How would you feel if your internet looked like this? What if GIFs played like this? Or simply like this? Fortunately, your ISP (internet service provider) likely gives you unbridled access to all the sites you know and love. But thanks to changing administrations in the U.S. and increasingly greedy ISPs, that could soon change.

Right now, the FCC (Federal Communications Commission) operates under the principle of net neutrality. This means that your ISP must provide you with full access to any online website or service you wish to use. In February of 2015, the FCC adopted strong net neutrality rules using Title II of the Communications Act. But now, these rules are in jeopardy.

Trump’s FCC chairman and former Verizon lawyer Ajit Pai is trying to relax the rules a bit—allowing ISPs to adhere to voluntary net neutrality promises rather than forcing them to adhere to the Title II laws. The success of Pai’s plan would effectively end net neutrality, as there are countless examples of ISPs undermining net neutrality before there were strong rules in place. I'd like to share an excerpt from this video:

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Let’s just say Comcast created a new TV series, and it just so happened that that competed with a Netflix series very similarly.

If these rules go away, how is there not an incredible incentive for Comcast to slow Netflix down coming into my house and make their video, the Comcast video, very robust?

AJIT PAI: So, under that hypothetical, one of the things that’s important to remember is that it is a hypothetical.

And we don’t see evidence of that happening in the marketplace on a widespread level.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: There have been some examples of ISPs blocking certain things. The Google Wallet was blocked. Skype was blocked. One Canadian telecom blocked pro-labor sites.

I mean, they’re — it’s not like this doesn’t happen.

AJIT PAI: Well, there are isolated cases, but if you look at the FCC’s own records, there are only scattered anecdotes to support this.

And the argument I have made is that, in order to justify preemptive regulation of all 4,462 Internet service providers, you should have pretty concrete evidence of an overwhelming market failure.

But, secondly, the other argument I would make is that the hypothetical is a classic question of competition and consumer protection law.

Ajit Pai's response to concrete evidence of ISP censorship before net neutrality laws existed is basically 'Well, that probably won't happen if we get rid of net neutrality.' This, while not nearly as extreme, is analogous to saying "Most people don't kill so we're probably fine making murder legal."

But Pai’s plan is not going unnoticed. On July 12, an “Internet-Wide Day of Action” was launched, with companies like Amazon, eBay, Facebook, Netflix, reddit, Spotify, and Twitter joining in to raise awareness along with over 50,000 other websites. #NetNeutrality was trending on Facebook and Twitter. Many tweets were calls to action or grim speculation about the future without net neutrality:

This is what our internet will look like if @AjitPaiFCC is allowed to repeal #NetNeutrality. @realDonaldTrump appointed him @FCC chairman! pic.twitter.com/5CUAsC9QBw
— Barnacules 🎥📺🕹🤡 (@Barnacules) July 12, 2017

This GIF will buffer until #NetNeutrality is safe. @Stranger_Things pic.twitter.com/elSWlOUklr
— Netflix US (@netflix) July 12, 2017

Don't allow the @FCC to destroy free speech on the internet. Protect #NetNeutrality. Join us! Take action here: https://t.co/WhaxjOUQDZ pic.twitter.com/1P60z6dCO9
— Mark Ruffalo (@MarkRuffalo) July 12, 2017

Millions of emails and comments were sent to both Congress and the FCC. The widespread participation and success of the Day of Action showed just how many people care about upholding net neutrality.

But what’s the fuss? The examples above illustrate minor annoyances such as long loading times, but the implications of the death of net neutrality are far more serious. A free and open internet allows small websites and companies to compete directly with big ones, encouraging competition and better services.

A free and open internet allows every voice to be heard, regardless of political alignment, race, gender, sex, sexual orientation, economic class, or any other factor that allows discrimination. Killing net neutrality harms everyone except big ISPs and their lobbyists.

And big ISPs have a lot to gain. In 2013, Timothy Karr wrote, “In court last Monday, Verizon lawyer Helgi Walker made the company’s intentions all too clear, saying the company wants to prioritize those websites and services that are willing to shell out for better access. She also admitted that the company would like to block online content from those companies or individuals that don’t pay Verizon’s tolls.”

Without net neutrality, ISPs would have complete control over the flow of information in the U.S. It would be entirely legal for Comcast or Verizon to expedite connections to websites that pay them while throttling or blocking connections to those that don’t. They could even block websites based on a political or social agenda. The U.S. could realistically experience a level of internet censorship comparable to that of countries like China or North Korea.

The July 12 Day of Action has passed, but until Comcast implants your mind-control chip, it's never too late to speak up about net neutrality. This link provides you with the means to send an email to the FCC, call your senator, or spread the word on Facebook and Twitter.

Though the future of the internet may look grim, it is not too late to change it. As Free Press Action Fund President Craig Aaron said, “We have the facts on our side, the law on our side and the people on our side. We definitely have the internet on our side—and that’s why I’m so confident we’ll win.”