On the topic of Net Neutrality, the big corporations did a very good job at defining the conversation by saying they want to offer "fast lanes". But in reality, they are toll lanes, and anyone who doesn't pay the toll, won't be able to afford to do business. This is exactly what happened with Netflix - even though people spent their money for their own Internet access, Comcast wanted to "double dip", and charge Netflix too. So it started to cripple their service until Netflix had to cave. Fortunately for Netflix, they had the money to cave and pay the money. But realistically, it would knock out new websites in a flash. This website right here may not exist, if it weren't for net neutrality. Would Facebook come to exist if it couldn't have started up without paying the bribes to Comcast, Time Warner, etc? Probably not...

And to those who are "free market" people, like I am, and who think that Comcast should be able to charge whatever they want, there is a problem with that assessment. The problem is that Comcast, Time Warner, etc all have local market monopolies or oligopolies. That means that other competitors can't come in to make an efficient market. This is why our speeds lag other major industrialized nations, because these companies are not forced to upgrade their networks to compete.

The only reason someone would not support Net Neutrality would be the large ISPs, the politicians who get funding from those ISPs, or maybe other large companies who could afford to pay for the toll roads, and then get the benefit of locking out startup competitors.

If anyone wants to act now on making sure that Comcast and others don't "double dip", you can visit here to contact the FCC: https://www.callthefcc.com/

Question about the spilling candy video: Are you getting more people because you made it simpler to ask for more information, or are you getting more people because they have to ask for more information because it wasn't shown? I'm not sure if it makes much of a difference, but the latter might suffer from lower conversions to leases because in the end, they had to get more information to qualify themselves, and it didn't change that they were not a good fit in the first place. Does that make sense?