The Neutrality Delusion

["Dave Farber" <farber () gmail com>]

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Richard Bennett <richard () bennett com>
> Date: May 31, 2017 at 2:06:33 PM EDT
> To: ip <ip () listbox com>, Dave Farber <dave () farber net>
> Subject: The Neutrality Delusion
>
> Here’s my piece from MIT Tech Review.
>
> A View from Richard Bennett
>
> The Neutrality Delusion
> https://www.technologyreview.com/s/607984/the-neutrality-delusion
>
> Net neutrality will never be anything more than a vague aspiration with no clear definition.
> --
> The most surprising thing about net neutrality is the fact that the Internet policy community is still debating it 15 
> years after the idea was born. If it were the magic bullet it’s alleged to be, by now we all would have seen the 
> light, embraced it, and moved on to more pressing issues such as privacy and cybersecurity.
>
> Net neutrality is essentially the belief that intelligence inside the Internet is detrimental to innovation at the 
> network’s edge. This misguided faith leads advocates to demand lobotomies for Internet service providers in the vain 
> hope of maximizing the Internet’s potential. 
>
> While most people who are aware of net neutrality believe it to be a good thing—even if they can’t define it—it 
> delivers the opposite of its promise.
>
> Net neutrality hasn’t extended high-speed broadband networks to all corners of the nation and the globe, for example. 
> In fact, it hasn’t even made the networks we have any faster or more reliable. Networks have indeed improved at an 
> awesome rate since the 1990s, but net neutrality has had nothing to do with this progress.
>
> Likewise, net neutrality has not made the Internet safer or more secure, nor can it. Progress toward greater security 
> depends on technical and regulatory enhancements that we haven’t even had time to discuss because net neutrality has 
> sucked all the oxygen out of the room.
>
> And net neutrality has not made networks any less expensive, nor can it because it requires costly investments in 
> network infrastructure to deal with trivial engineering issues such as fleeting moments of network overload.
>
> Worst of all, net neutrality is not actually enforceable. This question was studied by British computer scientist 
> Neil Davies for Ofcom, the U.K.’s FCC, in 2015. Davies looked at the six best methods of “traffic management 
> detection” described in the academic literature and found all of them wanting in some important way.
>
> Net neutrality enforcers need the ability to detect unfair treatment of Internet sites; without this capability 
> regulations banning such conduct are meaningless. But Davies declares “no tool or combination of tools currently 
> available is suitable for practical use” in this endeavor.
>
> So what gives with the snarky blog posts, the sloganeering, the clever formulations about innovation, and the 
> shrieking of cable TV comedians about this wonky notion? While the Internet certainly appears to be developing 
> nicely, we can neither prove nor disprove its alleged neutrality.
>
> [more at MIT Tech Review, link above]
>
> —
> Richard Bennett
> High Tech Forum Founder
> Ethernet & Wi-Fi standards co-creator
>
> Internet Policy Consultant



-------------------------------------------
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=20170531171114:AC084D8E-4645-11E7-A484-EE28A6672613
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com