Net Neutrality & Decentralization (Opinion)
Many would have heard about the latest FCC news where its head Ajit Pal has helped to push the agenda of Big Telecom Businesses and strife innovation and freedom of information in the name of helping promote innovation. I will not delve further at the risks that we expose our-self now but rather share some positives that will help give you some hope that all is not lost.
If you read my previous opinion piece, then you will realize that people are focusing on ways how to find alternate form of network like Mesh network, community based network back bones and even looking at Decentralization and overlay networks to bypass the gatekeepers who strife free speech and access to global wealth of information.
What is Net Neutrality?
Net neutrality is the principle that Internet service providers must treat all data on the Internet the same, and not discriminate or charge differently by user, content, website, platform, application, type of attached equipment, or method of communication.
For instance, under these principles, internet service providers are unable to intentionally block, slow down or charge money for specific websites and online content. The term was coined by Columbia University media law professor Tim Wu in 2003, as an extension of the longstanding concept of a common carrier, which was used to describe the role of telephone systems.
A widely cited example of a violation of net neutrality principles was the Internet service provider Comcast’s secret slowing (“throttling”) of uploads from peer-to-peer file sharing (P2P) applications by using forged packets.[9] Comcast did not stop blocking these protocols, like BitTorrent, until the Federal Communications Commission ordered them to stop. Or in the extreme cases they Great Chinese Internet Wall where they have blocked access to all the international websites and only acts as a walled garden for Chinese Websites only. Or even in case of North Korea where even the phones that people buy takes screenshots of what internet activity you are doing and reports to government. So what we see in all these cases, in the information age where information is money, the privacy, the right of free choice for a citizen is controlled.
Need for Decentralization and Open Internet
Open Internet Under an “open Internet” schema, the full resources of the Internet and means to operate on it should be easily accessible to all individuals, companies, and organizations.
Applicable concepts include: net neutrality, open standards, transparency, lack of Internet censorship, and low barriers to entry. The concept of the open Internet is sometimes expressed as an expectation of decentralized technological power, and is seen by some observers as closely related to open-source software, a type of software program whose maker allows users access to the code that runs the program, so that users can improve the software or fix bugs.
Proponents of net neutrality see this as an important component ofan “open Internet”, wherein policies such as equal treatment of data and open web standards allow those using the Internet to easily communicate, and conduct business and activities without interference from a third party.
In contrast, a “closed Internet” refers to the opposite situation like walled gardens, wherein established persons, corporations, or governments favor certain uses, restrict access to necessary web standards, artificially degrade some services, or explicitly filter out content. Some countries[which?] block certain websites or types of sites, and monitor and/or censor Internet use using Internet police, a specialized type of law enforcement, or secret police.
What happens to Internet without Net Neutrality
Preserving Internet standards Net neutrality advocates have sponsored legislation claiming that authorizing incumbent network providers to override transport and application layer separation on the Internet would signal the decline of fundamental Internet standards and international consensus authority.
Further, the legislation asserts that bit-shaping the transport of application data will undermine the transport layer’s designed flexibility.
Any violations to network neutrality, realistically speaking, will not involve genuine investment but rather payoffs for unnecessary and dubious services. Non-net neutrality will involve leveraging quality of service to extract remuneration from websites that want to avoid being slowed down.
This theory was confirmed in 2014 when Netflix announced it was making payments to Comcast and Verizon to avoid throttling, slower internet speeds for particular services or websites, by those ISPs.
All content must be treated the same and must move at the same speed in order for net neutrality to be true. A neutral network is a dumb network, merely passing packets regardless of the applications they support.
Voice against Net Neutrality
The voices against Net Neutrality argue that the end of net neutrality rules will lead to a closer link between cost and consumption. While net neutrality may be conceptually appealing, it is not equitable. Their question, is it fair that a few super-users are allowed to clog up networks by downloading movies, playing data-hungry online games, and not paying more for it? Why shouldn’t ISPs be allowed to price data according to volume, type, or speed? Fourth, ISPs could use any extra revenue generated from high-bandwidth users to subsidize the cost to regular users or improve network infrastructure.
But the truth is ISPs would discriminate by offering their own preferred content faster and cheaper. Ironically, this is already happening under net neutrality regulation: AT&T for example, offers DirecTV access as a zero rating product, i.e. it does not count toward data caps.
The companies that Control America’s Internet
According to BroadbandNow, there are currently 2,566 internet providers in the United States. Of their list, 1,230 specifically provide wired connections, and only a handful have complete coverage across the entirety of the United States. Furthermore, a number of companies on their list are subsidiaries of the larger companies that most consumers have heard of, like AT&T or Comcast.
Why Big Internet Giants may not care about Net Neutrality
Despite the Net Neutrality debate, the Big business have already their own plans in place to face any such challenge coming out of network disruption.
Tech giants are using more and more bandwidth. TeleGeography estimates that content providers like Google, Facebook and Netflix now account for 38% of total worldwide used international bandwidth. Having their own dedicated cables means that they can use them as they like.
There are a handful of very, very influential content providers who are shifting the balance away from the telecoms. Among the newcomers are a few of the world’s leading internet companies, which have concluded that, given the cost of renting bandwidth, they may as well make their own connections.
Hence they are already hedging against the well known issue of bipartisan nature of ISP providers and with good reason. But the issue remains can small internet startups and budding content providers sustain with Net Neutrality gone.
What FCC has effectively Done
The below are the Declaratory Ruling of the FCC Order
- Restores the classification of broadband Internet access service as an “information service” under Title I of the Communications Act — the classification affirmed by the Supreme Court in the 2005 Brand X case.
The above link explains how classifying internet as an Information Service basically how FCC is taking back all the innovation made in the internet age back to stone age of 90s and early 2000. Whats worse it gives too much power in the hands of ISP who do not really care about improving infrastructure of internet, Net Neutrality or not as they are just the last mile internet providers.
- Reinstates the classification of mobile broadband Internet access service as a private mobile service.
The term “private mobile service” means any mobile service (as defined insection 153 of this title) that is not a commercial mobile service or the functional equivalent of a commercial mobile service, as specified by regulation by the Commission.
Which basically means, Mobile internet which forms the major chunk of the internet traffic around the works is now at the mercy of the telecom providers who may charge you the price of 5g connection but depending on what site you want to access as a consumer may be getting at 2g speeds. This directly affects the ability of many apps and many small content providers to operate freely.
- Finds that the regulatory uncertainty created by utility-style Title II regulation has reduced Internet service provider (ISP) investment in networks, as well as hampered innovation, particularly among small ISPs serving rural consumers.
Yes instead of clarifying it and solidifying it, by repealing the law like many Trump era misadventures they just destroyed any hope of further innovation in Technology space effectively making sure more startups and small and medium businesses that are key to job creation today leave to greener pastures instead of struggling in US.
- Finds that public policy, in addition to legal analysis, supports the information service classification, because it is more likely to encourage broadband investment and innovation, thereby furthering the goal of closing the digital divide and benefiting the entire Internet ecosystem.
This broadly speaks of a mindset where the FCC chairman lives in a technology era of 1900s instead in future where for the true growth in Internet adoption and technology he depends on Broadband and coaxial cables as the way to go to promote internet adoption.
- Restores broadband consumer protection authority to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), enabling it to apply its extensive expertise to provide uniform online protections against unfair, deceptive, and anti-competitive practices.
This specific change did not require repeal of the whole Net neutrality Act, instead of looking at bigger matters now Federal Trade Commission will spend its good time to look at should an ISP in a small county can throttle a specific internet service or not. Heights of stupidity in policy making.
- Requires that ISPs disclose information about their practices to consumers, entrepreneurs, and the Commission, including any blocking, throttling, paid prioritization, or affiliated prioritization.
This only requires but does not outlaws such practices which in itself is undoing of years of hard work that went into making sure the true network speeds reach to the final consumers viz a viz content delivery is concerned.
- Finds that transparency, combined with market forces as well as antitrust and consumer protection laws, achieve benefits comparable to those of the 2015 “bright line” rules at lower cost.
Its a hogwash that we are sure the current FCC does not care about at the first place.
- Eliminates the vague and expansive Internet Conduct Standard, under which the FCC could micromanage innovative business models.
It not only eliminates the vagueness but many of the good efforts made to bring Net Neutrality.
- Finds that the public interest is not served by adding to the already-voluminous record in this proceeding additional materials, including confidential materials submitted in other proceedings.
This goes on to show that how much transparent FCC is and by such opaque actions it only reaffirms that the final rule drafted in only to favor few telecom lobbies and not the wider consumer and enterprise base.
Need for Decentralization
Decentralization is the process of distributing or dispersing functions,
powers, people or things away from a central location or authority. Decentralization has, not only an administrative value, but also a civic dimension, since it increases the opportunities for citizens to take interest in public affairs; it makes them get accustomed to using freedom. And from the accumulation of these local, active, persnickety freedoms, is born the most efficient counterweight against the claims of the central government, even if it were supported by an impersonal, collective will.
And as in my earlier article this will only come when people take the power of running the internet create more peer to peer utilities and not just at application software level. But also at the hard ware level and also at the network connectivity and creating sustainable internet backbones.
For this to happen more focus has to be given on open hardware initiative.
Starting from computers, network routers, network switch today has to be open sourced and with the help of 3d technology should be created from ground up. Yes for intercontinental connectivity more effort is required by setting community internet fiber net cable lines but by creating DAO ( Decentralized organizations) to manage such an infrastructure and by funding it with Tokensale and creating a loose community across the globe to manage such an decentralized internet. This will help us get away from the dependency on Governments to define laws that either support us or chokes our freedom.
We have the technology for Decentralization we just need to build it
For financial system we have Bitcoin and crypto currencies, for file storage and distribution we have Storj and BitTorrent. For Decentralized applications we have Ethereum, Lisk and even Kademelia protocol. For decentralized network backbone we have Mesh networks. For security we have overlay networks like Tor and I2p. For Decentralized messaging, voice and audio we have WebRTC.
Final Thoughts
So now we need to ask can’t we carve out a decentralized future for us. I would say, Net Neutrality or not, the revolution has already begun. Time is ripe for more innovation and come out from the fold of national identity, regional biases and racial insecurities. Internet showed us what we really are — a true global commune of ideas, innovation and collaboration. And to really achieve it, free market or not, the future is Decentralization.
For more news follow: https://t.me/cryptbytestechnews
If you like the Blog then please help support the publication viahttps://www.patreon.com/cryptbytestech. Also you can send some eth contributions to 0x670A8721C343Ce16D619630283Ea70F3235e3247
If you have a story please join the telegram channels and share with us Joinhttps://t.me/joinchat/AsCHKQ8-wkEQYo5BXDQgZQ.
If you want to explore more on Cryptos visit -> https://cryptoprofile.com
