If they start losing money they will have a much stronger motivation to act. I feel like they say they are for it but they are not spending considerable resources (they should be) to stand up to the FCC.
If we stage a nation-wide boycot of Amazon, Walmart.com, and a few other big retailers (and stop using Google, Bing et al) I can almost guarantee it that they will move mountains to bring back net neutrality. You have to get the big corporations a profit motive to get anything done in this country.
I think the rate of technological change will force the SEC regulatory system to adopt an RFC process open to the public (bypassing Congress), similar to IETF, and I think Direct Democracy is an inevitable outcome of such disruption.
Here to all the folks who are A) not legal scholars but pretending to be from their mom's basement and B) unable to reason about the implications but still assert their opinions, there are a ton of references to this issue. Here is one:
ISPs can block all P2P traffic (bits flowing between residential IPs) and removal of Net Neutrality regulations will embolden them to do so, but it's also about the trend toward ISPs being giving the green light to do whatever they want, with eventually no regulation whatsoever.
Last mile includes my last mile and your last mile and cannot see why blocking P2P traffic would not be part of the definition of last mile. Each user would be limited to a set of approved centralized services. No user to user routing.
Only user to approved service and approved service to user.
Going with your "source/destination" definition, one Bitcoin/Signal user is source and the other is destination. They can require traffic to be exclusively between user and approved service provider, can't they?