The article gives a basic explanation of the debate that is going on about net neutrality between the deregulators and the openists. The article itself is made of five parts. The deregulators which include the cable, phone, and Internet companies want the internet deregulated so they can charge people on a pay as you go, tier type basis. The openists want the system we already have and regulations to keep these big companies under control. The article goes through the terminology and the major players in the debate.
The first part defines what net neutrality means and how it has different definitions to different groups of people. The second part describes the players involved and the terminology used in the net neutrality debate. The third section describes where the debate started from and who brought to the forefront. The fourth section tells of the dilemma caused by the debate. The fifth and final section gives some solutions to end the debate and to keep it from coming up again.
Why is it a big deal if there are only a few companies that control the internet, wouldn’t it be less confusing?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
If only a few companies controlled the internet it would become a pay as you go system. This would become much more expensive.
ReplyDeleteIf only a few companies control the internet, it will become a monopoly and eventually costs will continue to rise. There will be no competition, therefore you will need to pay what they require to have the service.
ReplyDeleteRachel.
I like the internet the way it is, if I had to pay every time I went online this would become too expensive and too much of a hassle. Yes, it may be less confusing and more manageable, but in the end its about money, and nobody wants to spend more.
ReplyDeleteI think it may be less confusing if only a few companies controlled the internet, but it would hurt the people using it because they could control every aspect of the internet. They would create a monopoly on it. Nobody wants to pay more money for the internet, and that is what would happen.
ReplyDeleteThe few companies that would end up controlling the internet would monopolize it. From there, these companies could do whatever they wanted and we would have no choice but to comply with higher costs and various other stipulations for use.
ReplyDeleteYes it would be less confusing but we the people do not want some company deciding what we can and can not access when there is so much information available. Now that we know the information is out there why is it okay for someone to censor us for profit? Knowledge should be available to all but I don't know if it can be free in every sense. Either we're paying or the big company is controlling what we're seeing. I don't really know enough about the behind the scenes so...this is all just fluff.
ReplyDeleteLess confusing perhaps, but a monopoly for sure. Plus that means they can determine what is put online and how often they put things up up on the internet.
ReplyDeleteIt would be less confusing but who wants to pay as you go for internet usage? Just paying for internet access cost enough money. I'd rather be slightly confused then pay.
ReplyDeleteMaybe it would be less confusing but i dont know if i like that argument as a reason to implement it. Id be interested to see lawsuits about violating freedoms if this ever happened.
ReplyDeleteHaving only a few big companies means not much competition. Those companies could take advantage of that situation to benefit themselves at the expense of everyone else.
ReplyDeleteIf only a couple big companies controll the Internet, it becomes similar to a monopoly. Those big companies can increase rates at will, which may lead to more expensive Internet. Plus it will hurt those who use the Internet a lot, since they would be paying every time they use the Internet
ReplyDeleteLeave it the way it is. It would be a big deal if only a few companies ran it because they would get into censorship and that would ruin the freedom of the internet.
ReplyDelete