I recently came across this NPR online article, "Google And Verizon CEOs Unveil Proposed Net-Neutrality Policy."
"This is bad. Very, very bad. Don't be fooled by the happy-sounding words that surround the main points.Tomorrow's internet is wireless. Period. Today's wired internet is going the way of the VCR. And tomorrow's wireless internet is exempt from these rules -- meaning that companies CAN block or degrade traffic to legal sites, they CAN favor certain traffic over other traffic, etc. What does that mean? It means if you want to see a video of the newest iPhone on your Droid, you'd better go put on a pot of coffee, because it could be a while. Using Comcast but you want to check out Verizon's prices? Go get yourself to the library where they still have them old wired computers, because Comcast Wireless doesn't support access to "Premium" sites without an extra fee. The internet goes from the open and equal-access portal you've come to love to this. Please call your representative. The internet was built with tax dollars -- it's a public resource just like a highway. (Like an information SuperHighway!) Corporations should not be allowed to discriminate based on whether or not they like your packets."
The comment comes from a member of the many growing advocacy groups for net neutrality. Net neutrality is a principle advocating no restrictions on content, sites, platforms, etc. placed by internet service providers. Google and Verizon are apparently "joining forces" to offer "additional, differentiated services" (i.e. to those who pay $$ for faster-loading content).
The debate piqued my curiosity, so I ran a mini poll on LinkedIn on primary search engine use. Of the measly 17 responses, an overwhelming (and expected) 94% said they primarily used Google. The other 6% said Yahoo. Zero people said Bing or Other.
What do you think of the net neutrality concept and the Google/Verizon partnership?
