Infrastructure

Infrastructure: Network Neutrality and Network Future

This writing serves as a book review for the scholarly journal titled, “Infrastructure: Network Neutrality and Network Futures”, written by Francois Bar, Walter Baer, Shahram Ghandeharizadeh, and Fernando Ordonez. The article focuses on the progression of technology and how the Internet came into existence. Interestingly, it does not just focus on where technology originated, but also where it is headed. Much of the piece uncovers the perpetrators who have hindered advancement and the changes we must make if we are going to evolve as digital consumers. 

It is hard to fathom how far technology has come. Will all the purposes we now use the internet for, it is hard to imagine that at its beginning stages we mostly went online for texting and emailing people. Now it has become part of our everyday lives. In the 1970s and 1980s, the internet was beginning to come into existence, and its early uses were implemented by Gopher servers. The internet is quite different from the traditional networks, cable and telephone, in two fundamental ways: there is a less controlled atmosphere for users and it is an E2E environment for communication. When we think about the internet, we begin to understand that we now have gained the freedom to watch and experience whatever we want; we are no longer adapting to predetermined programs and times. 

            Currently, the Internet still has a stronghold on viewer capabilities. According to Bar, Baer, Ghandeharizadeh, and Ordonez (2012), “..Comcast and Time Warner control well over 50% of the U.S. cable market and, instead of competing, cooperate so as to consolidate their regional monopolies” (pg. 113). The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) revealed staggering statistics in regard to broadband accessibility in the United States. Currently, the United States ranks fifteenth among developing counties when examining the percentage of users. But this can be a deceiving factor in some respects, since it includes people residing in rural areas. Bar, Baer, Ghandeharizadeh, and Ordonez (2012) made it clear throughout their writing that the duopoly of providers needs to be “contained”. There have been efforts made by companies such as Amazon, Ebay, Google, Microsoft, and Yahoo! to work towards more consumer protection, as many fear we could be facing the end of the Internet. It is not a new concept. Many have been weary of the control held by infrastructure owners, as they operate with the intent of controlling what people view. Staggeringly, when you combine the phone and cable industries, they still control 98% of the broadband market. 

With a third party ready to compete with the duopoly of TCNOs, we could begin to notice more affordability and a better infrastructure. What we need to consider and focus on is network neutrality. With a third infrastructure that is municipally-owned, costs would be more feasible. We show a lacking in broadband development, on a global scale, because of the unaffordability that has denied us a sense of empowerment. The possibility of social and technical innovation has ceased to exist. Bar, Baer, Ghandeharizadeh, and Ordonez (2012) made a good point when discussing an ideal scenario in which “strict rules forbid all network owners, telephone, cellular, and cable alike, to discriminate among users” (pg. 133). It is amazing that this path to inequity began as far back as 1969, when the U.S. Department of Defense first led us to TCNOtopic, and the first bits of information sped across the computer. 

This evaluation of technology at the current moment, and the explanation Bar, Baer, Ghandeharizadeh, and Ordonez (2012) provided when discussing its early history, were very “readable”. Newly introduced users, such as me, were intrigued by the historical background of the Internet’s development. It went on to explain further how new technology is soon to become more commonplace; new technological applications make it possible for passengers to transport themselves without having to set a hand on the steering wheel. I think what made the book a little confusing at certain points was how the authors included scenarios along with things that actually happened. At times, the only time I was able to distinguish between history and plausible scenarios was when the authors listed a year next to their timeline of events. It is obvious that technology is ever-changing, but it seemed the authors were anticipating change a little too rapidly. 

Bar, Baer, Ghandeharizadeh, and Ordonez (2012) anticipate that in 2017, cities such as Los Angeles will show “a growing number of people are driven by their AutoMata from place to place” (pg. 139). It was this anticipation that was a little unconvincing since many people are still dependent on their cellular devices, while the authors feel AutoMata will be replacing mobile phones by this year. They predicted as well that by 2014, GM and Ford will introduce the AutoMata software in all its vehicles while a multitude of drivers are still remaining responsible for their cars performance.

The population is growing in this world, so I find it hard to believe that vehicles can possibly avoid all reckless drivers and potential “surprises” without any assistance from the human drivers. An epidemic is still in effect among many media users, especially young adults and teens. Drivers are constantly distracted by texting while driving. Laws are being implemented to deter people from using digital devices while driving, but it is difficult to differentiate between using their phone and using one of the devices designed for their vehicle (i.e. OnStar, GPS systems, car video players).  The authors discussed the benefits of AutoMata systems, but we first have to resolve the current issues. I still remember the last time I visited my friends in New York City. Once I arrived and we began our trip to Harrisburg, PA, everybody was mesmerized by a different digital device in the car and we rarely talked. 

To truly provide ample resources for broadband users, we need to “shake things up.” There are ways to avoid the duopoly of local access providers. Universities, schools, businesses and other public agencies have bypassed this stronghold upheld by local access monopolies, by providing direct links from their internal broadband networks to points of presence on the Internet services. It will take time, but the dictatorship we now face from providers will eventually fade away.

References:

Bar, F., Baer, W., Ghandeharizadeh, S., & Ordonez, F. (2012, August). Infrastructure: Network Neutrality and Network Futures. Networked Publics, 109-144. Retrieved December 9, from http://site.ebrary.com.library.esc.edu/lib/empire/reader.action?docID=10251680&ppg=120