Network Neutrality and Evolutionary Legilations

#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.