Telecommies

Any discussion of net neutrality should start with clarification.

First, it has nothing to do with bandwidth (at least not directly). It won’t limit the type of connection you can get (i.e. dial-up, DSL, or cable) or how much you pay for it. So those “all you can eat buffet” analogies out there don’t really fit.

Net Neutrality is about whether internet service providers (ISPs) have the right to monitor and discriminate users traffic speeds. This is a meaningful issue because until very recently, it simply hasn’t been done. Comcast allegedly got the ball rolling, discriminating against the use of bit torrent, a peer-to-peer file sharing network.

While freedom is a much cherished value online, the perceived internet rights of consumers are clashing with the responsibilities of ISPs. Should all online activities be treated equally? If bandwidth is indeed a limited resource, what happens when Mr. Smith can’t get his e-mail because too many people are swapping bootleg movies? This is a worthwhile discussion for public discourse. However, what does disturb me are calls to erect internet regulation.

At a present point when many Federal officials still struggle to understand what the internet is, granting them full micro-managing authority is a scary prospect.

My greatest fear is internet regulation encouraging a pattern of monopolies as we’ve seen in the phone, electric, oil, and cable industries.

I want a vibrant internet with fierce competition for services. If Comcast is as evil some complain, I want a new start up to capitalize on contempt, popping up like a daisy and providing faster internet service. Regulations will never do that, but they can certainly stop it. That’s the problem.

—
Net Neutrality is a new issue on my plate. As I learn more and share thoughts on this issue, this blog should grow and evolve.