There are several pros and cons to network neutrality. The support for network neutrality comes from those persons who enjoy free music being streamed from YouTube, watching movies on Netflix, and downloading music from the many available sites Another aspect that it is very important is the access to different Internet Service Providers. Since many local areas are unable to provide a numerous amounts of these providers, customers may have limited access as determined by the providers. So providers in a less successful area would have less access to services as opposed to those in a "rich" service area. On the other hand, opposing net neutrality could would also greatly benefit the larger companies that can afford to have better Internet Service providers. After time their more efficient services would ultimately assist with improving the company as a whole and in time, would help with services provided to the average person.
Just as recently as last month, Netflix was challenged by Verizon to provide a smoother service of Netflix to the Verizon customers. This put Netflix in a more profitable position and also benefited Verizon. The backbone company between Netflix and Verizon, Cogent, is now put in a very poor position. They basically have to meet the demands of everything Verizon says or else they are put out of business because they can't work around Verizon.
There is an issue with net neutrality and freedom of speech among those who believe of free speech on the internet. Large telecom companies such as Verizon, Time Warner Cable, and Comcast would be able to route everything from our phone calls, e-mails, and videos that we are viewing. I found a fairly good example online, "Imagine if the phone company could mess with your calls every time you tried to order pizza from Domino's, because Pizza Hut is paying them to route their calls first." This really helped me understand what all of this truly meant. As for how this would all affect me, I am big into downloading music from websites such as soundcloud.com and I use YouTube fairly frequently. I definitely think this would negatively affect me. I would be restricted on so many accounts as to what I could do on the internet.
I believe that net neutrality should stay as it is. In the CNN Tech article they wrote about how the service providers are the ones providing the service, so they should be able to decide how their service is used, whether it be free or not. I agree with that statement, I also believe people should not have to pay more money to have better access to internet, that's not what the original developers of the internet wanted this to be used for. It's very discriminatory to the people who really don't have the option to have better ISP around them.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/02/23/comcasts-deal-with-netflix-makes-network-neutrality-obsolete/
https://www.aclu.org/net-neutrality
This two links definitely helped explain what net-neutrality was and how it affects everybody. I thought these were two valid sources because the Washington Post is a major daily newspaper that practices ethics and checks on their facts to secure the credibility. As for ACLU, this website was definitely more biased towards protecting net neutrality. I found it to be valid for just one side of the argument, it gave a lot of information as to how a believer in net neutrality would view this problem and what they would do about it.
No comments:
Post a Comment