Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: Sylvia Else Newsgroups: comp.misc Subject: Re: Net neutrality is dead Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 12:05:26 +1000 Lines: 97 Message-ID: References: <20171121172949.029d3854.rsw@therandymon.com> <20171214144925.0009894c.rsw@therandymon.com> <20180611142955.4cba815c.rsw@therandymon.com> <20180612123456.972551aa.rsw@therandymon.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: individual.net PyFu/u/EMymoMhzcmj/EvgEpYFG4aUDbpeM0kHsir6pVEBYB0n Cancel-Lock: sha1:Bv6UXsiHUnGV/jB8fy6i/uru/k0= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.1 In-Reply-To: <20180612123456.972551aa.rsw@therandymon.com> Content-Language: en-US Xref: csiph.com comp.misc:16093 On 13/06/2018 2:34 AM, RS Wood wrote: > On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 14:29:55 -0400 > RS Wood wrote: > >> On Thu, 14 Dec 2017 14:49:25 -0500 >> RS Wood wrote: >>> Internet service providers say they will not block or throttle legal >>> content but that they may engage in paid prioritization. They say >>> consumers will see no change and argue that the largely unregulated >>> internet functioned well in the two decades before the 2015 order. >>> >> >> It's official: >> https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/11/technology/net-neutrality-repeal.html >> >> Net neutrality is dead in America. Can't wait to see all the awesome >> innovation America's tech sector is now free to explore: bundled >> internet packages, premium websites, pay-to-play. Let's do to the >> internet what we did to cable tv - that seemed to work pretty well, >> didn't it?* >> >> >> * if your definition of success is monetizing the slow, expensive death >> of a platform for short-term profit. >> > > Interesting piece from NYT: > https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/11/technology/how-net-neutrality-repeal.html > > Today, the internet is run by giants. A handful of American tech > behemoths — Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Google and Microsoft — control the > most important digital infrastructure, while a handful of broadband > companies — AT&T, Charter, Comcast and Verizon — control most of the > internet connections in the United States. > > The very idea that large companies can’t dictate what happens online is > laughable now. Large companies, today, pretty much are the internet. In > this world, net neutrality didn’t have a chance. > > So, what now? > > There’s a misunderstanding that the repeal of net neutrality will > result in immediate and drastic change online. That won’t happen. With > lawsuits and legislation pending, with the media still paying attention > and with activists poised to pounce on obvious infractions, broadband > companies are going to be extremely careful, in the short run, to be on > their best behavior. The internet won’t be slower tomorrow. You won’t > be blocked from certain sites. You aren’t going to be charged more. > > But as I argued last fall, a vibrant network doesn’t die all at once. > Instead it grows weaker over time, with innovative start-ups finding it > ever more difficult to fight entrenched incumbents. > > As I’ve noted often in the last few years, big companies have been > crushing small ones over and over again for much of the last decade. > One lesson from everything that has happened online recently — > Facebook, the Russians and Cambridge Analytica; bots and misinformation > everywhere — is that, in the absence stringent rules and enforcement, > everything on the internet turns sour. Removing the last barriers to > unfair competition will only hasten that process. > > It’s not going to be pretty. > > “History shows us that companies that have the technical capacity to do > things, the business incentive to do them and the legal right — they > will take advantage of what is made available to them,” said Jessica > Rosenworcel, an F.C.C. commissioner and a Democrat, who voted against > the repeal of net neutrality last year. > > By repealing neutrality rules, the government has just given our online > overlords that legal right, she cautioned. > > “Now they can block websites and censor online content,” Ms. > Rosenworcel said. “That doesn’t make me feel good — and if you rely on > the internet to consume or create, it shouldn’t make you feel good, > either.” > > The underlying problem is that last-mile delivery of internet access is a natural monopoly, just as it is for electricity, gas, water and sewage. It's next to impossible for find a business case for parallel construction of such infrastructure, even if the incumbent is prevented from improving its service or cutting its prices to see off the interloper (as it would usually do). In Australia, we are seeing the national broadband network being constructed for last-mile delivery. While its implementation has been somewhat bungled, the principle is sound, and presumably it will work properly eventually. I only hope that some future government doesn't sell it to the highest bidder with few if any restrictions in a short term cash grab (there is some precedents for a government doing that - see Sydney Airport for an example). Until the US government sees the light, the US consumer is going to get ripped off. Sylvia.