Monday, May 01, 2006

Warner Crocker has been blogging quite a bit about Net Neutrality and the dangers it faces. While I agree NN is a vital element of the Internet, I feel we should approach the problem from another angle: Decentralization.

Currently, there is a concern that companies like Verizon control too much of our access to the Internet and can manipulate the rate at which sites can be accessed, as well as block it entirely. For example, AOL could bar its subscribers from sites that claim Time Warner is evil.

These possibilities exist because we have allowed a handful of corporations to control our access to the net. Even the many smaller providers are reliant on the infrastructure of these larger companies. The net must evolve beyond this into the network it was intended to be: an interconnected system of computers that is decentralized and difficult to disrupt.

To an extent, this shift has begun. P2P networks move reliance away from central servers to connected users. The ability to connect to multiple networks is being hatched. Coupled with the growth of municipal wifi, we will be able to access the Internet through multiple channels simultaneously. If one channel is blocked, another will be followed. Ultimately, there will be no way for any one company to disrupt the flow of information. The idea of Net Neutrality will become obsolete. Providers will need to supply unobstructed access or else see their customers diverted elsewhere.

Simultaneously, the Internet is growing easier to access without the need for a service provider. In the further future, each of our computers will serve as routers and our wireless connectivity as the infrastructure. Just as more homes draw power from the wind and the sun, so too will they connect to and empower the Internet. Thus will end the danger to Net Neutrality.

Net Neutrality and Decentralization


0 Comments:

    Post a Comment

    << Home




    Archive

    • July 2014
    • June 2014
    • May 2014
    • October 2013
    • July 2013
    • June 2013
    • April 2013
    • January 2013
    • August 2012
    • June 2012
    • April 2012
    • March 2012
    • February 2012
    • December 2011
    • July 2011
    • June 2011
    • May 2011
    • April 2011
    • March 2011
    • February 2011
    • January 2011
    • December 2010
    • November 2010
    • October 2010
    • September 2010
    • August 2010
    • July 2010
    • June 2010
    • May 2010
    • April 2010
    • March 2010
    • February 2010
    • January 2010
    • December 2009
    • November 2009
    • October 2009
    • September 2009
    • August 2009
    • July 2009
    • June 2009
    • May 2009
    • April 2009
    • March 2009
    • February 2009
    • January 2009
    • December 2008
    • November 2008
    • October 2008
    • September 2008
    • August 2008
    • July 2008
    • June 2008
    • May 2008
    • April 2008
    • March 2008
    • February 2008
    • January 2008
    • December 2007
    • November 2007
    • October 2007
    • September 2007
    • August 2007
    • July 2007
    • June 2007
    • May 2007
    • April 2007
    • March 2007
    • February 2007
    • January 2007
    • December 2006
    • November 2006
    • October 2006
    • September 2006
    • August 2006
    • July 2006
    • June 2006
    • May 2006
    • April 2006
    • March 2006
    • February 2006
    • January 2006
    • December 2005
    • November 2005
    • October 2005
    • September 2005
    • August 2005
    • July 2005