David Isenberg is in a tizzy to explain why the Washington Post got it wrong on Internet neutrality regulation and this is what he comes up with:
C’mon! If we see an innovative artist, do we need to balance that innovation with better paint? If we can buy innovative cars, does this demand better roads? If we like innovative electronics, do we need better electricity?
Actually, yes. Before we had paved roads, cars were engineered like the Model T, and with the advent of highways we got faster and more comfortable cars. So yes, there is a very strong relationship between the design of a car and the road it runs on. And a lot of that modern art stuff isn’t possible without acrylic paint, and the electronics we use depend on clean and stable power. These things are very much related, thank you very much.
Isenberg, you see, doesn’t go in for all that engineering mumbo-jumbo. Like most of the passionate voices on the pro-regulation side, he’s worried about free speech. That’s a legitimate thing to worry about in an era where the FCC fines TV networks for showing Janet Jackson’s breast, but there’s actually no connection between that issue and the Quality of Service provisions banned by the Markey Amendment and similar legislation.
Unfortunately, Isenberg’s claim to fame is a deep spiritual understanding of the Internet’s technical infrastructure. As far as I can tell, that claim is based on gaseous vapors.