my stance on NN to either of them. Obviously someone is falsely impersonating me and my stance on NN.

Copy of the letter: https://imgur.com/gallery/ssQw4

Everyone here agrees that ISPs should not throttle/paywall/censor/restrict our content. Period. End of story. ISPs are notoriously shady, but here are some reassurances Trump's FCC has given us:

FTC Privacy Regulation, sec.177 aka Facebook, Reddit, etc. can't snoop on your privacy:

Restoring FTC [Federal Trade Commission] jurisdiction over ISPs will enable the FTC to apply its extensive privacy and data security expertise to provide the uniform online privacy protections that consumers expect and deserve.651

Direct quote from Trump's FCC: No throttling. FCC release, p.83

Many of the largest ISPs (Comcast, AT&T, Verizon, Cox, Frontier, etc.) have committed in this proceeding not to block or throttle legal content.507 These commitments can be enforced by the FTC under Section 5, protecting consumers without imposing public-utility regulation on ISPs.508

b-but im an ISP I don't wanna be transparent I just wanna bait-and-switch my customers (FCC release p.82):

The FTC’s unfair-and-deceptive-practices authority “prohibits companies from selling consumers one product or service but providing them something different,” which makes voluntary commitments enforceable.502 The FTC also requires the “disclos[ur]e [of] material information if not disclosing it would mislead the consumer,” so if an ISP “failed to disclose blocking, throttling, or other practices that would matter to a reasonable consumer, the FTC’s deception authority would apply.”503

Specifically good for new media ISPs cannot conspire. (FCC invokes Sherman Act Antitrust Laws, Section 144, p.85, FCC release)

Section 1 of the Sherman Act bars contracts, combinations, or conspiracies in restraint of trade, making anticompetitive arrangements illegal. If ISPs reached agreements to unfairly block, throttle, or discriminate against Internet conduct or applications, these agreements would be per seillegal under the antitrust laws.518

**UNLIMITED NETFLIX, and other video sources (Yes this includes porn) **

If an ISP that also sells video services degrades the speed or quality of competing “Over the Top” video services (such as Netflix),526 that conduct could be challenged as anticompetitive foreclosure.

Here's the big one. Free Press was pushing hard to mess up the network's ability to regulate and wanted to censor it hard. This won't happen under Trump's FCC (THANK GOD)

We also conclude that the Commission should have been cautioned against reclassifying broadband Internet access service as a telecommunications service in 2015 because doing so involved “laying claim to extravagant statutory power over the national economy ..."

And this is the big one. Unlike Obama's net neutrality this new system would not only allow competitors to self regulate but if they DO misbehave the FTC would destroy them.

176.We also reject AT&T’s assertion that the Commission should conditionally forbear from all Title II regulations as a preventive measure to address the contingency that a future Commission might seek to reinstate the Title II Order.647 Although AT&T explains that “conditional forbearance would provide an extra level of insurance against the contingency that a future, politically motivated Commission might try to reinstate a ‘common carrier’ classification [2015 Net Neutrality Regulations],”648 we see no need to address the complicated question of prophylactic forbearance and find such extraordinary measures [are] unnecessary.

TLDR

• Regulatory rollback throwback to 90's.

• FCC claims the 2015 Regulations gave the government "extravagant statutory power over the national economy".

• Regulatory oversight of the ISP industry shifts back to FTC (Federal Trade Commission) as it has been since the invention of the internet.

• FCC is enforcing against throttling, censorship, restriction, etc. by invoking consumer protection and anti-trust laws (via FTC).

• If ISPs collectively conspire to paywall a content-provider, they are subject to FTC anti-trust penetration.

• FCC has reduced its own jurisdiction, because they're typically geared toward stricter and narrower regulations (censoring profanity on the radio, cable, etc.) as opposed to regulating the entire internet service-provider industry.

• FCC repeatedly acknowledges that its new policy is deliberately business-friendly in hopes to expand the economy (internet plays a huge role obviously). Acknowledges that potential abuse of this friendliness will result in stricter policy.

• America has some of the shittiest internet in the world because our infrastructure is antiquated and fiber-optic trenching projects keep getting killed. Hopefully this provides the investment needed to fix that. Better infrastructure means faster speeds and cheaper service.

• [THIS IS A BIG ONE] Remember all the Congressmen who wanted to sell out our personal information earlier this year? Allegedly this FCC repeal will block that, because of FTC consumer privacy protection regulations don't allow it. Trump's admin is trying to fight for your privacy.

So, I’d like to think that most of the people here are smart. That being said, I see some stuff through here about NN. There’s been various arguments.

Just to be clear. This is not an invitation for ridicule or “you’re wrong because you’re dumb” arguments. Just a civil discussion.

What are your view points, and why?

For reference, here’s mine: net neutrality is pointless. And here’s why; all content on the internet IS NOT created equally. What do I mean? An HTTP GET reply packet shouldn’t be treated the same as a data packet containing YouTube video. Tailored packages mean I can pay for fewer services (streaming and gaming and light browsing).

I also want to point out that while there were a few problems that should have been covered by NN mostly had to do with cellular vendors (Verizon and AT&T, specifically). Again, mostly, Comcast has questionable stuff going on as well. But the forced reclass of the internet was arguably not good for progression. On top of this, NN has only been implemented in the last few years. Let the open market regulate the internet once again.

All this is just my opinion, and I could be completely wrong, but I’m interested to see what this subreddit thinks

All this to say, I could be wrong. Enlighten me!

we're talking to a wall. walls don't answer back. we just can't win....