The Debate begins 8 minutes and 20 seconds (8:20) into the show. I thought it would be important to know what Smaller ISPs think of Net Neutrality.
Brett Glass pretty much talked a lot of BS.
It is the ISP's job to have enough capacity to provide their customers with the throughput that they are paying for. If they cannot provide the customers with the throughput they are paying for (ensuring that any throughput lower than what the customer is paying for is not the result of their ISP)
What people like him would like is for people to pay more for a faster connection, but never do anything with the connection that will use the speed. This is also why ISP's like the ideas of capping the total data transferred. People are less likely to do something that will actually make use of the speed they are paying for, if doing it would blow through their cap within an hour. This is basically indirect blocking by simply making it not feasible to do certain bandwidth intensive tasks.
Networks are limited in terms of throughput and not total data transferred. That is why ISP's charge more for faster connections.
Once you allow ISP's to charge based on the data type, then, or charge on both ends, then it legitimizes a business model where ISP's sell a specific speed for a lot of money, and then never actually give customers those speeds unless they are able to double dip and get paid twice for it.
What that CEO wants, would be totally illegal with physical goods. Imagine 4 customers going into a pizza shop and each ordering a large pizza for the full price, and then the shop owner only makes a single pizza and splits it 4 ways (instead of making 4 large pizzas for the 4 customers who ordered and paid for large pizzas)
Agreed this is what ISPs want. I pay close to 200 for 50mb/s down and 5 up. When I use the full 50, a day later I only get 1 to 5 down.