My basic understanding of network
neutrality is that it's an idea or belief that the Internet should
remain free of government or corporate restrictions and that all
packets should be treated equally. However, there is a big debate
on the exact meaning of net neutrality and if the government should
be brought in to place broad regulations over the Internet in an
attempt to keep net neutrality alive.
At this point the big concern is that
ISPs (corporations) are possibly looking to filter or slow data they
don't want going through their networks and limiting what the
consumers on their networks may have access to. For example (this is
hypothetical), Charter and Comcast are both cable companies with TV
being the main service offered. So to encourage customers that have
only Internet to start paying for TV as well, they may slow down
video streaming to those costumers or charge them more for it. Other
concerns are out there as well, such as limiting voice and video chat
over the Internet by ISPs like AT&T or Verizon or ISPs limiting
which search engine you can use, making it difficult or impossible to
get to websites like Google or Bing.
With talk of this happening, I can see
why a lot are getting worked up, but to invite the government in to
regulate yet another part of our lives, just in case... No, thank
you! If or when things like this do start happening, I feel the
market can help to correct the problem by people like myself, that
would just switch to a different ISP.
Also in some ways this is already
happening, at least when it comes to speeds. I can pay less monthly
and get a slower speed, or I can pay more and get a higher speed.
I'm fine with this, and, in fact, I like it that I have a choice in
speeds and in ISPs. Some companies are known for slowing down P2P
connections used in things like Lime Wire or Bit Torrent. Still, I
don't want the government to step in until it has to, if it ever
does.
Heya Chris. I think your point and explanation were well-formed but I am going back and forth on what you said about the market. In all honesty, isn't there a point when the market just doesn't have a choice? There are only so many ISPs available in any given market and if they are all doing the exact same thing, perhaps the biggest move the market can make is to boycott, but who would really be willing to be without the internet for who-knows-how-long? Perhaps it would help if the government is regulating the ISPs, because they're not encroaching on our personal lives so much as monitoring the companies that are.
ReplyDeleteI agree Chris. It's bad enough to have the government dip into everything they can as it is, but when it comes to the internet, it was formed and regulated on the idea of being free from rules (all in a sense). If the option of regulating it at the ISP's is given, then whats to stop ISP's from limiting or stopping the flow of different packets just because they are trying to stomp out the compitition (google vs bing, myspace vs facebook, etc.). When control of that nature is given to someone, it can then turn into something far worse than it was designed to be. I say keep it how it is and let the market control itself.
ReplyDelete