Net neutrality: it’s still a debate?

I was listening to the Washington Post Technology Podcast and the most recent topic du jour was net neutrality. I’m amazed this is still a topic of debate. OK, I’m not really amazed, because it’s in the wireless carriers’ best interests to defeat net neutrality and therefore they’re motivated to keep it in the public discussion.

Is net neutrality really all that difficult? Requiring broadband providers, especially wireless companies, to handle all kinds of traffic will force them to be better about managing their networks, creating differentiation between providers in terms of their quality of service. Companies which don’t effectively provision and manage their network will fall behind their competition. Isn’t that how a free market is supposed to work?

Net neutrality will also create an open market for new services and applications. Instead of innovators having to worry about getting the approval of broadband providers to run a new app or service (witness the Google Voice/Apple/AT&T debacle), leading-edge developers can just worry about creating something great. Having a free, open network as a guaranteed foundation will do far more for advancing network-based apps than protecting the profits of wireless broadband providers. I’m glad to see the FCC isn’t bowing to industry pressure and is going ahead with plans to implement net neutrality rules

Matthew Petro Recommends

Coworking is a commodity. It is a race to the bottom. (Derek Neighbors)
Why it’s too soon to call Randy Miller ‘boss’ at East Valley Tribune (Heat City)
It’s Not About Startups. It’s about changing the world. (Derek Neighbors)

http://www.zachowenby.com/ Zach Owenby

I believe the reason it is still a debate is because the wireless internet is still an infant, yet it will become the future of the internet. The the iPhone opened the floodgate with its ability to bring the full web experience to a handheld device. Granted it is not perfect, but it is far better than anything preceding it. The public is hooked on a wireless internet, and the expectation is quickly becoming that the wireless internet will offer faster and faster speeds, just as the transition from dial-up to broadband did. And this is where the problem resides.

Because wireless technology can only support two nodes communicating simultaneously within a given channel, the technology resorts to other techniques to share the available spectrum amongst multiple nodes. For real-time protocols (i.e. video and voice), this is a big problem because you end up with noticeable delays. Deploying more towers doesn't necessarily solve the problem, and unlike a wired network, a wireless network by nature is in a constant state of flux.

The push against Net Neutrality is just a means to an end for the telecoms. Had we known what we know now 12 years ago, AOL and all those other ISPs would never have offered unlimited internet access. But that ship set sail years ago, and it would be nearly impossible to change that expectation now, unless another shift in user behavior and expectations occurred. A shift like the wireless internet. The fight against Net Neutrality is simply a trojan horse, because once the telecoms are allowed to determine how content is accessed, it will be applied to all aspects of their networks, not just wireless. When that day comes, be prepared to see the sort of data limits and speed restrictions you currently see from wireless carriers on your home or business internet connection.

BTW, I am a supporter of Net Neutrality.
http://www.zachowenby.com/ Zach Owenby

I believe the reason it is still a debate is because the wireless internet is still an infant, yet it will become the future of the internet. The the iPhone opened the floodgate with its ability to bring the full web experience to a handheld device. Granted it is not perfect, but it is far better than anything preceding it. The public is hooked on a wireless internet, and the expectation is quickly becoming that the wireless internet will offer faster and faster speeds, just as the transition from dial-up to broadband did. And this is where the problem resides.

Because wireless technology can only support two nodes communicating simultaneously within a given channel, the technology resorts to other techniques to share the available spectrum amongst multiple nodes. For real-time protocols (i.e. video and voice), this is a big problem because you end up with noticeable delays. Deploying more towers doesn't necessarily solve the problem, and unlike a wired network, a wireless network by nature is in a constant state of flux.

The push against Net Neutrality is just a means to an end for the telecoms. Had we known what we know now 12 years ago, AOL and all those other ISPs would never have offered unlimited internet access. But that ship set sail years ago, and it would be nearly impossible to change that expectation now, unless another shift in user behavior and expectations occurred. A shift like the wireless internet. The fight against Net Neutrality is simply a trojan horse, because once the telecoms are allowed to determine how content is accessed, it will be applied to all aspects of their networks, not just wireless. When that day comes, be prepared to see the sort of data limits and speed restrictions you currently see from wireless carriers on your home or business internet connection.

BTW, I am a supporter of Net Neutrality.

Matthew Petro

Oct200913

Matthew Petro

2