Net neutrality is in the news, but I think there's a lot of confusion about what net neutrality is in the first place. I decided to take a stab at making an analogy to help non-technical people understand the general idea of what it is and isn't without getting into the weeds about ISPs, traffic shaping, QoS, zero rating and such. I'd love to hear people's thoughts and suggestions.
The internet service provider operates a toll bridge. Under net neutrality rules, they would be free to set their own prices for crossing the bridge, they can offer an ‘unlimited’ bridge crossing plan that allows subscribers to cross the bridge as many times as they want for a fixed monthly fee. They can charge higher tolls during busy hours.
They can charge heavier vehicles higher fees to compensate for the higher cost of providing service (i.e. more wear and tear caused by heavier vehicles). For example, they can have a weigh station and set the fees for crossing the bridge based on the weight of the vehicle.
However, they are barred from inspecting the contents of the truck and charging a fee based on the contents. They are barred from asking the driver their destination and varying the charge based on that. They are barred from charging a low fee to cross the bridge to visit Whole Foods but a higher fee to visit Stop and Shop.
Top comments (6)
It's like renting a truck that artificially lowers its max speed to 25 when you put a load on it. Metaphorically, Net Neutrality says rental companies aren't allowed to do that. Plus, in this metaphor nearly everyone needs a truck for both work and home purposes -- i.e. it is a common utility.
So you pay for electricity but allowed to use it for fridge and lights only.
HC version: If you want to charge your laptop, pay for 'charging' bundle.
Soft version: if you want to charge your laptop at regular speed, pay for 'charging' bundle.
Yeah, another good analogy.
This analogy has problems when looking at the types of vehicles. This would be nearly comparable to the protocol being used. Net neutrality ensures the quality of protocols, whereas your analogy seems to imply charging based on protocol is okay.
I'd limit the analogy to the number of trucks and the size of them.
That's a good point
Net Neutrality means the company giving you an internet connection will not change the speed of your connection depending on whatever reasons they choose. The company will be neutral and not give you a faster or slower connection to sites like Google, YouTube, or Netflix.
Most of the fear around losing net neutrality is around internet providers suddenly charging someone more for things we either need or do not care for. An example of this is bundling websites like cable tv bundles channels. You may not watch Channel 156, but you're paying for it. The charge can either go to the consumer, or the company providing the site.