h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Although the origins of this are from the USA, I think this will, sooner or later, affect every user of the net if it is not implemented.

For reference:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/neutrality.asp
"telephone and cable companies that control the telecommunications networks over which Internet data flows have floated the idea of creating the electronic equivalent of a paid carpool lane — that is, charging larger or more traffic-intensive Internet businesses and information providers a fee in order to end their traffic via faster and more reliable network pipelines:"

http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/apr2006/tc20060426_553893.htm?chan=technology_technology+index+page_more+of+today

So, good thing? Bad thing? Middle indifferent thing?

I think we should have net neutrality with no class divide in the world of networks based on ability to pay.

*ahem*

I think some companies would find that idea very appealing since it likely has some security implications too. I think others would be frightened away from anything that separates them from their customers, even by what should be effectively transparent. We're not talking a whole new internet of course, just an express infrastructure tagged on.

This sort of thing might also make it faster for the rest of us by taking away load from the main backbones.

I'm inclined to see private backbones as inevitable, since the internet appears to me to be moving very slowly towards the distributed network model (whereas now its more a connected set of clusters, or maybe a tree without a trunk - like a Bush. Well, it does begin with dubya). If it does so, some people are going to find a need for really solid, long-distance fat pipes, and so other people will supply them.

Hmm, reading again, I seem to have missed the point a bit. They're talking about giving priority over the same infrastructure. I don't know if this is different in reality, since some of the money is going to be invested in the system either way.

I guess I think whether this is bad depends on how much variety you have over who carries your traffic. If individual users have the option to vote with their chequebook then that's fine. If individual users can't tell enough of a difference to do so then who care.

Honestly I can't see why website traffic is a practical problem at the moment though. If you're a company whose customers are having trouble using their website then:
a) Upgrade your servers, or manage them more efficiently.
b) Hire a web designer who can create clean, efficient code that will scale to larger numbers of customers.
c) Get rid of all your goddamn Javascript shite.

You can already pay more to link directly into the backbone, and hence get faster connections. How is this different?

I think we've all seen how neutral ISPs are with the actions of Yahoo! and Google in China, and of course these are not the only areas of censorship.

Paying for a priority rating on traffic is normal. This should be bad news for smaller companies that use the net though, once again the big boys will be able to buy up the resourse, even though in this case its effectively limitless.