A lot of people are amazed at how fast the internet has come – and how much more they can learn about the world around them. But let’s be honest: we’ve barely scratched the surface of the possibilities that exist. And while our smartphones can be a great source of entertainment, they’re not the only tool we have to learn, improve, and explore.
One of the most exciting and liberating technologies in the history of our world is the computer, and the computer network. Its all-pervasive nature has allowed people to gather together in huge groups in unprecedented ways. And it has also enabled us to communicate with each other in ways that we never thought possible. But in the past year you may have even started to wonder if there are any limits to what the internet can and can not do. I think there may be one of those new limits.
The concept of net neutrality is still relatively new to most people. But most people know that this is the exact thing that was supposed to prevent, but instead created a situation where it was easier and faster for some of the internet’s most dangerous content to be distributed to children than for the rest of the internet to be available to everyone. This is a concept called net neutrality, and it has been around forever.
Net neutrality is the concept that all internet content must be provided at the same level of quality, speed, and cost to all internet users. In other words, no one should be able to send anything faster or cheaper than whatever content is available on any other internet.
So, according to this new study, if you want to send something to someone over the internet, you have to send it at the same speed and quality, and the content provider has to be able to provide it at the same price per megabyte.
I was surprised to find out that the study was actually done by the same company who did the study for the FCC earlier this year. I knew this is the case because they did the study but didn’t do the FCC one. Even if you don’t agree with the FCC, it’s great that they are focusing on this particular issue. I can’t get too excited about the FCC because they are going to be busy with the rest of their review of net neutrality regulations.
I think the FCC has a point that it could be even more expensive if it were to give companies less information about what they are doing. I think companies need to be able to get approval for the information they are putting out there and the approval process needs to be as transparent as possible. Companies can often be secretive about their plans, but to keep their plans secret while the FCC is looking at them is just not good, especially as companies grow.
That said, I’m not convinced net neutrality regulations are necessary. I think the FCC could do a better job of regulating broadband providers, and that it would also be good for the internet in general. The internet is a public utility, which is one of the things that the FCC is supposed to regulate.
There is a lot of confusion about net neutrality. Some people think it’s about “free market,” which is a false dichotomy. The FCC is supposed to be regulating ISPs, not the internet as a whole, but the internet is a public utility, so the FCC is regulating the internet as a whole.
ISPs compete with each other by offering different packages of services and different speeds. The FCC should be regulating the internet as it is a public utility, not internet providers. I like wunong’s idea that the internet is not a public utility per se, but rather a service that is built to be used by the public. And I like the idea of regulating the internet as a whole.