Net neutrality is characterized as keeping a level playing field. It is really about control, specifically government control. Currently access to the internet is essentially uncontrolled in the United States. There are two parts of access: hookup and software.
Windows internet explorer is not free. It was part of the software package purchased with the computer. In addition you can purchase or subscribe to other software access points such as AOL or Yahoo. You the consumer control the price by your willingness to pay, or your willingness to forgo benefits by using a free subscription service.
Connection or hookup is where the net neutrality is currently in contention. Connections range from dialup (free using your house phone) to hardwired (paid service through your local telephone or cable provider). Free public connections (government and private)are available for laptops equipped with wireless modems. The government service is frequently provided through community libraries which control content access. Motels provide it for their guests. Coffee shops, fast food restaurants, and other private sources provide wireless connection to lure customers.
The limitations for using the internet are software and hookup baud rate. Internet providers are constantly looking for an edge to make themselves more profitable. The two principle profit areas are monthly subscription fees and advertisements including "pop ups" and links.
The governments concern is hardware changes and provider manipulation. The government could ban hardware as not meeting "neutrality standards" or requiring only a nominal fee for Patent usage. The manipulation is almost an ethics problem. A large provider could have levels of customers: paid subscribers, sub let providers, and free. Paid get guaranteed highest baud and least ads. The free seldom get high baud and are potentially swamped with ads. The government says "range of service" is not neutrality.
Neutrality sounds laudable. Control is the goal.
No comments:
Post a Comment