A Cracked Pot

With the rumored deal between Verizon and Google supposedly being announced this coming Monday, Net Neutrality is about to go front and center again in the media.

There are two issues with NN. First, is the issue that companies who can afford to pay for premium speeds are going to end up effectively blocking out the little guys who can’t afford to pay. That means blogs, personal websites, and even websites owned by most small businesses, won’t get priority online and will load slower for their visitors. It’s a real threat to free speech, depending on how far it goes. After all, if I can load Ebay instantly but have to wait 30 seconds for Etsy to load, I might be more likely to go to Ebay.

Legislation restricting this kind of business practice is something I’m in favor of. I think the Internet should remain a fair playing field for all content providers, regardless of their ability to pay.

But there’s a flip side to all this, and something most of the legislation proposed to date ignores. Bandwidth hogs can be detrimental to other internet users. I have friends who are literally downloading things almost 24 hours a day. They set a download queue before they go to bed, with enough things lined up to keep downloading straight through till morning. As it stands now, their internet usage does little to effect those users sharing resources, as their ISPs throttle their bandwidth. Limits are placed on their download speed so that others sharing the same access aren’t significantly affected by their downloading practices.

With most of the NN laws, bandwidth throttling, especially throttling based on particular types of content or from particular sites (like file sharing sites) will be illegal. My friends who download things constantly will have unfettered bandwidth access. That means if I happen to be unlucky enough to share a cable internet connection with them, my access speeds are going to be so negatively affected that the internet, for me, will become unusable.

It makes sense for ISPs to throttle bandwidth based on content or application. It’s a simple, effective way to make the internet more usable for all their customers. If they limit the bandwidth available for torrents or other file sharing sites (or video streaming sites, or other sites that use a lot of bandwidth), it frees up bandwidth for other, less-resource-hungry online activities. It keeps the internet relatively fast for all users, and minimizes extreme ups and downs in download and upload speeds.

Here’s a better solution: make it illegal for companies to enter into agreements about bandwidth usage. That means an ISP can manage bandwidth however they see fit and best for their customers. If they want to throttle bandwidth from a particular user, group of users, or website because it’s hogging resources and damaging the experience of their other users, then they can do so.

What they can’t do, though, is take a payment or enter into a “partnership” or other agreement with a company or organization to provide faster speeds for a particular site or sites. I also think transparency should be required for their throttling and bandwidth management activities, so users know how their usage is being limited and to help prevent backroom deals.

Congress needs to stop trying to pass laws they don’t understand and think through the possible repercussions of the bills they write. Industry experts as well as independent experts need to be more thoroughly consulted on technical matters that are beyond the scope of understanding of most of our people in Congress. Net Neutrality is not a cut-and-dry issue, at least not as it’s been presented.

(via orientaltiger)

There are four things I’m really afraid of in life. Two of them are sort of normal, everyday phobias: heights and spiders. The other two are a bit more complicated: mediocrity and irrelevance.

The idea that I will go through life only achieving mediocre results, and that my contributions to this world will be irrelevant, scares the crap out of me.

I’d rather fail miserably than achieve mediocre results. At least with failure you learn things and figure out how to do better next time. Mediocrity is dangerous; it’s the status quo. It’s easy to maintain mediocrity. It’s comfortable, like your favorite sweater. Mediocrity is getting by, and as long as you’re getting by, it’s hard to muster the extra effort to do great things.

The idea that everything I do in life will be irrelevant in the grand scheme of things leaves me feeling hollow and empty inside. The thought that my opinions are irrelevant, that the things I do and say and think and believe aren’t important, scares the living hell out of me. I want to be important. Does that make me a snob? Probably. Do I care? Not a bit. I have no problem with elitism when it’s deserved.

If I’m mediocre, what’s the point? Anyone can be mediocre at pretty much anything given enough time and practice. I want to excel at things. I want to be great. If mediocrity is the best I can do, I’d rather just sit on my ass and do nothing. I’d rather just give up.

I guess what scares me the most about mediocrity and irrelevance is the idea that when I’m gone, when I die, I won’t be remembered or missed by anyone other than my very closest friends and my family. And once they’re gone, I’ll be forgotten forever. And I guess that scares me more than anything.

There’s a real problem with the way they teach kids about diversity and prejudice and all those related topics in the U.S. (and probably elsewhere, but I’m only familiar with the way it’s done here). We’re taught from a very young age that not only is everyone equal, but everyone is essentially the same. Differences aren’t acknowledged. Sure, we may be told that individuals are different, but not that there are any differences between groups, whether they be ethnic groups, racial groups, religious groups, or any other kind of group.

It’s ridiculous if you think about it. We’re taught that our experiences shape the people we become. The things we experience at a young age determine, at least in part, the way we act and think as an adult.

So why wouldn’t our ethnicity, our heritage, our religion, and also our race, have an effect on the kind of person we are? There are going to be differences between people who are raised in different environments. And many of the factors that determine those difference are deeply rooted in race, ethnicity, heritage, and religion. To try to say otherwise is ignorant.

We need to teach kids that yes, there are differences between people, and sometimes those differences are because of ethnicity, race or religion. Sometimes they’re not. But it’s okay if they are; it’s okay if someone has a different outlook on life because of the way they were raised, because of the traditions of their religion or ethnic background.

We need to teach kids that different doesn’t inherently mean better or worse. We need to let kids explore their differences and learn about why those differences exist. This prepares kids for dealing with people from all walks of life when they become adults. It teaches kids that it’s okay to ask a question if you don’t understand why someone does something a certain way, and that it’s not inherently offensive if someone wants to know why you do one thing or another. We should learn from each other, and one way to do so is to explore how and why we are different.

The idea that it’s somehow offensive or bigoted or racist or whatever to acknowledge that there are differences between ethnic groups, religions, races, or any other group is preposterous. Ignoring those differences brings us no closer to a world that is truly free of racism and prejudice than believing stereotypes.

We need to reach out to one another, to understand why differences exist, and to embrace those differences as what makes the world a unique and wonderful place to live. We need to stop thinking that we all have to be the same in order to get along. We need to stop worrying so much about being politically correct and start making an effort to really understand each other. With understanding and empathy, those differences matter less and less, and we can all move past them and look at each other as people—nothing more, nothing less.