|
That's a message the carriers and money recipients have been floating, but it's warped. The bill intended to keep the status quo, not change things. What's at risk of changing is the net's historically equal footing for all participants. Bits moving from peer to peer without privileged access beyond your connection speed and network efficiency.
Net neutrality as a law was intended to maintain that equal footing in the face of telecoms wanting to move bits they're paid extra for before bits they have to move for free. The big telecoms and providers want to continue charging the consumer end of the connection, and start charging content providers for privileged access. i.e. company a pays more so squeezes out company b. It upsets the historically equal footing of content providers, which of course means we'll get to watch bidding wars between the big guys and someone new like youtube2 will have a hell of a time getting started. Want to squeeze them out? Pay more for your content to ensure you have priority and their service will suffer. Obviously this favors the carriers and large media interests.
I don't expect problems to hit immediately but it'll be a creep of profits vs. what the public will bear. It'll change the landscape.
__________________
There are a vast number of people who are uninformed and heavily propagandized, but fundamentally decent. The propaganda that inundates them is effective when unchallenged, but much of it goes only skin deep. If they can be brought to raise questions and apply their decent instincts and basic intelligence, many people quickly escape the confines of the doctrinal system and are willing to do something to help others who are really suffering and oppressed." -Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky and the Media, p. 195
|