But it's worth calling out the tech industry's passion for the latest cause, "net neutrality," for what it is: self-interest.This quote I picked from Are Bits are NOT Created Equal. I agree it is self interest. I do not get why we are going to all this grandstanding on Congress about net neutrally.
When really why we cant keep things the way it is?
The internet will continue to get bigger and sites are charging for content. So if companies are making money why want more for the same information?
If it this happens it seems to me that it starts a windfall of controlling behavior. I do not want to say it is 1984 or anything but I liked one of the comments I saw on a article. It says this.
1. Start an ISP and offer services based on your own principles of network management.
2. Buy shares in an existing ISP and implement your own principles of network management.
What you don't have the right to do is to tell a company which you don't own, what kind of product you must offer. Imagine what kind of can of worms that would open up. HP could ask the government to force Apple to sell HP computers in Apple stores, based on "neutrality" and Peet's could force Starbucks to sell Peet's coffee in Starbucks based on "neutrality" and so forth. Heck, government could choose our spouses, because if we made the spousal choice ourselves, we would be biased, as opposed to a government bureau which would be "neutral" about the matter.
It is a scary thought.
I don't quite see the connection in point number 2. The entire basis of neutrality is doing the exact opposite of that comment. By remaining neutral, no one is forcing you to choose anything. When things are not neutral, companies choose which sites you will have faster access to based on personal interest.
ReplyDelete