We could still have a free press, since "the press" is explicitly mentioned in the First Amendment. Whether things that resemble a free press (if that's what you meant by "like") are desirable, is another matter.
That's not the case. There have always been restrictions on commercial speech that are not allowed towards individual speech. For example, it is completely acceptable to restrict commercial speech based on content.
There are plenty of Democrat VCs. I’m sure they have no interest in greed and will be happy to fund you for purely idealistic reasons.
Not really.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/10/another-state-la...
This is the Republican hypocrisy: only corporations (or extremely wealthy individuals) can start ISPs. Municipalities, a.k.a. The People, cannot.
Also, I’m not sure that law actually precludes a municipality from setting up an independent public utility that funds itself with subscription fees rather than taxes.
Republicans claim to favor local control over state and federal control. But in fact they are perfectly happy to exercise state control over local government (or federal control over state government) if local control threatens business interests or empowers minorities or women.
Republicans also claim to revere the Constitution and the intent of the founders. The Founders clearly intended for the means of communication to be a public good. The government's duty to provide a postal service is written into the Constitution. But the postal service was simply the state of the art in communications technology in 1791. There is no reason to think that the founders did not intend for that government responsibility to keep up with technological advancements.
You just disqualified yourself from being considered intellectually honest by engaging in bigoteering.
> The Founders clearly intended for the means of communication to be a public good. The government's duty to provide a postal service is written into the Constitution. But the postal service was simply the state of the art in communications technology in 1791
Again, don't take this the wrong way, but your ignorance is shocking. There was this little thing called the (optical) telegraph that was a bit more state of the art than post horses.
Furthermore, Ben Franklin quite clearly states that in order to have freedom of the press you must first have a press. The 1st amendment wasn't construed by any of the founders to imply socialized printing presses.
I presume you mean this?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semaphore_line
Invented in 1792, four years after the Constitution was ratified.
(You might also want to look up "glass houses" and "throwing stones".)
> socialized printing presses
The Internet is not a printing press. Web sites are printing presses. The Internet is the means by which content is distributed, not the means by which it is produced.
You might want to read the link you shared. “Modern design of semaphores was first foreseen by the British polymath Robert Hooke, who gave a vivid and comprehensive outline of visual telegraphy to the Royal Society in a 1684 submission in which he outlined many practical details.” and “One of the first experiments of optical signalling was carried out by the Anglo-Irish landowner and inventor, Sir Richard Lovell Edgeworth in 1767”
>The Internet is not a printing press. Web sites are printing presses. The Internet is the means by which content is distributed, not the means by which it is produced.
You’re not even wrong.
The contents of, source of, and destination of each packet is none of the ISP's business.
Packets may even be encrypted. And increasingly, they are.
No, common carriers choose not to ship them precisely because it isn't legal (unless the sender and recipients are FFLs). Common carriers are usually fine with shipping muzzleloaders and pre '98 guns (all of which can be shipped and received by non FFLs).
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/04/one-b...
You could always start your own energy company.