kidmercury

Albert has a post up on net neutrality. Before you read that, though, you should check out how Albert dissed me for commenting on the eugenics agenda. I was surprised when he did that, tried beefing with me on kookology. LOL, please. My kook game is legit and backed by years of diligent research. Beef with it at your own risk.

Anyway, Albert's post on net neutrality got me thinking about my views on net neutrality. Here it is:

1. One of the key issues is whether Internet Service Providers (the people that provide Internet access to your home and send you a bill every month) should be required to treat all devices and content equally. Can they charge certain sites to pay more, or can they make certain sites go slower?

2. The concern is that if ISPs are allowed to discriminate, they will do just that, and choke more money out of the system which will suck big time for businesses and Internet users.

3. The net neutrality movement is in part about trying to legislate against ISPs doing that, mandating that they provide equal access to all.

Sounds good, right?

Maybe. The ISPs are a rotten bunch and if they are not stopped it is quite conceivable they will ruin things for everyone. From this perspective the net neutrality stuff is cool.

However. Requiring ISPs to treat everything the same is requiring ISPs to bear certain costs -- costs that, at some point in the future, may prove to be inefficient and ultimately a malinvestment. To claim that ISPs should be required to provide equal access to all forever ignores the possibility that the environment could change so that some content/devices should be discriminated against, and that it may be economically advantageous and morally neutral to do so. Personally, I favor the idea of independent networks that have their own rules and their own standards. Who is to say how ISPs should run their business? If they try something stupid that simply leaves an opportunity open for a competitor who is not so naive.

So, in the end, I reluctantly support net neutrality. All the crap about how we could all get screwed big time if the ISPs decide to choke the Internet does have some truth to it, in my opinion, and I view that as the ultimate safeguard which must be protected against, because that would supremely suck if the ISPs ruined the Internet for us.

However I would urge all to be extremely cognizant of what bills may get attached to net neutrality legislation, and to not believe a word the President says -- always do your own research and verify from trusted sources outside of the mainstream media. Remember the US government, like most governments of the world, is ultimately controlled by criminals. To deny this is simply to guarantee you will be operating from a false perspective.

I also hope that if we do get good network neutrality legislation passed, I hope that people will be aware that there may be a time in the future when this legislation has outlived its usefulness, and that things should be adapted accordingly at that time.