[governance] Re: Is unequal treatment of Internet users justifiable based on ability to pay for it?

[Karl Auerbach]

On 08/14/2010 03:58 PM, Paul Lehto wrote:

>> However, one can take an alternative view and look at the term "public
>> internet" to describe only that portion of the net that is owned or
>> operated by a public entity.
>
> As with many words in the dictionary, numerous meanings exist but
> reasonably intelligent users and writers are able to distinguish them
> and convey clear meanings

"clear meanings"?  Clear to whom?

The argument you are making is one that says "public internet" and 
"internet" are of identical meaning, which is to say that the word 
"public" is a meaningless and thus superfluous adjective.

On the other hand some of us read words, particularly words of legal 
import, so that every word has meaning and no word is surplus.  Which is 
to say that the word "public" in the phrase "public internet" is a word 
that has meaning.

But you missed my larger point - it is very possible, even perhaps 
likely, that those who author statements of net neutrality couched with 
phrases such as "public internet" actually mean their statements only to 
apply to those parts that are owned or operated by a public entity. 
Humpty Dumpty famously asked who is the master, Humpty or the word. 
When performing exegesis on statements by Google or Verizon or others 
about network neutrality it would be useful to remember that the authors 
of those statements are using extremely careful language to navigate 
very tricky policy waters and that those authors are the masters of 
their own words.

Regarding your dismissal of a provider who traffic engineers their 
network routers to give priority to domain name query and response 
packets:  Why should not a provider build a network that makes their 
network feel more responsive to users?  What is wrong with that?

And, finally, you dismiss the ability of people to make their own 
decisions (or to delegate those choices to their chosen agents) and thus 
say that there should be no choice possible at all because to do so 
simply empowers the rich over the poor.

That strikes me as an argument that says that people are unable to live 
their own lives and that they must depend upon protection from those 
with more expertise or time.  That was the same argument used by Queen 
Victoria and King Leopold to justify their imperial policies over the 
people in their African colonies in the 19th century.  It is not an 
argument that I am particularly willing to accept.

I am not opposed to protective agencies and even paternalistic 
institutions - I do believe that governments, and citizens under those 
governments, do have duties of those kinds.  However, I do object to 
such agencies and institutions when they do not allow individuals to opt 
out and chose their own path.

The internet is not free.  If people are not allowed to chose the way 
that they want to use the internet then those choices will be made by 
others.  And more often than not those choices will be made by those who 
view the internet as a means to make money from users or, as we are 
beginning to increasingly see, as a means to impose governmental policies.

User choice is not some sort of anathema; user choice works just fine in 
other areas of life.  Are you opposed to services such as Federal 
Express of UPS that provided tiered package delivery services for tiered 
prices?

Again I ask, if the knobs and levers that control how traffic is passed 
across the internet are not knobs and levers that can be manipulated by 
users then who is going to have the power to do that manipulation and to 
what ends?

	--karl--


____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t