Well Jim isn't best source of this news since he is pretty incompetent in this regard but he has heart where it needs to be on this topic.
Truth to be told the loss of net neutrality is just a matter of time, while defending it people should work on their local legislators/states to remove entry barriers of new ISPs on market. Things like state enforced ban on sole ownership of entire available infrastructure in given area, ban on accumulating both infrastruture and services delivered via infrastructure in hands of one company/corporation/trust, ban on any financial ties between content and services creating companies and ISP, state supported programmes for building and modernising infrastructure in underdeveloped regions (with lease time to return the investment of the private company then going back into state hands) etc.
Basically we have a situation in which some of big corporations blackmail other big corporations holding consumers hostage, alternative is turning market to milk farms for customers or just blackmailing taking opposite direction, while still consumers being held hostage.
In short, states need to decimate huge comapnies like google, facebook etc. on the one side and ISPs on the other side - both are in position of 'natural' monopoly and that has to be dealt with sooner or later.
I don't think any of the YT commentators present this point of view. However defending net neutrality will look iteration after iteration more like landing on Char up until Raynor shows up. There are some serious, precise, shattering strikes needed to remove the source of lacking or non-existent competition on what suppose to be 'free' market.
