Net Neutrality
The internet has grown immensely ever since it first started around the time August of 1960 when it was just a proof of concept at MIT. Now the internet is felt like it is a necessity, we must be able to access it all of the time with our smart phones with no more that the fastest speeds possible. The idea of net neutrality is to keep the internet free, and not to priorities speeds for companies who will pay more for it. Consequentialism and the justice theory are helping fight the argument on wither it is wright or wrong. Net neutrality is an idea that needs to be keep because it gives everyone the same chance of accomplishing goals on the internet and freedom of speech.
When the internet first started it was planned to be uncontrolled by any one private person or company. This allowed it to grow the way it did because anyone could access, or even host their own web pages. In January 2010 the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) made a press release saying that they will start to allow Internet service providers (ISP) like Comcast and Time warner Cable to control the speed of people internet speed more than they did. This would allow larger companies like Amazon and Apple to pay their ISP more too priorities they customers internet traffic to their site making it load faster.
…show more content…
This sounds like a good idea but would make small startup companies unable to compete with the larger company’s website speeds and availability. There were many different petitions to stop the privatizing of the internet “with many different large companies trying to keep the internet neutral like Twitter, Facebook, and Verizon.”(Morgan) Verizon Wireless went to the Supreme Court to argue that the FCC cannot control what the IPS do. Verizon won the case and stopped the FCC from starting to change speeds on the internet for the moment of time. There has been many other case with the FCC and most of them favoring net neutrality. On April 15 of 2016 “The U.S. House of Representatives voted 173 to 241 pass, the No Rate Regulation of Broadband Internet Access Act, a bill that would undermine the FCC’s ability to enforce key net neutrality protections.”(Harmon) This was one of the latest events trying to keep the internet free. Net Neutrality has been around for some time now and will continue to fight private parties on the freedom of the internet. There are different opinions weather net neutrality is wright or wrong and different ethical views too. Net neutrality relates to Consequentialism because one of the ideas is people are selfish by nature. An example of this is the FCC is taking the free internet that is built by induvial people, and trying to control it by them self. They are trying to sell right to the internet and make a profit off of it. Making the internet controlled by one grope could have some negative effects if their personal opinions and believes started controlling the internet. James Rachel helped developed the idea of Ethical Egoism that it encourages one to act in one’s beset interest first. This is also what the FCC is doing because it is in their own interest is to make money. This puts off the interest of others could suffer because a small business is trying to make a web site but cannot afford to pay the same thing as larger companies, so they are stuck with slow to not internet presences. In this day in time not having a web site for a business can leave them out of business. Consequentialism has believes that are being showing from the FCC being selfish. The Justice theory by John Rawls also relates and can inspire within arguments of idea of net neutrality. The justice theory is made up of five principles and a few of them are very important. The principle of equal liberty states that everyone has as much liberty as possible as long as everyone is granted the same liberties, this means that everyone can have the same liberties. Net neutrality would give everyone the same liberties when they are on the internet without being monitor of controlled by the government. The principle of equal opportunity says that social and economic inequalities can be just as long as everyone has access to equal opportunities. What the FCC wants to do is to take away the equal opportunity for everyone and only give it to the people who are able to pay for it. This would impact smaller or start-up companies that are only selling online because if they could even afford the tax, it would be taking away the profit they can make. Lastly sharing the burden of everyone using the internet at the same time making it slower at time falls into the Distributive principle where burdens of society are shared between everyone to make them equal. Over all justice theory can relate to the FCC wanting to take away right and make people pay for them. With any good argument there is always an opposing side. Letting the FCC pass the law that lets ISP charge more for companies to have fast and more accessible internet access for the customers. When we let ISP control more of the internet they will be more able to inforce and control US copyright laws. This would allow the government to be able to shutdown illegal file transfer and pirating web sites. This would give credit back to the original creator of the product and monetary value of the product. With the new law it could allow better online gaming (Peer-to-peer) with better experience. When online games are played now they can have slow intermediate connection leading into an unfavorable experience. Gaming server hosting companies like Microsoft’s Xbox and Sony’s PlayStation would pay more to have a better connection and overall experience. Lastly it would make the internet a safer place because the government and ISP could block more of the spam and viruses that affect users without their knowledge. The new law would allow the government and ISP more control over the internet making in faster in some cases and more controlled. In conclusion net neutrality is the idea of not letting the FCC control the internet and make companies pay more to have faster and better internet.
Consequentialism relates to net neutrality because people are selfish by nature and the government wants to control over the internet, which was made to be free. Also the justice theory gives everyone the same equal chances to opportunities. Since starting doing this paper in the past few days’ congress and the white house ruled to keep the internet free for now until the FCC tries to fight the net neutrality again. To sum it all up I think the internet should be free and remain free without the FCC taking control over
it.
The Internet came to be because of the user. Without the user, there is no World Wide Web. It is a set of links and words all created by a group of users, a forum or a community (Weinberger 96). The concept of net neutrality is the affirming concept behind the openness of the net (Vinton Cerf). Vinton Cerf stated, “The Internet was designed with no gatekeepers over new content or services. A lightweight but enforceable neutrality rule is needed to ensure that the Internet continues to thrive” (Vinton Cerf). Moreover, consumers would be protected under a monopolistic market due to network neutrality (Opposing Views). The Open Internet Coalition on Opposing Views.com state that in a perfect world there would be a variable amount of high-speed broadband competitors offering consumers plenty of choices. This would provide a market-based check on violations of Net Neutrality so consumers could pick a provider that respected the open concept. However, the world is imperfect and a mediator is needed to ensure networks remain open and the incentives to innovate and invest will continue to exist (Opposing Views). Lastly, there is an existence of fast and slow lanes without the implementation of network neutrality (Owen 7). This ...
Net Neutrality requires to give everyone access to everything on the internet. This means that your internet provider won’t charge you for using specific websites. But with this, companies will have the ability to charge you for using basic things such as email, Spotify and even YouTube. Fast and slow lanes will also be included which may vary depending of what packages you paid for. But that is just the beginning, being that with this they will be able to control what you are able to see and not, ending Freedom of Speech in the
... The history of the internet takes us back to the pioneering of the network and the development of capable technologies. The explosion of the internet’s popularity in the 1990’s was large and dramatic, boosting our economy and then helping to bring it into a major recession. One can only hope that the explosion becomes organized and slightly standardized in the interest of the general public.
One example of Consequentialism is the Rights. One of the three chosen are the rights. An example for the rights is when a Peeping Tom is spying on a woman through her bedroom window and is taking pictures of her secretly of her undressing. If the Peeping Tom is never caught and if he doesn’t show anyone the pictures, then no one is being affected in this case. For this action, the only consequence of this situation is that it gains his own happiness.
The article was about net neutrality. The main voice of the article was our own Anooha Dasari and the article explained her efforts to keep net neutrality. Anooha described the absence of net neutrality as “dangerous” she states “It has formulated my personality, opinions and political ideology. If it is controlled, my generation of students could be inclined to be just on one part of the spectrum. That’s dangerous.” She then contacted United States representatives to convince them to keep the internet free of persuasion. The article then expanded from Anooha and explained that this as being largely debated all across America and not just in Mundelein High School. The end of the article circled back to Anooha and stated that she will forever
The debate of Tim Wu and Christopher Yoo is about whether keep network neutrality. The Network Neutrality is about principle “non-discriminatory interconnection”, it refers that all users of the network should be received equal treatment. The Tim Wu is a supporter of network neutrality, he states the internet more like a highway rather than a fast food restaurant, so it should remain neutral. Because basic on the transportation and communication network should within scope of public interest, not on the individual difference. But the Christopher Yoo as a opponent thinks even if deviations the network neutrality there will not be necessarily damage users and innovation and then he suggests an alternative approach called “network
First, the mechanics of the internet must be understood in order to understand the argument of Net Neutrality. Internet Service Providers (ISPs), are the actual channels of the internet which provide suppliers of content and services (CSPs) to consumers (IUs) (Kramer).
In the beginning, the Internet was created by the military in 1958 for their own personal purposes. They had no idea how many people would be interested in the Internet, nor how much the Internet could grow into what it is today. The Internet as we know it today did not come about until 1995. Now, it is said that approximately one third of the world's population uses the Internet, and it is still growing. The dot-com bubble spanned from 1995 to 2000 and involved the entire world. The Internet caused an unprecedented growth and speed in business because of how accessible it was to everyone. Many people wanted to become involved because they saw how fast it was growing. One company that made it possible for so many participants to invest was NASDAQ, the first online stock exchange and is now the 2nd largest in the world. This caused ordinary people to get involved whereas in the past the stock market was reserved for businessmen and corporations. NASDAQ made it possible for the average guy to make quick money, whereas the job market required education, degrees, and work experience. Anybody could make money sitting at home on their personal computers, which was completely revolutionary. In fact, many companies started in garages (Apple, EBay, and Amazon for example). Many of these companies saw an expeditious expansion in customer base and funding if they attached the prefix "e-" or added ". com" to their name. Every business rushed to be the first of their kind, and each desired a monopoly. This, in the end, was a major part that led to the downfall of the dot-com bubble. Companies were rushing to expand their client base without determining a long-term business plan. The whole thing was moving so fast that investors would give thei...
Net neutrality was the big talk towards the end of 2017. Taking away net neutrality would cause chaos in my opinion. Making schools and other organizations pay to use technology only discourages them from doing so which is a major step backwards in such a technological point in time. The world is constantly creating new ways to implement technology to our everyday lives and charging us to do so is not a step in the right direction. Saying that getting rid of net neutrality will do away with discrimination is absurd. Discrimination was around way before the internet was but instead we once again have one political party trying to undermine the other by playing the victim. I do agree that it isn’t right that such huge corporations such as
Terrorism, it's one of the worst things that can ever happen to mankind. The NSA’s goal is to prevent this horrible threat and save lives. So far the NSA has prevented 54 terrorist attacks around the world. Take a second to think about how many lives have been able to be lived because of this. Many people would say the NSA are stalkers and should not be doing what they're doing, tell that to the thousands of lives that have been saved. As of right now the NSA is monitoring about 200 phone numbers for FBI security. That means you have less than a 1% chance of being monitored. Unless you are a terrorist with evil plots, I highly doubt that the less than 1% of people being “stalked” is you. This is why the NSA is barely an infringement on privacy.
Today’s media outlet has become a source for a plethora of information for people of any age and background to search through and inform themselves. However, this information is not entirely meant for the pure of heart. The internet is a dangerous place, if one is unfamiliar with how to navigate it properly. The Deep Web, Hidden Web, or The Invisible Web, as most internet dwellers call it, is a term for the submerged parts of the World Wide Web whose content is not indexed by standard search engines for various reasons. With the right tools, these parts of the web are reachable and the horrors that await can mentally scar those who are not prepared for its mysteries. Tor is a tool used for accessing the deep Web. Tor is government made browser
Net neutrality is another chance for the government and businesses to limit citizen’s freedom of choice. The government should not try to control people’s lives and watch what people do on their phone! If the government controls everything us being the people will have no rights or freedom. “In the future, intelligence services might use the internet of things for identification, surveillance, monitoring, location tracking, and targeting for recruitment, or to gain access to networks or user credentials,†Clapper told a Senate panel as part of his annual “assessment of threats†against the
The internet is an essential tool in everyday life. The age of a person does not matter, because whether they are a teen, an adult, or an elderly person in order to stay in contact with others they will need the internet. However, the internet is dangerously addictive. Some studies say that the internet is not the addiction, but the means of getting to the addiction. The more believable of the two studies are the ones that discuss the internet being the addiction. Curtis stated in 2012 that reports on the brain are showing that people who excessively use the internet show abnormalities similar to people who suffer from substance addiction. Curtis also stated that internet addiction was becoming
Abstract— This research examines three questions: Does Internet addiction really exist? If it does exist what criteria does one have to meet for them to be labeled as an Internet addict? And lastly an ethical evaluation of Internet addiction. The questions are explored by investigating the fundamentals of addiction (i.e., Compulsion, Obsession, living problems, lack of satisfaction) and then correlating them to excessive Internet use. This research concludes that whilst the concept of Internet addiction cannot be completely ruled out, the majority and most probable explanation when it comes to Internet addiction is that the Internet is being as a medium to engage in different types of addictions.
Imagine someone born in the early 1900’s entering a modern-day classroom. They would likely be confused as to what televisions, computers, cell phones, and other electronic devices are. It is also likely that they would be overwhelmed by the instant access to information that the internet provides. Digital media has become a large part of people’s everyday lives especially with the rise of digital media in classrooms. Digital media is growing so rapidly that people who are not adapting to this shift in culture are falling behind and becoming victims of the “digital divide”, this is leaving people misinformed. Digital media has a large effect on the way that people communicate, this is especially evident in the way that students interact with