Net Neutrality or How I Learned to Love Packet Equality This issue is sort-of complicated, but not so much. So follow my simple logic here: Internet Packets need to have equality of service, speed and priority. Why? Because if they don't, providers can mess around and do very strange things in terms of prioritizing them (the packets) however they want. The best part is that the only logical reason not to have Internet Packets equal, is that ISPs just want more power, money and potential regionalistic monopolistic power. ... If you want a more detailed and reasonable analysis..keep reading. Net Neutrality (in the common definitive form that everyone talks about) is basically a concept that is equal to: "All Packets From All Corners of the Internet have the Same Priority." That doesn't mean that your particular connection can handle all those packets. That doesn't mean the world will end. It just means that your packets and everyone else's has the same priority. Equality, if you will. Now, the problem comes in ONLY if dudes don't have packet equality. Suppose we let the ISP's (Internet Service Providers such as Verizon, AT&T, ComCast, etc) have "market competition", then it gets...very interesting and potentially very troubling (because in MANY regions, there is only one [or potentially two] ISPs, which means the normal safeguards of competition are out the window. Plus, who's to say that both of the ISPs won't pull the same bullcrap? Think OPEC working to fix the oil production for maximum profit, which is actually kinda already happening because of the all the direct profits that the ISPs are making sure as hell aren't going back into the Internet, otherwise we'd have a helluvalot of fiberoptic like in South Korea]). Let me pose a hypothetical situation using gas stations as 'websites', gas station chains as the 'ISP's' on the internet, and gas as the websites and such. You are driving a fast tier-2 car. As such, all cars need gas (websites and things to go to). You are aware of only one type of gas station in your city called "ComCast". You drive over to the gas station (gas stations == ISPs) and discover an incredibly long line--such that in order to get your gas, it would take a really long time. Then you spot a fast tier-1 car (costs more, even though it has the same horsepower [bandwidth] and he can get ANY gas he wants (except gas from competitive stations, b/c...everyone knows that ComCast really only wants to sell THEIR gas [just like every other gas station chain]. Basically the gas supplier can make gas unequal, just because of where it comes from, where it goes or who accesses it. Why? Because they control the supply! ////Disclaimer off. If your ISP starts messing around with internet packet prioritize, expect to be paying extra for a lot of bullcrap or..just have slower internet for no earthly reason. We pay each ISP to keep their networks current, updated and expanding. Each ISP doesn't want to upgrade though. Why? Because is costs a lot of money, and only now are they whining about it because they've been skimping around with expansions and lining their pockets with a lot of money. A lot of people buy internet service that they will NEVER use. Those who DO use their maximum bandwidth, will want the same speed as anyone else--but the ISPs will try anything to skimp. They're now playing the: 'We can't make all packets equal, because A) we need more income and B) obviously only businesses need optimum priority. As such, other users need less than optimum priority. As such, common users (most of whom will probably never notice a difference because they hardly know what the internet is to begin with) will have to pay extra to have optimum priority (extra money for ISPs for doing their job, yet making it sound reasonable to idiots). Businesses will also have to pay more, because...they're businesses and want optimum speed because of course they 'need' it (extra money for ISPs for doing their job, yet making it sound reasonable to idiots).' The thing is, is that if all priorities are equal then the only thing limiting the packet is the networks provided by the ISPs. And, the technology is already HERE to expand to full fiber optic! IE, the ISPs want to skimp so they're making up things that make is SEEM that there are limitations so that people need to have tiers (because having everyone on the same tier is too hard on their poor, overtaxed, limited network because GOD KNOWS HOW YOUTUBE is KILLING the INTERNET!! INTERNET DOWN, too many videos!!!!!!........). To sum it up, ISPs want to give slower tiered service while charging for high-tiered service while all the time not upgrading because they don't have to b/c they're giving the shaft to a lot of people who don't want to pay extra for decent service. IE, ISP's want to give Less for More. Net Neutrality will stop a lot of potential abuses. ps, Video Gamers demand a lot more of the internet than most businesses. They demand very low latency (ping) times, and if the ISPs start doing tiered system, they're going to anger millions of American gamers who are used to having very low pings while still paying a godly sum ($40-$100/month). I don't think they'll like paying an even more godly sum for tier-1 service. Other informative links are: |
|---|
| All material is copyright © 2005-2007 Christopher Perkins. Reproduction or redistribution without permission is strictly prohibited. |