Interesting People mailing list archives
Re The Internet Can Save Itself From Ajit Pai. Just Not Here. -- Ajit Pai has the power to destroy the internet – but only in the US, not overseas
From: "Dave Farber" <farber () gmail com>
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2017 14:50:30 -0500
Begin forwarded message: From: Andrew Lippman <lip () media mit edu> Subject: Re: [IP] The Internet Can Save Itself From Ajit Pai. Just Not Here. -- Ajit Pai has the power to destroy the internet – but only in the US, not overseas Date: December 18, 2017 at 6:36:44 PM EST To: dave () farber net Assar’s coments are in part right. This decision will not destroy the Internet instantly or universally, but it is a great step backward for what has become a human right and is pretty clearly a public good. And his argument neglects the social interfaces we all use. The danger is not in the design of IP and TCP, it is in deep packet inspection that allows a router to make decisions. That can bring us back to the AOL days of a walled garden or advance the carrier equivalent of what Facebook tried to do in India: provide a cheap pathway to Facebook with some possible escape to the rest of the net. Sacrificing openness the Internet on the altar of big business will not make it cheaper on the whole or allow for any other innovation other than the economic innovation of the carriers. And it does not send a good signal to the rest of the world about our feelings about human rights. Lots of these arguments in favor of the FCC decision rewrite history. Yes, it is true that the Internet flourished without Title II regulation, but the FCC tried with the Open Internet Order and agreements to prevent Comcast from discriminating among services. The Verizon/FCC case that removed a lot of the protections of the Open Internet Order led directly to Title II regulation. In other words, the Internet flourished both because novel services got in under the wire of delivery control and while it was the operative means while carriers fight tooth and nail to destroy it. They have now (seemingly and likely temporarily) won that battle. You might well see some clever rate structures that deliver cable equivalent services over wireless, like zero-rating. But this is smoke and mirrors. If the carriers are extracting monopoly rents for most-favored-service status for some, you will be the one paying for that. Personally, I would happily pay this tax if it forced them to wire up everyone for free and provide terminal equipment to those who couldn’t afford it. Take the public good part of public airwaves seriously. But do you really think this will happen? Andy Lippman
------------------------------------------- Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/18849915-ae8fa580 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=18849915&id_secret=18849915-aa268125 Unsubscribe Now: https://www.listbox.com/unsubscribe/?member_id=18849915&id_secret=18849915-32545cb4&post_id=20171220145046:101D21D2-E5BF-11E7-A32A-C0EFA74E7557 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Current thread:
- Re The Internet Can Save Itself From Ajit Pai. Just Not Here. -- Ajit Pai has the power to destroy the internet – but only in the US, not overseas Dave Farber (Dec 20)