#Networked
Publics – K. Varnelis
Infrastructure
Chapter
4 – Network Neutrality and Network Futures
Debate
over Network Neutrality Pg 118-123
Neutrality
of the net and the amount of key information and secured data within the realm
and capacity of a telecommunication company has come under much scrutiny. I
have yet to empathize with the desire to own another human being through the
ownership of the information he seeks which is considered amenable and
proprietarily trafficked by his network provider.
Monsanto
comes to mind where they propose owning human beings who have consumed crops of
the seeds the company owns. Intellectual Property Rights is another domain – hence can
information in compartmentalized ways come under the aegis of various domains
and spheres-making it yet another feature of the universe held for business.
This
wouldn’t be the first attempt at unctuous mollycoddling of information by
marketers only to stimulate an audience’s earnestness for faster and better
service. Because faster clarifies being ahead and better expounds
self-gratification.
The
National Security Agency, in my opinion and understanding will have most of the
arena in the game to come in the future.
The
government and also its foreign allies are responsible parties currently, which
protect the right to analyses of information pertaining to anyone in the
rudimentary sense, subversively. But at what point and to whom does information
take on a compulsive and martial role -And what bodies of governance determine
this at what cost is the burgeoning debate in this field and that is of much
interest to me.
We
are essentially corroborating fathomable matters around elusive entities such
as air, ideas, thought waves and quantum technology. There has got to be
fairness or an authority that will speak on behalf of the audience itself that
is in danger of being privatized.
Otherwise I see a whole new direction towards dictatorial rulings
defining the demise of democracy, in more ways than one.
Organizations
of top-secret conduct and pursuit have usually gate-kept information and with
regard to what is allowed by the media to show case and introduce a to public.
Further it is recommended by those who are schooled and privy to hear say or
rumor or memetic, that we ingest with a pinch of salt any bite of information
we haven’t experienced or witnessed. For the kind of information served to a
certain diaspora and in this day and age is subject to skepticism and open
dialogue of course. Beyond which if history does have a way of perpetuating itself
even though times are different and constantly evolving then there is much to
adhere to and imbibe from the past.
Information
either topples at a tipping point to create intended ripples across its
audience there by creating wealth for those who are copyrights savvy and
persevere for economic results - reveling in a cumulative growth of their
share of the ether or information can catch the attention of those who wish to
distribute it with caution and encourage room for thought. Either way an audience
is proposed and predetermined by their network providers to provide for upkeep
and modernization. The economy currently hasn’t yet been able to support a
model where the quality of information and its availability is earmarked for a
specific echelon depending on brackets that can afford to expend their
disposable income on cable companies and their broadband services.
Collaborations
have understandably come to the rescue in a state of affairs where consumers
and their purchasing powers have been heavily monitored by Capitalists and
Conglomerates and those to have access to every move we make on the
Internet. Much to the shock and
dismay of the public ideals where today not much is private unless one can
afford to keep it that way.
Regulating
Neutrality of services in the field of media is proportionate to the character
and grit of a dynamic society. A society that will eventually receive and
encode, interpret and decode and apportion information.
