As we know, the rapid rise of technology has disrupted many industries. In class we discussed the music industry in particular.
But there is a bigger battle going on over the internet itself. ISP's such as Comcast and Silicon Valley giants like Google and Netflix are warring over whether all data should be treated equally. Under the Obama administration, the FCC (Federal Communications Commission) ruled in favor of Silicon Valley and ordered ISP's to be regulated as a utility like Con Edison.
That is very likely to change under the new administration. ISP's claim all data is not equal and that content creators should pay more to distribute streaming content to help offset network maintenance costs for ISP's.
Here are two argument for both sides:
Pro Net Neutrality: http://theoatmeal.com/blog/net_neutrality
Against Net Neutrality: http://mashable.com/2014/05/16/5-arguments-against-net-neutrality/#GXx6m4ddomqn
Read both and weigh in on one side of the debate. Which side do you support? There will be a quiz on the articles.
Net neutrality has been a thing since the internet has been a mainstream thing. Although people think that net neutrality isn't a thing and that it should just happen, it actually kinda a big deal. Basically, what certain companies want to do is to raise the price on internet packages so that they'll get more of a profit from internet users. So websites like google, netflix, and crunchyroll who doesn't pay ISPs will have a long wait time or even blocked by the service provider.
ReplyDeletePro net neutrality will allow users and websites to not pay Isps and that the internet is a utility, not a luxury. This mean anyone and everyone can use the internet, not just at home, but on their phones, and such.
Ant Net Neutrality means that the government now regulates the internet. Not only that but it forces users to pay more for using the internet than others. Meaning, you are punished for using something simple but necessary.
Net Neutrality is something very important in our lives today, because the internet has been integrated in our everyday lives. If it fails, then we would have to pay more, for something very important.
After reading the two articles of pro net nuetrality and anti net nuetrality, I think that net nuetrality is a good idea and needed to be kept. Even though the article of anti net Nuetrality had a good point that they should pay people more for using more internet, but we shouldn't all have to pay so much money for the internet. It should just be guarenteed already. If we pay for netflix, we shouldn't have to pay more just for netflix.
ReplyDeleteNet neutrality has been around since the internet came to be and was used daily. I am for net neutrality. It gives us the freedom to go on the internet whenever we please. Anyone can use the internet. Net neutrality is basically a rule that internet service providers(ISP) should enable access to all content no matter the source.It is controlled by the government. If big giants like Google and Netflix don't pay the ISPs, users can be blocked or have to wait a long time. Pro net neutrality will allow users alike to not pay ISPs to ruin our privileges on the internet. Its also not putting the internet in the hands of the government.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading both articles, I am pro net neutrality. Although, anti net neutrality had some great points, such as paying for how much we used rather than everyone paying the same amount because it simply isn't fair. However, I am positive no one wants to be regulated by the government practically 24/7. Net neutrality made it a point to show we still have our freedom and everyone on the internet is treated equally and used by everyone and everywhere. Net neutrality treats the internet as a prized possession and to make know that we all should use it respectfully. With net neutrality, we get what we paid for, and it's 100% fair and just for everyone.
ReplyDeleteI'm pro net neutrality because there can only be so much government interference in our lives. I agree with Dayna in saying that anti net neutrality made some great points for example with how much we paid and not everyone should pay the same price because we all use different packages and different services. I am probneutrality because I don't want to be regulated by the government all the time. No one wants to have a smaller package and pay a bigger price as if it was a big package. Net neutrality is fair because you get what you paid for and there is a level of privacy that is not crossed by internet service providers or the government.
ReplyDeleteafter reading both articles i'd have to side with anti net neutrality, because if net neutrality was put into motion that means there would be more government involvement in monitoring the Telecoms, speaking for myself I already distrust the man (system) and this would be an invitation into the more clandestine areas of my life and of many. Little regulation has been working for years on end, why change it now? (And risk the possible consequences. if net neutrality passes, how can we know won't be in a way that'll make it harder for new companies to offer Internet services?)
ReplyDeleteAfter reading the articles, I think net neutrally is good. We should pay for what we use because not everyone uses the same amount. If we pay a set price, it won't be fair for the people that don't use the internet to much. We should still continue paying the packages that we can pick because we can choose how much internet we get and how much we pay
ReplyDeleteAfter reading the articles I would have to say that I am pro net neutrality. I say this because I agree that the Internet shouldn't be controlled. The Internet should be a free space for everyone. Plus I'm pretty sure that no one would enjoy having the government watching what we do and control what we can view and can't view. Even though the anti net neutrality did have some good points I'll just stick to pro net neutrality.
ReplyDelete