- Acid Test by Quixote - http://www.molvray.com/acidtest -

Net neutrality, Google, and Verizon

You’ve all heard by now that Google and Verizon will take care of it. They will come to an agreement between them that will ensure the best use of bandwidth for everyone.

And what we’re arguing about is whether their agreement preserves enough net neutrality.

Green horrified face. By Jeremy Brooks.

Net neutrality is a question of rights. Who determines the content of the public airwaves? Who determines the extent of your right to see or hear what you choose? Who determines what you can choose to see and hear?

Since when do businesses decide questions of rights? That is a function of government.

Does the government fit into such a tiny tub by now that we no longer have any idea what it’s for?

3 Comments (Open | Close)

3 Comments To "Net neutrality, Google, and Verizon"

#1 Comment By Neurovore On 19 Aug, 2010 @ 17:35

First they came for the wireless networks and I did not speak up because I was on a cable line…

I am not sure if this will be the turning point to a future when we will have to subscribe to “website packages” like they do with satellite and cable stations but I think it is only a matter of time before “net neutrality” becomes an outdated concept much like needing a warrant to spy on somebody. In any case I was rather surprised when congress voted to preserve net neutrality back in 2006 but it seems like that decision has now been rendered quaint.

#2 Comment By quixote On 24 Sep, 2010 @ 07:21

Yeah. It all reminds me of the cartoon I saw a couple of years ago: a guy is cleaning out the closet and comes across a box marked “Civil Rights.” “I’ll throw these out,” he says to a woman in the background. “I wasn’t using them anyway.”

#3 Comment By Neurovore On 01 Oct, 2010 @ 16:17

Speaking of internet neutrality, you no doubt have been following the news on the Democrats in Congress and their complete failure to push through a bill that would guarantee net neutrality.


As usual, the Republicans absolutely refused to cooperate, so with the failure of this bill the only option at this point is to hope that the FCC maintains its authority to prevent telecomm companies from interfering with internet services.

As deregulation of government enforcement agencies in the name of “privatization” is just as chic as ever, I can foresee this will degenerate into a similar situation that we currently face with cable and satellite television. Internet users will be forced to choose from service “packages” consisting of different websites that they would be allowed to visit through their service for a certain monthly fee.

Any website that is not on your pre-approved list of websites that you chose for your service package will be blocked, and if you want to have access to more websites, you will have to upgrade to a more expansive service package and be charged accordingly.

On top of that, the speed of your service will still be much slower and you will have a maximum cap on how much bandwidth that you can use per month unless you can afford to pay for top internet speed and unlimited time on the internet. However such unlimited high speed service will be prohibitively expensive for most private internet users because it will be aimed towards the corporate sector.