How many of us know,
“TIM-BERNER LEE”?
This person is the reason;
we are been able to read this article. Not only this article but he is the
reason for this whole concept of “WORLD WIDE WEB”. This article is not about
him or his achievements or his role in the making of “www” but of higher
concern.
When it was made- our
internet, the main focus was on the word, “no discrimination”. It means there is no partiality to whatever
service is demanded, or to whatever website we want to log in, every feature
and every service should be treated without discrimination. This is the reason,
when we try to find something using “search engines”, the sites with closest or
probable match is given to us in form of list not the ones that are highly paid.
Now the question
arises, is this impartiality really happening?
No, this is a clear
answer. Yesterday only i tried to open a simple website that came into my “Google
search”. And what i got was, “this website cannot be open in your country.”
This is not the end of it, many of us must tried at some point of time to
search something on YouTube, and many a times the statement was the same as
above.
What we are talking
about is- “NET NEUTRALITY”. It simply means network neutrality that is; no
favourites should be played with the contents that are on the internet.
Like in every story
there are some people who want the “good guys” to die. In this context they are the big telecom
companies who want it. They want to act as a “gatekeeper” checking whose
website or apps should go fast, and who’s slow. This scenario is like bribing
the watchman with a 20 Rs note and asking him to enter the college late without
notifying anyone.
What will happen if
this internet will become as “pay per view” types? By pay per view- it means we
may have to pay a network tax to run voice-over-the-internet phones, to use
advanced search engines.
May be, the
free-flowing internet as we know, will be a history.
The telcom’s have two
general complaints with a non-tiered, neutral network. They argue that
the improvement of infrastructure is costly and without proper compensation,
results in major content providers not paying their fair share.
Let take a neutral
point- let’s see the whole scenario in a form of pros and cons:
To be in favour of Non- neutrality, one of the
points is- Capacity is finite. So
concept of prioritization comes up. If there is no prioritization, a few apps
will consume too much bandwidth; and also it reduces the service provider’s
motivation to increase bandwidth
But to counteract these
statements
The net neutrality is
essential for-Innovation- ISP/operators can kill innovative apps if they are
allowed to discriminate; another point is that of “competition”- operators can
kill competition by selectively disallowing certain applications.
At
last the consumer only will suffer.
In
conclusion, Net neutrality is not a law yet, it
is still practiced. If it is not there then consumers fear that they will discriminated
by network provider on the content. The future is still unset, why not take our
bid, there are various sites for these petitions and who are working for “our
right” of net neutrality. Why not support them.
