> >US Internet Speed Has Gone From 12th To 6th Fastest Since End Of Net Neutrality

> I see this being tossed around as a counter to the main point of NN being slow down of speed.

It's been nowhere near long enough to see the effects of investment in infrastructure for improving Internet speed since the net neutrality rules were repealed. Any change in speeds since November would be due to work that has been in progress for a while.

To show the improvements in speeds, all that ISPs has to do is provide full/unthrottled speed for speed test websites such as fast.com and speedtest.net.

...which they're now allowed to do, without net neutrality.

Even with net neutrality, they were allowed to do so. In fact, they were mandated to provide an even footing for all websites.

The point being that without net neutrality they can fudge the speed tests by prioritising that bandwidth, and excluding it from throttling.

> Also, why do the state dem AG's always suing to enforce new laws instead of the legislation process, it seems like the new way to pass laws is to get a judge to give it to you. We have legal weed from legislation now.

I agree with your position, but it's not just Dems. This is the main point of my comment also, this should be done with legislation.

I believe all the states that currently have recreation cannabis have it because of referendums and ballot initiatives. The legalization process has shown exactly how our legislatures have failed to address this issue. Canada did legalize recreational use with legislation, but they are the only ones so far.

I personally blame gerrymandering.

Vermont recently legalized it via the legislature, though I think your main point still stands.

Ah yes, their law did go into effect last month didn't it. Reading up on it, it sounds like Vermont has taken an approach like DC where commercial sales are not allowed, but personal possession, cultivation, and gifting are.

I wonder if we'll look back in 10 years and wish more places had taken these approaches, or if they well eventually also enact commercial legislation.

Recreational cannabis was passed by a ballot measure in Oregon.

Speed doesn't matter if bandwidth went down aka download caps.

So, speed can go up on the "preferred service" while speed goes down for "everybody else".

Lots of the ISPs now have deals where traffic to their preferred video streaming service doesn't count against your caps. And, wonder of wonders, that traffic is somehow faster than everything else.

NN isn't about "speed". It's about the fact that everybody's packets are given the same "speed".

And gay marriage, too.

Looking at Q1 2017, and comparing against Q3 2015, we saw the average speed of the US, as measured by Akamai (i.e., someone actually delivering content, not just a 'speed test', which we know is gamed, and largely only hit by people with quick speeds anyway; I've never checked my speed except when I got a new ISP that said it was faster than my old one, i.e., when I first got 100mbps, and when I first got fiber) increase from 12.6mbps to 18.8 mbps. A year and a half under net neutrality and actual, real world average speeds increased 50%. So that was the pre-existing trajectory. It's not like "we're going to repeal net neutrality" is going to cause ISPs to pull their investments instantly, not when they've already been investing. If it's even related.