It was only a matter of time. Deep down we all knew it. The internet could not last as we knew it. Divisions lay in the camp. One company against the other. Who held the most weight? Who could get things done? At a European level, at an international level. A two-tiered system. It’ll be grand they said. Really? Do you expect us to believe that? Do you expect us to fall for it? The good point about the internet was that you were free and I know people can abuse that in ways. But there is an understanding at some level. If you were going to change everything, why introduce us to the world of internet in such a form to begin with? If things change drastically as they are quite likely to, there will be a reaction for sure. You think that the problems will go away by making it two-tiered. They won’t. There will be even greater problems and a disconnection across the wider world. Doing a search on the term ‘net neutrality’ is not very helpful, there seems to be a certain level of confusion surrounding this term. No clear cut definition. The policymakers carrying out these amendments know what’s in store but it will be a much later stage before we know the real impact of such amendments. I’m not an expert in this area but I am aware of the importance of free speech, and this also applies to the internet. There has been talk about paywalls in relation to media and such. Some are in force – streaming services and such. I would argue that until a code has been hammered out in relation to the tax affairs of multinationals, there is no argument to be even made in relation to gagging internet citizens. If someone could interfere with your phonecalls based on ploys and tactics in favour of certain companies would you stand for it? You call one pizza place but it is interfered with, so you have to call another pizza place, who are secretly giving backhanders to the phone service provider to interfere with those calls. Sounds very democratic, doesn’t it?
Free speech has divided people throughout history but it is basic human right. It is quite likely that any amendments will gag people, or chain them to a form of censorship as they may be discriminated against based on what data they are engaged with or hold. An internet black market of sorts will probably arise from all of this. What right does anybody have to store information about your search or file history and could then possibly manipulate data in order to discriminate against your person in the form of your IP? Something is not quite right there, that is a total violation of human rights unless that person is seen to be a direct threat to others for some valid reason. I do agree with a certain level of monitoring but tailoring data is not the way forward. Building data towers is not the way either. The internet is a worldwide phenomenon and therefore we should all have an input. There is not enough emphasis on managing technology which is the key issue if someone is taking to the airwaves to vent, or rant about not being entirely happy about something in life, and expressing themselves, in doing so, in an inappropriate manner. It is a reflection of wider societal issues that are not being addressed. But instead of taking responsibility, it has been decided to confuse, distract and divert people. We are not creating states which hold certain internet values because it is a global phenomenon but coming from different cultural norms and sets of beliefs our ideas of things are quite independent of one another. It is the internet that has begun to transform us in this manner and that is a positive thing and it should be embraced. We are beginning to identify, accept and celebrate difference and diversity, and connect through interests and ideas. Don’t stop us now! It is shameful to think that companies could attempt to influence policy when it is not in the interest of the common good and for their sole benefit. Every eventuality can arise from the internet, in the same way, every human being is unique and attempting to constrain human behaviour through internet civilisation will hinder rather than help people. There will be a backlash in some shape or form and it will manifest itself somehow.