To quote Wikipedia:
Network neutrality (equivalently "net neutrality", "internet neutrality" or "NN") refers to a principle that is applied to residential broadband networks, and potentially to all networks. Precise definitions vary, but a broadband network free of restrictions on the kinds of equipment attached and the modes of communication allowed would be considered neutral by most advocates, provided it met additional tests relating to the degradation of various communication streams by others.[1][2][3]
The principle of Net Neutrality and regulations designed to support the neutrality of the internet have been subject to vociferous debate in various forums. Since the early 2000s, advocates of Net Neutrality rules have warned of the danger that broadband providers will use their power over the "last mile" to block applications they do not favor, and also to discriminate between content providers (i.e. websites, services, protocols), particularly competitors. Neutrality proponents also claim that telecom companies seek to impose the tiered service model more for the purpose of profiting from their control of the pipeline rather than for any demand for their content or services.[4] Others have stated that they believe "net neutrality" to be primarily important as a preservation of current freedoms.[5] As co-inventor of the Internet Protocol Vint Cerf has stated, "The Internet was designed with no gatekeepers over new content or services. A lightweight but enforceable neutrality rule is needed to ensure that the Internet continues to thrive." [6]
Critics, meanwhile, call net neutrality rules "a solution in search of a problem" and believe that net neutrality rules would reduce incentives to upgrade networks and launch next generation network services.[7] Others argue that discrimination of some kinds, particularly to guarantee "Quality of Service," is not problematic, but highly desirable. Bob Kahn, the Internet Protocol's co-inventor, has argued that the term net neutrality is a regulatory slogan, which he opposes: "If the goal is to encourage people to build new capabilities, then the party that takes the lead in building that new capability, is probably only going to have it on their net to start with and it is probably not going to be on anybody else's net.[8]" The US Federal Trade Commission urges restraint in the examination of the new regulations proposed by network neutrality advocates: "Industry-wide regulatory schemes – particularly those imposing general, one-size-fits-all restraints on business conduct – may well have adverse effects on consumer welfare, despite the good intentions of their proponents[9]."
In my opinion, we are way behind the rest of the world in using Broad Band Connections and are stifled by the major companies on price and speed. There are stats to back this up. According to a few articles that i have read, this does not have to be so. Remember back several years ago there was a big push to lay Fiber all across America. We only utilize about 2-4% of that fiber laid or "Dark Fiber" as it is called. Our capacity is far greater than what we presently use. The big 3 have a monopoly on the American Internet user. Comcast, ATT, Road Runner all cap their services for a high premium fee. I know that Verizon FIOS will eventually put a dent into this, but if we do not strive for Net Neutrality, all this will be lost. They will censor what you read and how you use it and for how long.
This is a very good site to use to find out current information about this issue.
What is your opinion?
No comments:
Post a Comment