There's a battle going on in Congress, and it could effect any of us who use broadband internet today.
I'm guessing that's quite a few of you.
Personally, I'm getting tired of the victim excuse in American politics. You can't critique the Iraqi war, because it might hurt the feelings of our soldiers (but, apparently, getting them shot and blown up isn't a problem). You shouldn't talk about intelligence failures or illegal intelligence activities because it might hurt the morale of our intelligence agents (I'm so trying that one on my boss for my next review. It's not that I failed ... it's that you're insulting me).
And now, we have to let the telecoms charge for preferred internet traffic because the poor things have been doing all the dirty work while companies like Microsoft, Yahoo and Google have been getting a free ride.
That's right. The telecoms are victims now. That's precisely the argument Republican Joe Barton used in defending knocking out an amendment which would secure the internet as we know it now. Now, traffic on the internet is blind. Everything from that NiWiFi game you played last night to uploading pictures of your cat is treated exactly the same. The broadband pipes which ship it from one location to another could care less about the content, and everything gets treated differently.
The problem the telecoms have with that is that they don't control the traffic and hence, can't charge a premium. If they did, they could charge you more to have your grandmother's photo upload faster compared to your NiWiFi game. And some of the comparisons the proponents of this "preferred net" make sound not so bad. It's like FedEx, they say. If you want to be sure you grandma's photo gets their faster, you'll just pay a little more.
What's the harm in that? Everyone loves grandma.
The harm is that the comparison doesn't make any sense. Using a snail mail analogy to compare modern broadband delivery of content is idiotic.
Consumers aren't the ones asking for this,
big businesses are the ones asking for this. Nobody down here on Planet Earth is asking to pay $10 extra for grandma's photo to make it in nine seconds instead of twenty. People like
AT&T are asking for it so that they can deal out who can deliver high def movies in the future ... and who can't. With AT&T, of course, making money hand over fist for every movie being downloaded.
Consumers are already getting more than they need. iTunes offers a robust method of delivering television shows and now movies, and yet it's overall market saturation is minimal. Technology and the industry is evolving fine with the Internet as it is ... which is exactly what has the telecoms worried. They see people like Skype being able to hone into their core business by running on top of their own broadband pipes and they really, really don't like it.
So they want Congress to make it OK for AT&T to be able to charge Skype ... or whoever AT&T chooses ... for better delivery. Once again, it's not that people can't use Skype with the current net ... it's just that the telecoms can't control it.
Republican Joe Barton needs a reminder that a lot of Congressmen need these days. He doesn't work for American business.
He works for Americans.
And I'd hope that he either gets an attitude adjustment or a new job.
By the by, same goes for Democrat Bobby Rush, of my homestate of Illinois.
tagged: network neutrality, internet