Network management Toolkit

Story: Net neutrality fight returns to Senate

• 
• 

Imagine high roads on which certain car owners may travel on reserved lanes at 160mph while one lane to the left or right masses of other cars are driving at 80mph. In short: accidents waiting to happen and loads of traffic jams. Don't count on help arriving any time soon in such events since the focus will be on keeping the 160mph lanes moving. And do keep in mind that additional lanes won't arrive anytime soon as well and even if they do the landscape will change dramaticly because of that. Not to mention adding significantly to the complexity of it all (which will come at a price as well for sure). To whome will those extra costs (or reduced level of service) be offloaded? The happy few rich or the plentyfull average blokes? Well, study your tax history to get a clue.

Now comes budget time and maintenance needs to be done. Which lanes will get top priority and which lanes only when absolutely needed? Furthermore, how possible would it be that a 80mph lane will be temporarely taken to serve as a 160mph lane just because the normal 160mph lane is in maintenance? And wouldn't that impact driving experience on the left over 80mph lanes even more? Thus, perhaps, motivating the 80mph drivers to become 160mph drivers themselves? Thus, in turn, motivating others to designate a lane as a reserved 320mph lane while leaving less to the rest? Etc, etc. Business 101, I guess.

Legislators might still believe that customers control markets but that's only the case in markets without singular market control (lack of equal oppurtunity choice). Because in the latter case it's profit margins that are the deciding factor and nothing else. Having control over access (or content) is one heck of a market control.

• 
• 

• 
• 
• 

Full Talkback thread