Opinion by: Stuart Gardner, CEO of Spacecoin
The cat-and-mouse game between net neutrality and the Federal Communications Commission, the US communications regulator, continues after a federal appeals court in the country once again struck down rules to protect consumers’ unrestricted access to the internet.
This precarious position of net neutrality in one of the largest supposed free markets in the world highlights the vulnerabilities of centralized internet infrastructure, where corporate interests and regulatory scrutiny exercise outsized control on how a user accesses the internet.
Tech and policy leaders must address these growing threats by pursuing decentralized, permissionless internet access as a sustainable solution to safeguard digital freedoms, prevent corporate gatekeeping and ensure accessibility for all users.
Why net neutrality matters
Net neutrality is the idea that all internet traffic should be treated equally. Whether it is a video on the streaming giant YouTube or a niche service like Mubi, internet service providers (ISPs) have to provide the same streaming speed and quality to users. It keeps the internet and the content and services based on it open and freely accessible to all.
Without net neutrality rules, an ISP could create “fast lanes” for specific content and services. For example, AT&T could provide its users with faster access to HBO and throttle the speed of its competitor, Netflix. AT&T previously owned HBO and now offers it to its customers under an agreement with its new owners, Warner Bros. Discovery. In the case of fast lanes, consumers would have to pay more to access HBO competitor Netflix at a higher speed and with better video quality.
While ISPs have traditionally denied that they would resort to such measures and would treat all traffic equally, history shows a different side. In 2012, AT&T restricted Apple’s FaceTime service to users on the provider’s shared data plans. Back in 2007, Comcast was found to be blocking peer-to-peer services such as BitTorrent on its network.
Recent: L1 blockchain releases major rebrand to expand its mission and scale for Web3 finance
The crucial policy has been a matter of great debate in the US since the 1990s. While the term “network neutrality” was coined in 2003 by Tim Wu, some US politicians expressed concerns over protecting the nascent internet in the early 1990s.
Critics of net neutrality say that the US court’s latest decision will bring “more investment, innovation, and competition.” ISPs, however, have consistently denied that net neutrality protections have any bearing on their investment decisions. A 2017 research report by the internet Association showed that ISPs continued “to invest and innovate at similar or greater levels” even when net neutrality regulations were in effect in the US.
The absence of net neutrality will reduce consumer’s power over internet access. First, as mentioned above, it will allow ISPs to block, slow down or restrict consumers from accessing services, applications or websites. Second, it will allow ISPs to charge content companies such as Netflix and Amazon to provide their services to users in a faster, high-quality manner.
This pay-to-play strategy can discourage newer players in content- and internet-based services since they might not be able to compete with incumbents with deeper pockets. Even more troubling is the potential for ISPs to censor or limit access to politically sensitive content, posing a direct threat to democracy and free speech.
Why decentralization is the answer
We live in a time when the true ideals of a free and open internet are under attack. The most recent repeal of net neutrality regulations is taking us toward a more centralized, controlled version of the internet. In this scenario, a decentralized, permissionless internet offers a powerful alternative to today’s reality.
Decentralized systems can address the threat of censorship by distributing content across a network of nodes, ensuring that no single entity can block or suppress information. Decentralized physical infrastructure networks (DePIN) demonstrate how decentralized storage can keep data accessible even when network parts are disrupted or taken offline. This censorship resistance is crucial in regions where governments or corporations try to limit free expression online.
Decentralization can also cultivate economic democracy by eliminating intermediaries like ISPs and related fees. Blockchain-based platforms allow smaller, newer players to compete with incumbent services and content companies on a level playing field. The Helium network, for example, uses a decentralized model to challenge traditional telecom monopolies with community-driven wireless infrastructure.
In a decentralized system, developers don’t need approval from ISPs to launch new services. That dramatically lowers barriers to entry and encourages permissionless innovation. Entrepreneurs and creators can freely…
cointelegraph.com