What it means to neutralize the neutrality of the network to use the Internet



[ad_1]

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) aims to revoke the net neutrality rules that were introduced by the Obama administration next month. The existing rules do not allow broadband providers to discriminate against content providers (as long as they are legal players and the content itself is legal). However, if the FCC gets away with it, that will no longer be the case.

The involvement of such a movement by the FCC on the Internet has been intensely speculated during these last weeks.

However, to get a clearer picture of what the absence of net neutrality would mean for the Internet in the United States, perhaps a good place to look would be in countries where the net neutrality laws are already lax .

For example, a look at an Internet package the Portuguese mobile operator, Meo, shows a scenario in which Internet services are grouped into different categories of services. Meo's plan, called "Smart Net", offers customers monthly subscription options in titles such as Video, Messaging and Social. The five categories they offer have popular applications such as Spotify, Google Drive, Netflix and Facetime.

Although at first glance, this may seem to get cable channels through the Internet, it is a bit different. Here the services offered are additional to the mobile subscriptions for general use, with which you can access any service, including those mentioned above. For example, if you are an important user of applications such as Facebook or Snapchat, you should pay approximately $ 8 per month to get even more "social" data.

In the meantime, you would use the data badignment of the regular subscription for everything else.

China is another country where the neutrality of the network is a moot point, although in that country the content filtering is directed by the government and not by the companies. The Chinese government is extremely intolerant of criticism of the government, and any content it finds offensive is censored from the Internet.

In other words, the definition of "legal" content is quite weak in China, to say the least.

Although the United States has a political system different from China, if the neutrality of the network is reversed in the US. UU., Suppressing the voices that legitimately disagree on the Internet, especially if they come from marginalized or poorer people, can become easier for the government. [19659002] In New Zealand, although there is no authoritarian government as in China, in terms of Internet use, they allow service providers to offer what is called "differential prices".

For example, the telecommunications brand, Vodafone, offers customers a social pbad for websites such as Twitter, Snapchat and Instagram. With the pbad, the customer would have a monthly limit on the data they could use for these websites. As of now, for $ 8.72 per month, a customer can buy unlimited access from the company.

If the client is someone who uses a specific service to gather information to improve their position in life (for example, a student who accesses video lessons provided by a Facebook page) and if that person is economically disadvantaged, making them pay more for access to the material would be socially counterproductive.

If such a scenario were developed in the United States or not, we could only speculate now But one thing is for sure: the way you use the Internet would be drastically different without the neutrality of the network.

[ad_2]
Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.