In the weeks since the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) voted to reinstate net neutrality, it’s all anyone is talking about in the telecoms sector. And it is, indeed, a very big deal for end consumers, who have been heavily disadvantaged over the last seven years, since the rules were repealed back in 2017.
Net neutrality ensures that Internet Service Providers (ISPs) treat all data on the internet equally, without discriminating or charging differently by user, content, site, platform, application, or method of communication. Under net neutrality rules, ISPs are prohibited from intentionally blocking, slowing down, or charging money for specific online content. This means they cannot degrade your connection speed to services like Netflix or Zoom to promote their own competing services.
Without net neutrality, ISPs could potentially manipulate internet access and speeds, favoring certain websites or platforms, and so controlling what users can see and do online. This could undermine the fundamental principle that the internet should be an open platform where consumers have the power to make choices about how and where they access content, regardless of their internet provider's business interests.
Not as simple as flipping a switch
But while reinstating net neutrality will likely be advantageous for consumers in the long run, it’s not as simple as flipping a switch. A lot has changed over the past seven years: we now have 5G, Internet of Things (IoT), edge computing and blockchain-based decentralized telecoms solutions. Is the FCC prepared to regulate this evolved landscape? I would go out on a limb and say no.
For example, for optimal functionality, innovations like 5G and IoT require differentiated network services, which the net neutrality rules as they stand simply don’t provide for. This is because applications like autonomous vehicles and healthcare monitoring systems rely on extremely low latency and high reliability. Traditional net neutrality rules wouldn’t prioritize such critical services over less sensitive traffic, because the idea is to treat all internet traffic equally. But such a one-size-fits-all approach doesn’t quite cut it in a world that has moved on over the last seven years, and will continue moving at lightning speed.
Slow regulation and fast politics
Indeed, this is a common problem with regulation. Of course, oversight is important and necessary in an industry like telecoms. We have seen what happens when incumbents are allowed to run wild, with practices like blocking, throttling, paid prioritization and redlining all seeing a marked increase since 2017, resulting in sub-par service for consumers, especially in underprivileged areas.
However, regulators are slow-moving beasts. This is why it has taken so long to reinstate net neutrality rules in the first place, despite a change in administration. Even after voting to reinstate the rules, there is a waiting period of 60 days for them to come back into power.
But even this isn’t the worst part. Far more importantly, there is simply no guarantee that the rules won’t be repealed once again at a later date, when a new administration comes into power. And this could come far sooner than we think, as elections are just around the corner. If this happens, net neutrality could be dead in the water once again. In a political landscape that yo-yos between opposing parties at breakneck speed, sluggish regulators like the FCC have no chance of developing and upholding rules and legislation that are appropriate for the modern world.
The rise of challengers
Indeed, this explains the rise of challengers in the telecoms space that are designing solutions with the end consumer in mind. It is the most underprivileged communities that have been most negatively affected by the repeal of net neutrality rules. People in rural areas, for example, have had less choice of internet providers, leaving them at the mercy of the monopolistic practices of the telecom giants active in those areas. This could mean lower quality service and higher costs for the very communities that could afford it the least.
Challengers set out to increase competition in the telecoms space by shifting the balance of power in favor of individual users. For example, decentralized blockchain-based solutions allow users to become providers of connectivity with the help of physical antennas that create a decentralized network, outside the control of telecom providers. By setting up such antennas, or gateways, individuals can provide a stable connection wherever they are in the world and earn rewards for doing so.
Currently, such solutions already exist for networks of IoT devices. Mobile and internet connectivity is more complicated, of course, but there are exciting possibilities to create such decentralized networks with the help of satellites. This could even facilitate a global mobile network that isn’t subject to local restrictions and price plans, providing truly global coverage for an interconnected world.
Democratizing telecoms
Blockchain-based telecoms aim to democratize access to communications and bring much-needed transparency, trust and fairness to the sectors. This transparency would naturally prohibit the practices that have run rife in the absence of net neutrality regulation. These solutions are also designed for the modern world – a world that runs on 5G and continues to innovate every year.
And, crucially, decentralized telecoms won’t simply disappear, while net neutrality rules very likely would. In fact, we could even see some support for innovations like blockchain under a new administration (though it is very difficult to speculate on the impact of politics on any sector).
Regardless of the outcome of the election, though, blockchain technology stands for independence from political influence or geographical constraints. At such an uncertain time, these innovative technologies are perhaps the only thing we can be certain of. This certainty has been absent from the telecoms sector since 2017, as providers have been able to set their own rules on a whim. It is time to bring it back so all US citizens – wherever they may live and however much they earn – can sleep soundly at night, knowing that at least their internet access will remain fair.
The views expressed in this commentary belong solely to the author and do not represent The Fast Mode. While information provided in this post is obtained from sources believed by The Fast Mode to be reliable, The Fast Mode is not liable for any losses or damages arising from any information limitations, changes, inaccuracies, misrepresentations, omissions or errors contained therein. The heading is for ease of reference and shall not be deemed to influence the information presented.
