Where do you stand on Net Neutrality?

[Slyfox696]

Simple question, complex question.

Where do you stand on Net Neutrality. If you're not aware, to put it in simple terms, Net Neutrality is the idea that all Internet traffic is treated equally, and that no Internet traffic is given priority over another type. In the current Net Neutrality fight, the idea is to have the FCC regulate Internet traffic to ensure Net Neutrality. In all honesty, both the "for" and "against" camps have good points, although I think one side is ridiculous, personally. I'll give you a brief, and somewhat coarse, rundown.


Against Net Neutrality

1. More governmental control over Internet (which can be a scary thing after what we've seen over the last couple months).

2. Violates the concept of a "free market" system.

3. No regulation gives Internet Providers incentive to keep their networks in top shape and pursue new and better technologies


For Net Neutrality

1. Without Net Neutrality, Internet Providers can slow down Internet access to rival media providers. For example, if Google was an Internet provider, then they could strangle Internet speeds for any user on their network trying to visit Hulu instead of YouTube. This can lead to big companies buying fastest speeds and killing Internet innovation.

2. Lack of Net Neutrality can create a class system on the Internet, where those with the most money are provided priority service on the network.

3. There's a lack of broadband Internet providers, and without regulation, Internet providers can essentially charge any amount for Internet they want, and limit the amount of Internet bandwidth each person receives at the same time. It's similar to what cell phone companies are currently doing.

4. Without regulation, Internet Providers could cut off access to any website they don't want people to see, effectively crushing the concept of free speech.



These are just a few for and against arguments, you can find many more out there. So, how do you feel? Are you for Net Neutrality or against?


EDIT: I'm including a link which you can use to view more for and against arguments. http://www.theatlanticwire.com/tech...nd-cons-of-net-neutrality-in-two-lists/24598/

 

[Calderownz]

Honestly, this is the way that most inventions have gone. However, I'm not in favor of altering or changing the flow of information in any way shape or form. Whether I agree with or disagree with the content, I'm not in favor of changing the content.

It's a tricky subject, really. Truthfully, I think we should ignore any government oversight. Especially considering that the internet is universal and who is to say which government would effect what. Also, that could still cause problems if you don't agree with your countries ideas.

I think providers like phone companies or cable companies should simply just provide the service. They make more than enough money with the service they provide. Blocking information and data traffic simply because you aren't connecting with their system would destroy the internet. The net in terms of how we know it now.

In order to attain all the information that you currently do, you'd literally have to own a subscription to all internet providers. That's ridiculous.

If providers want to charge a bit more for certain content, I could understand that. Business-wise, that makes sense. However, I don't think it's needed.

With the way things stand now, everyone should be happy. Those provided and thosing providing internet access.

 

[RockFan89]

So the decision is between letting the government control what we see on the internet or letting a bunch of corporations decide.

Well, if a corporation decides to start blocking certain sites, I could always go find another company to provide me with internet access. If the government blocks me from certain sites, I'm left with no choice.

In it's current state, corporations due have this power and we haven't seen major problems while countries, like China and Egypt, that do have control, use that power to block the truth from getting out.

I think the answer is obvious, no to net neutrality.

What makes the internet so great is that everyone has access to it and no one really has control over it. All of the internet providers would have to collude in order to prevent people from seeing certain sites while the government could do it at it's whim. The former is so unlikely while the later has and will continue to occur.

Net neutrality is a solution to a problem that doesn't exist and will only open up more problems.

 

[Slyfox696]

Well, if a corporation decides to start blocking certain sites, I could always go find another company to provide me with internet access. If the government blocks me from certain sites, I'm left with no choice.

This seems like a fair point, however, very few locations in the United States have this option. Most residents are locked in to one, or if they're lucky two, internet providers, and there isn't an options.

In it's current state, corporations due have this power and we haven't seen major problems while countries, like China and Egypt, that do have control, use that power to block the truth from getting out.

This is untrue as well. Comcast is already throttling network bandwidth of certain users, and if I'm not mistaken, they may be doing it based upon where the information is being sent to. And if Google starts giving money to Comcast for exclusive rights for video sharing, then what happens to sites like Daily Motion? They get throttled, and people can't use them.

What makes the internet so great is that everyone has access to it and no one really has control over it.

Actually, the Internet providers have control of it, and unlike the government, their existence is based upon making the most money from it as they can.

Net neutrality is a solution to a problem that doesn't exist and will only open up more problems.

At this point, you are correct, it's a problem that doesn't exist...much. But if 5 years down the road, your statement is no longer true, will you change your mind?

 

[Dagger Dias]

I am very much FOR net neutrality. I don't want the government to control the internet. They have bigger issues they should be dealing with rather than taking away more freedom from us. I support the idea of a free market system. I also agree that no regulation is a better incentive to convince the networkers to keep their networks in good condition. The issue of a potential class system is less of an issue than government control. It doesn't bother me that some might get more priority due to their money, that's nowhere near as bad as the government telling you what sites you can or cannot go to. Internet provicers cutting off access to sites is a similar problem to what the government would do. This can be solved by simply boycotting these providers. There are other providers out there who people could use, who wouldn't tell you what sites you cannot go to. Problem solved. I remain on the side of being FOR net neutrality because we don't need a high level of regulation.

 

[Slyfox696]

I am very much FOR net neutrality. I don't want the government to control the internet.

These two statements are contradictory, at this point and time. The Democrats/FCC are actually in support of Net Neutrality. Net Neutrality states that all Internet traffic be viewed as equal, and prioritization not be given to one flow of traffic over another, no matter the circumstance.

You can actually be for Net Neutrality, but against the government regulation of it, but as the political landscape stands now, the only way to ensure Net Neutrality is governmental regulation.

 

[oscar]

I am against the net neutrality.Because of net neutrality,most of the internet providers can not afford new technology.Different different internet providers has different way to provide service to users.If a internet provider giving cheap service then that provider will definitely get priority traffic less than costly internet providers.Does anyone know who is cheap provider with high speed internet(high priority oveer others)?
____________________
For More Information of My Internet Providers Visit:dsl flatrate and dsl provider