Ty Talks About: Net Neutrality

Or, Ty hops on the bandwagon to attract more readers!
Net Neutrality is a very hot topic right now, with debates happening even within my own family.
Frequently I’ve been getting pop-ups telling me that:
TY IF NET NEUTRALITY GOES AWAY IT WILL MAKE YOUR INTERNETS SLOWW STOP IT NOW SAVE INTERNESTRHSYFHJSHFHR!1!1!!!!111!1!1!!!!!!
The blatant lies are really starting to make me very angry, so I think it’s about time I set the record straight.
First of all:
NOTHING WILL CHANGE IF WE TURN OFF NET NEUTRALITY.
Before you began flaming me in the comments, I have a question for you. 
Did you remember what the Internet was like in 2014?
Did you see any difference after 2015?
If you did, then you’re a special exception, but for most of us, me included, nothing notable happened after net neutrality occurred.
I DIDN’T EVEN KNOW NET NEUTRALITY WAS A THING UNTIL 3 MONTHS AGO.
That’s how tiny the effect of net neutrality is.
Even if you throw all my evidence right out the window, that doesn’t change the fact that the problem never existed. The only form it came in was very rare exceptions that were still fixed by the FCC on a case-by-case basis! These companies who tried to ‘throttle’ content providers were violating anti-trust laws.
“But Ty, the big companies almost won!”
1. The new system Ajit Pi(e?) has put rulings in the hands of elected officials, rather than the biased, payed-off-by-Google hands of he FCC
2. There are these amazing things called appeals and petitions…
People claim that it ‘could’ happen, that we should prepare for it in case it happens.
That is the reasoning of DICTATORS!
“The people could rise against me, therefore I should start murdering all their family members.” 
What, so we should go ahead and put someone on death row because they ‘might’ murder someone?
This reeks of all sorts of totalitarian and tyrannical ideologies; please, stop using this argument!

Why Net Neutrality SEEMS helpful in the short run:
But let’s toss that out the window, shall we? 
So let’s say that I’m completely wrong, and I’ve totally messed up.
Another one of my main points against net neutrality is the long term effects.
Ya see, I honestly don’t mind net neutrality in and of itself.
It’s the potentiality for disaster.
Hundreds of laws tend to be thrown out before they can be ratified, and one thing that confuses many people is the why.
In the short-term these laws make lots of sense, and seem like a helpful solution. However, take it a level deeper and you encounter a very distressing problem: Many of these short term laws could be used as a stepping stone for far more extreme laws.
For example: Let’s say congress decides to ratify a law requiring gun-owners to put trigger locks onto their guns.
No biggie right?
Wrong.
From there on out malicious entities could press for stricter and stricter regulations, until you get to the point where you’ve all but outlawed guns.
That initial law blurred the line for what it means for a law to be considered extreme.
Heck, this is exactly what Google and others are doing!
You think they’re on our side? Wrong! Google is a business, they’re trying to obtain as much profit as possible! Believe it or not, that’s how capitalism works!
So if Google wants more net neutrality, you can conclude that net neutrality, must in some way benefit Google from a long-term point of view. Google isn’t doing this out of the goodness of it’s heart.
As Google pushes for more regulations, it cripples the tech sector slowly but surely, burdening smaller companies with fees and costs. Thus they make sure that only the biggest tech giants can afford to stay in the game.
Now, let’s throw the previous points out the window.
But the fact doesn’t change that the Internet actually doesn’t work like that anymore.
The idea of Net neutrality was coined 5+ years ago. Any good techie knows what this means. Net neutrality, and the arguments against neutrality are very, very obselete. All of these arguments for and against net neutrality were made for a system that is millennia old in tech years.
 The fact is that many of the ‘fast lanes’ that neutrality supporters are freaking out about, ALREADY EXIST.
Google long ago traded money with Comcast in order to get faster connection speeds.
Rather than spend significantly longer dealing with the Internet central database, Google decided to simply send stuff directly to many major ISPs.
This results in a significantly faster speed that everyone is happy with. 
In the end, we have to stop trying to protect the Internet with regulations and policies, and let it develop on its own.
Trying to govern it and put it under wraps will stifle it and make it impossible for the Internet to become the any better than it is now.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s