Sentient Void
04-08-2010, 01:11 PM
Net Neutrality is another regulation that the FCC and other govt agencies would like to see come into law to regulate internet service providers and quite probably eventually expand (as many regulations always ends up trying to do) to be justified into general regulation of the internet. Obviously it was given a very nice and helpful sounding name, much like The Patriot Act was.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_neutrality#Opponents
"Neutrality proponents claim that telecom companies seek to impose a tiered service model in order to control the pipeline and thereby remove competition, create artificial scarcity, and oblige subscribers to buy their otherwise uncompetitive services. Many believe net neutrality to be primarily important as a preservation of current freedoms.[4] Vinton Cerf, considered as a "father of the Internet" and co-inventor of the Internet Protocol, Tim Berners-Lee, creator of the web, and many others have spoken out in favor of network neutrality.
Opponents of net neutrality characterize its regulations as "a solution in search of a problem", arguing that broadband service providers have no plans to block content or degrade network performance.[5] In spite of this claim, certain Internet service providers have intentionally slowed peer-to-peer (P2P) communications.[6] Still, other companies have acted in contrast to these assertions of hands-off behavior and have begun to use deep packet inspection to discriminate against P2P, FTP and online games, instituting a cell-phone style billing system of overages, free-to-telecom "value added" services, and bundling.[7] Critics of net neutrality also argue that data discrimination of some kinds, particularly to guarantee quality of service, is not problematic, but is actually highly desirable. Bob Kahn has called the term net neutrality a "slogan" and states that he opposes establishing it.[8]"
The way I see it, if ISPs do anything the customers don't like, it would be to their detriment - as they would undoubtedly lose customers to competition. Over the years, online services have gotten better, and innovative technologies have been brought about, and ISP bandwidth has increased while ISP costs have come either down or stayed the same. The lack of restrictions on the internet has been a major reason for it's extreme success since it's current inception a mere 2 decades or so ago (of the modern way we use the internet).
Much of the Ron Paul Revolution, expansion of the ideas of austrian economics, liberty and other grassroots organizations (such as campaigns for Schiff, Rand Paul, Kokesh et al), etc are very much due to the internet and may very well not have happened without the civil and fiscal freedoms of the internet.
I feel the internet is seriously one of the last bastions of true freedom left in the world, and is one of if not the only effective launching points to plant the seeds for and expand the ideas for liberty and like-minded individuals. One of the last places to educate and inspire through reason and historical precedence on a massive scale, cheaply and effectively.
This initial breach and attack by agents and supporters of the government on this last bastion of freedom (that WILL result in further intervention) would lay a big blow to our efforts.
Many who are not part of a government agency - usually 'liberals' and even many 'conservatives' feel that 'Net Neutrality' is a good thing and try to grow support for it based on ignorance of what it will initially and undoubtedly eventually lead to (as most regulations do) in regards to both unintended consequences and further eventual intrusion into the internet and the protections, freedoms and other benefits it grants.
Luckily, the courts recently supported Comcast in fighting the FCC's authority to impose 'Net Neutrality'. However, this was only a temporary victory as it was only because the FCC has no authority to do so - legislation in congress can change this if they so please (obviously regardless of what public opinion thinks, as per the health care legislation).
Thoughts? And anyone have any good articles they know of to share on the fight against net neutrality? I would like to start sending them viral through my social networks, etc.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_neutrality#Opponents
"Neutrality proponents claim that telecom companies seek to impose a tiered service model in order to control the pipeline and thereby remove competition, create artificial scarcity, and oblige subscribers to buy their otherwise uncompetitive services. Many believe net neutrality to be primarily important as a preservation of current freedoms.[4] Vinton Cerf, considered as a "father of the Internet" and co-inventor of the Internet Protocol, Tim Berners-Lee, creator of the web, and many others have spoken out in favor of network neutrality.
Opponents of net neutrality characterize its regulations as "a solution in search of a problem", arguing that broadband service providers have no plans to block content or degrade network performance.[5] In spite of this claim, certain Internet service providers have intentionally slowed peer-to-peer (P2P) communications.[6] Still, other companies have acted in contrast to these assertions of hands-off behavior and have begun to use deep packet inspection to discriminate against P2P, FTP and online games, instituting a cell-phone style billing system of overages, free-to-telecom "value added" services, and bundling.[7] Critics of net neutrality also argue that data discrimination of some kinds, particularly to guarantee quality of service, is not problematic, but is actually highly desirable. Bob Kahn has called the term net neutrality a "slogan" and states that he opposes establishing it.[8]"
The way I see it, if ISPs do anything the customers don't like, it would be to their detriment - as they would undoubtedly lose customers to competition. Over the years, online services have gotten better, and innovative technologies have been brought about, and ISP bandwidth has increased while ISP costs have come either down or stayed the same. The lack of restrictions on the internet has been a major reason for it's extreme success since it's current inception a mere 2 decades or so ago (of the modern way we use the internet).
Much of the Ron Paul Revolution, expansion of the ideas of austrian economics, liberty and other grassroots organizations (such as campaigns for Schiff, Rand Paul, Kokesh et al), etc are very much due to the internet and may very well not have happened without the civil and fiscal freedoms of the internet.
I feel the internet is seriously one of the last bastions of true freedom left in the world, and is one of if not the only effective launching points to plant the seeds for and expand the ideas for liberty and like-minded individuals. One of the last places to educate and inspire through reason and historical precedence on a massive scale, cheaply and effectively.
This initial breach and attack by agents and supporters of the government on this last bastion of freedom (that WILL result in further intervention) would lay a big blow to our efforts.
Many who are not part of a government agency - usually 'liberals' and even many 'conservatives' feel that 'Net Neutrality' is a good thing and try to grow support for it based on ignorance of what it will initially and undoubtedly eventually lead to (as most regulations do) in regards to both unintended consequences and further eventual intrusion into the internet and the protections, freedoms and other benefits it grants.
Luckily, the courts recently supported Comcast in fighting the FCC's authority to impose 'Net Neutrality'. However, this was only a temporary victory as it was only because the FCC has no authority to do so - legislation in congress can change this if they so please (obviously regardless of what public opinion thinks, as per the health care legislation).
Thoughts? And anyone have any good articles they know of to share on the fight against net neutrality? I would like to start sending them viral through my social networks, etc.