According to the Forbes article, it states:
In just a few weeks, the FCC will vote to eliminate net neutrality. The vote isn't in doubt: with Pai in charge, the anti-neutrality votes have a 3-2 edge.
What Is Net Neutrality?
Net neutrality is the principle that internet service providers must treat all data on the internet the same. For instance, under these principles, internet service providers are unable to intentionally block slow down or charge money for specific websites and online content.
Without net neutrality, Internet service providers will be able to charge web companies for "fast lanes," which they can't do now. Smaller online video or video game providers could be relegated to the slow lane. The biggest service providers (Netflix, Google, Amazon, and others) may have to cough up extra money, but the consumers won't see any of that-all the benefits will go to the ISPs. Consumers could see their rates go up.
A recent example of this was in July 2017, when Verizon Wireless was accused of slowing down Netflix. And get this. **Ajit Pai, the head of FCC used to be a lawyer for Verizon Wireless. **What a coincidence, I know. Here is him reading his mean tweets.
We all must be getting riled up, because soon net neutrality may come to an end; but let us take a look at the for and against agreements for net neutrality.
Arguments for Net Neutrality
- Digital rights and freedoms
Net neutrality will foster free speech and lead to further democratic participation of the internet.
- Intolerance for slow-loading sites
Internet users will not like the slower loading time.
- Competition and Innovation
Proponents of net neutrality argue that allowing for preferential treatment of internet traffic, or tiered service, would put newer online companies at a disadvantage and slow innovation in online services. Tim Wu, a Columbia law professor, argues that, without network neutrality, the internet will undergo a transformation from market ruled by innovation to one ruled by deal-making.
- Preserving Internet Standards
Slowing down certain sites would signal the decline of fundamental internet standards.
- Reduction in Investment
Instead of billions of broadband investment driving other sectors of the economy forward, any reduction in this spending will stifle growth across the entire economy. Opponents say that net neutrality would make it more difficult for internet service providers and other network operators to recoup their investments in broadband networks.
- Potentially Increase in Taxes
FCC commissioner Ajit Pai, who opposed the 2015 Title II reclassification of ISPs, says that the ruling allows new fees and taxes on broadband by subjecting them to the telephone-style taxes under the Universal Service Fund.
- Unnecessary Regulations
According to PayPal founder and Facebook investor Peter Thiel in 2011, "Net neutrality has not been necessary to date. I don't see any reason why it's suddenly become important, when the internet has functioned quite well for the past 15 years without it...Government attempts to regulate technology have been extraordinarily counterproductive in the past.
- Charging Everyone the Same Price Isn't Fair
People who use more should pay more.
- Protect Average Users from Power Users
It will help guard against bandwidth "hogs" (e.g. gamers, movie streaming companies, etc.), and unleash innovative pricing models and schemes that benefit end users.
I believe the adamant claim for net neutrality is largely exaggerated. Is it true that once net neutrality comes to an end, consumers will pay more for the services? Won't competition and innovation solve that? There must be a reason why Peter Thiel says that net neutrality has not been necessary to date.
What are your thoughts, monkeys??