[Ma-linux] Net Neutrality

[Przemek Klosowski]

Kevin wrote:

   -- I think I understand net neutrality... equal access to the net for all
   (is that right?).  But I'm also a pragmatist.  Doesn't that mean someone
   will still have to pay for it - ultimately that means us the taxpayers.  I

Why do you think that 'net neutrality' will require funding, and
government funding to boot? Anti-neutrality carriers intend to inspect
the traffic and prioritize it based on a whole slew of criteria: what
it is, where it's coming from, etc. etc.    All these things look
fairly hardware- and labor-intensive, and it seems to me that it's
anti-neutrality that will require extra investment.

The only reason why carriers fight neutrality is that they plan to
charge extra---they figured out that the extra cost of breaking the
neutrality will be more than offset by the increased prices they will
charge for tiered service.

Net neutrality simply means that the carriers transmit whatever
traffic their customers desire. Here's an analogy for you: what if
your road toll depended on what you carry in your car trunk, and where
you're going? Besides being unjust, doesn't it look like it would
cause major traffic jams at the toll stations?

To take this analogy further, maybe Internet is getting to be
important enough to the national economy, to the point that it
eventually might be a public function, just like roads.  Before
someone jumps and calls it anti-business or communist, let me declare
that it's quite the opposite---good infrastructure is a prerequisite
for capitalism.