On Net Neutrality
Thursday, June 22, 2006 | 9:57:01 PM
Net neutrality... what's all this commotion?
If you don't know what net neutrality is, Ask a Ninja!
So you still probably don't know.
Net neutrality is the idea that no information should be prioritized by the ISPs.
Should ISPs decide to charge more for certain content, or even for faster delivery, then Net Neutrality would definitely be a good thing. Of course, if an ISP was to charge extra for some content, I'm pretty sure that it would lose a lot of business.
Both sides put up a good argument for themselves, but they also assume a cataclysmic death to the internet should the other side win. Either the internet will be highly regulated by the government or by the telcos.
It's interesting to note that the large internet companies (Google, Yahoo, etc.) are in favor of Net Neutrality and the large telecommunication companies (Cingular, BellSouth, etc.) are against it.
Personally, I don't think absolute network neutrality would be the optimum solution. Instead, providers should transmit data without discriminating between companies and should charge equal prices for equal service. Something of a reverse for equal pay for equal work, then. People already pay more for, say, FiOS than DSL (and why people still use dial-up at the prices of DSL now... err), so charging for faster lines isn't that much different. That sort of prioritization, however, is all about profit, not really about the consumer. Slowing down transfers doesn't promote progress as much as trying to discover faster methods.
---
Edit: I have discovered this long debate. It goes through both sides rather in-depth. I still stand by my idea that ISPs should not discriminate based on source/destination for packets, but I shall make an addendum. They can discriminate by types of packets, so VoIP services get more priority over e-mail, as it's worse to get a shaky VoIP connection than a slow e-mail.
And where's our cheap fiber optic connections? In Japan and Korea, they have widespread 100 MBit connections for the price that some people pay for Cable, DSL, even Dial-up. (I can't believe some people pay $50 for dial-up...)
Hmmm, people seem to be too lazy to comment on this topic, so I guess I'll toss my opinion into the ring. I suppose it really is up to the company, it's they're bussiness, so they can do as they wish. Yet, and the economy usually goes the lower priced better connection will eventually prevail over the others, causing a forced reform of policy. Or something like that.
I agree that if the ISPs do decide to charge more, then they are going to pay the price. But then again... consumers are probably more stupid than the Brass Race (refering to one of the creation myths of the Greeks). The consumers might not even do much about it... it's hared to determine what they'll do.
Seems as though you've started reading Mythology, eh?