[governance] net neutrality

[parminder]

 >Wonder why we keep insisting the problem is much more complex, or 
technical etc. I think it is simple and clear as day >light.

Especially, if we are inclined to see the Internet as more than a space 
for a competitive market (though NN issue has enough problems vis a vis 
Internet as a competitive market place) as a democratic public sphere 
and a space for exercising global citizenship.

I hear so many voices here argue to the effect that there need be 
nothing surprising, or wrong, if the Internet takes the contours of 
power - of dominaiton and subordinaiton - as experienced in the 'real' 
world. What I dont understand is that why just because we could not live 
in a compact of equality in the offline world, we should not strive to 
live in a compact of equality over and vis a vis the Internet (at least 
to the extent we can, at least to try, as progressive civil society). 
That is the ideological basis for network neutrality or what may be 
called as 'network equality'. To choose one side or the other is quite 
an ideological position. Beyond a point there is not much to argue about 
here, one has to choose one side or the other, we as a group may have to 
choose one side or the other. And fight for however close we can reach 
to the ideal.

Parminder





On Saturday 21 August 2010 05:22 PM, parminder wrote:
>
> See here new pay per site plans for Internet mobile in India
>
> http://www.tatadocomo.com/pps-tariff-plans.aspx
>
>  http://www.tata.com/article.aspx?artid=I+qapklYkjQ=
>
>
> Another Indian telecom, Tata DoCoMo has announced a select boutique of 
> email and social networking sites for about a dollar a month. (The 
> public Internet is of course for a much higher price.) It is obvious 
> that net neutrality is already dead on the wireless internet, as we 
> still argue about definitions and technical intricacies. The fact that 
> is simple and clearly understood by anyone is - IGC's  website, for 
> instance, is much more expensive to reach and browse than Facebook, 
> Twitter and Gmail put together. That is the problem, i.e. if we are 
> indeed inclined to see any problem there. And if we see here the death 
> of what was the most important promise of the Internet - that of 
> pulling all of us - or at least all of our content - to the same 
> starting point on the Internet.
>
> Wonder why we keep insisting the problem is much more complex, or 
> technical etc. I think it is simple and clear as day light.
>
> Parminder
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
____________________________________________________________
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