- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
That was a great lecture! but perhaps I know something about these things (full disclosure - I'm a telco employee) and don't want to put in a lot of technical detail here that obscures rather clarifies the issue of network neutrality.
To reiterate, network neutrality should mean that providers can offer various types of connections with various speeds, different mixes of various classes of services, etc., at various price points; what I do with the connection I purchase is my business.
Since the provider has sold me a connection with a specific profile, the provider has no issue in figuring out how to engineer its network. My choices on how I use my connection do not degrade anyone else's service. The various Robot-3 objections are irrelevant.
How to put together and market these various connections, hiding the technical details which most people won't follow, is an issue for the provider to solve. Hopefully, an Apple-like company will figure this out rather than a IBM-like company.
To reiterate, the version of network neutrality that says every IP packet is treated the same is a red herring, flies in the face of reality, and is pushed only by people who either do not understand the issue, or else want to sabotage network neutrality by posing an impossible version of network neutrality.
