Why Isis could enjoy the end of internet neutrality

The USA is deciding on an important issue that will impact the rest of the world when it comes to access to the internet. 

For those who do not know it, the founding members of the thing called the ‘internet’ made it possible for everyone to access all kinds of content on the internet, but internet service providers want to change that.

They want to impose a fee when people access popular websites for example, and that means they will make more money while they are curbing internet freedom and neutrality.

Why do we need neutrality?

Web access, according to the US FCC approval in 2010, is a human right that should be available to all. It means the internet service providers like Maxis in Malaysia or Emtel in Mauritius cannot block content or intentionally slow down a particular access to a any sites they deem not money making for them.

And that could mean millions of websites getting either blocked or sent into what is called the slow lane of the internet, thus making access difficult.

What is to be changed?

In the US, ISPs like Comcast, Verizon and AT&T think they could make substantial profit by charging users to access certain websites or by charging extra for “fast lanes”.

These fast lanes will be opened to companies and sites that are willing to pay to get their sites to bypass slow bandwidth.

Would this impact Malaysia?

Like I said earlier, it could lead countries like Malaysia to impose the same deal through the MCMC (which according to my humble opinion is already a pro-corporate entity). Beware.

What will change for you?

The net will be cut into two or more versions: 1. The one for the filthy rich companies and 2. for the rest of the world at least.

But no guarantee that in the future they may even cut the internet into various pieces of the pie, for example, one for poor countries only to access and it could be free but damn slow!

Rolling back net neutrality could also lead to an increase in internet bills for everyday web users.

It would also put a halt to innovation, because why innovate when you cannot access fast internet?

It would altogether push back progress, and give groups like ISIS (groups that have a lot of money believe us) to get faster internet while you and me would be stuck with a damn slow net.

Fight Piracy

An end to the internet neutrality may lead to a return to the good old days of the movies on CD’s so please do not throw away your fabulous machine that plays the CD Roms! They might be useful in the near future when internet neutrality is gone.

Sure, it will not be CD’s only, as it might well bring the revival of thumb drives or SD cards with loads of movies in them that would be sold or rented in street corners by vendors trying to make a quick buck by satisfying your movie binge urges.

And this is because those talking in favour of killing net neutrality are saying it will stop piracy. No, no, it won’t.

But surely, sites like PORNWEB.COM would make more money. Don’t you think they rich enough? 

Why now?

The reason why this issue rocked the internet this week is that the US is trying to change the rules. President Donald Trump has appointed an FCC chairman Ajit Pai who is pushing hard for the change.

The FCC has already voted in May that net neutrality guidelines should be repealed but to enforce this there is the need for another vote and this means net neutrality will die.

What does Trump want?

Trump, a businessman, is thinking like a business man. He does not want companies like Netflix, Google, Facebook, Reddit (fair enough), Amazon (fair enough), Airbnb, Twitter, Mozilla, Vimeo, Spotify, Dropbox, Expedia and so on to have cheap access to the internet while they eat most of the bandwidth.

But the US President, a disruptive figure since he was elected, is probably not aware that billions of people depends on these companies to connect to the rest of the world.

Alt Solution?

Trump has probably forgotten one important thing in the American business culture: Charge the companies, stupid, don’t blame the internet. That is to say he should probably charge a new fee to all the companies protesting the end of net neutrality, thus his government could show good records in generating revenue for America!

Article is based on explanations from

Leave a Reply

Back To Top