The Net Neutrality debate
December 15th, 2008 | by geo |
Net Neutrality allows everyone to compete on a level playing field and is the reason that the Internet is a force for economic innovation, civic participation and free speech. Without Net Neautrality telephone and cable companies can decide how fast certain content is delivered to you, what you do, where you go, and what you watch online.
The fear is that big companies can afford to pay network providers more money to have their content delivered faster, leaving smaller companies and others in the dust.
I believe in Net Neutrality, and that all content should be treated equally. Without it, the internet will become like traditional television to consumers, where large media and cable companies control when, what, and how it’s delivered. If users want faster content, it should be up to the consumer to purchase the “high speed” plan and pay the price. Others shouldn’t suffer in the process.
I do not have a problem with companies developing optimization algorithms, caching systems, and anything else they can think of for optimal delivery (this has been around for years i.e. bitcurrent), but they should not get preferential treatment from telcos by buying their interests.
Dear Mr. President-Elect, please enforce Net Neutrality.
Sphere: Related ContentRelated posts:
