Generally it has been held that the Constitution empowers states to decide who gets to vote and generally how elections are to be conducted (within limits, such as the 15th Amendment).

The rule only says that ISPs have to transit traffic without differentiating between it.

Paid caches aren't network transit. They're not affected by this rule.

Moreover,

47 CFR 8.9 "(a) A person engaged in the provision of broadband Internet access service, insofar as such person is so engaged, shall not engage in paid prioritization.

(b) âoePaid prioritizationâ refers to the management of a broadband providerâ(TM)s network to directly or indirectly favor some traffic over other traffic, including through use of techniques such as traffic shaping, prioritization, resource reservation, or other forms of preferential traffic management, either (a) in exchange for consideration (monetary or otherwise) from a third party, or (b) to benefit an affiliated entity."

The rule only says that ISPs have to transit traffic without differentiating between it.

Paid caches aren't network transit. They're not affected by this rule.

The rules say:

47 CFR 8.7 "A person engaged in the provision of broadband Internet access service, insofar as such person is so engaged, shall not impair or degrade lawful Internet traffic on the basis of Internet content, application, or service, or use of a non-harmful device, subject to reasonable network management."

Your word "transit" does not appear.

Yes, Netflix has a cache, Google has a cache, etc. ad infinitum. And ISPs still need to pay to operate and maintain the cache. And there still is Internet bandwidth to populate the cache, and the cache is only useful for the most popular content, the "long tail" still needs to come in over the Internet.

Wait until they find out about peering agreements.

And what about paid caches?

"shall not impair or degrade lawful Internet traffic on the basis of Internet content, application, or service"

So if TCP stacks on my middle boxes obey TCP bandwidth throttling rules, but (of course) let through UDP packets unthrottled, have I degraded lawful Internet traffic on the basis of Internet application or service?

Does this sound like a "certain" rule to you?

"Mechanism to Resolve Traffic Exchange Disputes. As discussed, Internet traffic exchange agreements have historically been and will continue to be commercially negotiated. We do not believe that it is appropriate or necessary to subject arrangements for Internet traffic exchange (which are subsumed within broadband Internet access service) to the rules we adopt today. We conclude that it would be premature to adopt prescriptive rules to address any problems that have arisen or may arise.
It is also premature to draw policy conclusions concerning new paid Internet traffic exchange arrangements between broadband Internet access service providers and edge providers, CDNs, or backbone services. While the substantial experience the Commission has had over the last decade with "last-mile" conduct gives us the understanding necessary to craft specific rules based on assessments of potential harms, we lack that background in practices addressing Internet traffic exchange. For this reason, we adopt a case-by-case approach, which will provide the Commission with greater experience. Thus, we will continue to monitor traffic exchange and developments in this market."

Now 5 years have passed where I resigned from my job and from then on depend on germans wellfare system.

I wasn't hired anymore. No one want's my knowledge and no one wants to hire a "foreigner" (my parents are migrants).

Too bad it is so hard to immigrate to the USA! We are all migrants here.

Based on this post, it looks like the BBC radio audio stream is encoded at a constant rate of 320 kbps using AAC-LC, delivered in the MPEG DASH container, and implemented in HTML5 using Media Source Extensions (MSE).

It is not clear to me if the BBC radio audio is being carried in MPEG DASH as MPEG-4 file format fragments or as an MPEG-2 Transport Stream, but I would suspect for audio-only it is MPEG-4 file format fragments.

Illegal informal small businesses in people's basements to avoid crazy business and labor regulations is a typical form of Greek business - why not data centers!

Internet access in america became so godforsaken slow

Oh yeah, back in the 1990's my Internet speed was 24kbps, now it is much slower! NOT!

How does ensuring that corporations don't prioritize Internet traffic (and unfairly disenfranchise startups and direct competitors) get the government more involved in your life?

Because there is no way to prove traffic prioritization and this will simply benefit the incumbent providers who have better government connections, while providing zero consumer benefit. Competition will be hampered, not improved.

Well "net neutrality" nuts, you finally have eroded all of the efforts we pushed in the 1990's to keep government hands off of the Internet.

There many other ways this could have been avoided (such as requiring municipalities to grant franchise rights to new last-mile ISP entrants, for instance), but now the Federal government is in charge.

Lest people in other countries think you are immune, you should well know that the US Federal government will basically put its rules on the entire planet.

I hope you will be happy with the results!

Regardless of who owned the local loop or who sold service on it, US local loop lengths are longer than most other countries (regardless of population density).

I believe the long local loops relates to a massive central office "centralization" in the US when digital switching came along. Why exactly this centralization did not happen in Europe (and Australia) is not clear to me, it might have involved timing of DSS deployment versus the timing of DSL practicality.

The result is that the US has fewer COs, and longer local loops. Worked fine for voice, not so well for DSL.