...and believe me, I include myself in that group.ChezClark
does a great job dumming down the whole "Net Neutrality" thing so that even I could understand it. Net Neutrality is about forbidding an ISP (Verizon for example) who has a business relationship with, say, Barnes and Noble, to charge Amazon punitive rates just for the privilege of reaching the ISP’s customers. Customers who, it should be emphasized, have paid for access to the Internet just like everyone else. There’s no good reason why ISPs should be able to throttle traffic selectively, based on their own interests, and that’s what Net Neutrality aims to prohibit.
The other thing that motivates Net Neutrality, of course: we’re all becoming providers. I’m a “provider” (albeit a tiny one), but I have no means or desire to pay extortion money to some ISP for the privilege of reaching you, a broadband consumer.
We want everyone to be a “provider”. Today's internet, if it means anything, is surely about breaking down the status quo of huge corporations being the only source of “content”. Net Neutrality is the foundation on which you build a many-to-many Internet. Opposing Net Neutrality is the way to cement the hegemony of corporate speech.Great. So who on earth would favor allowing the giant telecos to put a death grip on the internet and opposes Net Neutrality? Joe Biden
for one.Now the crazy stuff
This issue is being debated in Congress. The average age of a member of congress is 54. For Senators the average age is about 60. I've tried to get my 60-ish father online and let me tell you it was heavy lifting. Listen to crazy Ted Stevens
, the chairman of the commerce committee, if you want to get very worried about where this debate is headed.