Source: Cointelegraph Original: "{title}"
Views from: Stuart Gardner, CEO of Spacecoin
The "cat-and-mouse game" between the U.S. communications regulator, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), and net neutrality continues, as a recent U.S. federal appeals court again overturned rules protecting consumers' rights to unrestricted internet access.
In one of the world's largest presumed free markets, the unstable position of net neutrality highlights the fragility of centralized internet infrastructure, where corporate interests and regulatory scrutiny exert excessive control over how users access the internet.
Tech and policy leaders must respond to these growing threats by promoting decentralized, permissionless internet access as a sustainable solution to protect digital freedom, prevent corporate gatekeeping, and ensure accessibility for all users.
Why is net neutrality important?
Net neutrality is the principle that all internet traffic should be treated equally. Whether it's videos on streaming giant YouTube or niche services like Mubi, internet service providers (ISPs) must provide users with the same streaming speeds and quality. This ensures that the internet and internet-based content and services are open and freely accessible to everyone.
Without net neutrality rules, ISPs could create "fast lanes" for specific content and services. For example, AT&T might offer its users faster access to HBO while throttling the speed of competitor Netflix. AT&T once owned HBO and is now exploring agreements with its new parent company Warner Bros to provide HBO to customers. In a fast lane scenario, consumers would have to pay more to access HBO's competitor Netflix at higher speeds and better video quality.
Although ISPs traditionally deny taking such measures and claim to treat all traffic equally, history shows a different side. In 2012, AT&T restricted users on shared data plans from accessing Apple's FaceTime service. In 2007, Comcast was found to be blocking peer-to-peer network services like BitTorrent.
This key policy has been a widely debated topic in the U.S. since the 1990s. Although the term "net neutrality" was coined by Tim Wu in 2003, some U.S. politicians expressed concerns about protecting the nascent internet as early as the early 1990s.
Critics of net neutrality argue that the latest decision by U.S. courts will lead to "more investment, innovation, and competition." However, ISPs have consistently denied that net neutrality protections have any impact on their investment decisions. A 2017 study by the Internet Association showed that even during the period when net neutrality regulations were in effect, ISPs continued to "invest and innovate at similar or higher levels."
The absence of net neutrality would reduce consumer control over internet access. First, as mentioned above, it would allow ISPs to block, throttle, or limit consumer access to services, applications, or websites. Second, it would enable ISPs to charge content companies (like Netflix and Amazon) to provide their services to users in a faster and higher-quality manner.
This "pay-to-play" strategy could frustrate new players in content and internet services, as they may struggle to compete with better-funded existing companies. More concerning is the possibility that ISPs could censor or limit access to politically sensitive content, posing a direct threat to democracy and free speech.
Why is the answer decentralization?
We live in an era where the ideals of a free and open internet are under attack. Recent moves to repeal net neutrality regulations are pushing us toward a more centralized and controlled version of the internet. In this context, a decentralized, permissionless internet offers a powerful alternative to today's reality.
Decentralized systems can address censorship threats 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 maintain data accessibility when parts of the network are disrupted or offline. This resilience against censorship is crucial in regions where governments or corporations attempt to limit online free expression.
Decentralization can also foster economic democracy by eliminating intermediaries like ISPs and associated costs. Blockchain-based platforms enable smaller and newer participants to compete on an equal footing with existing service and content companies. For example, the Helium network challenges traditional telecom monopolies by providing community-driven wireless infrastructure through a decentralized model.
In decentralized systems, developers can launch new services without needing approval from ISPs. This significantly lowers the barrier to entry and encourages permissionless innovation. Entrepreneurs and creators can freely experiment with new ideas without fear of being blocked or throttled by gatekeepers.
Decentralized systems ensure that no single entity can exert undue control by distributing data and governance across a network of nodes. This decentralization of control can help build an internet that is resistant to censorship, manipulation, and corporate control.
Successful examples of decentralization
Decentralized communication networks, like the internet, are not just theoretical concepts—they have proven their availability.
In 2017, Hurricane Maria devastated Puerto Rico's infrastructure, while community mesh networks provided critical communication capabilities when traditional networks remained offline. These decentralized networks, based on principles of distributed infrastructure, demonstrated significant resilience under crisis conditions. Similarly, decentralized internet projects have been able to address communication issues during disasters because they do not rely on fragile ground infrastructure.
Blockchain ecosystems like Ethereum (ETH) and Polkadot exemplify how decentralized technology supports a variety of real-world applications, from financial transactions to community-driven projects. This principle can also be applied to internet infrastructure, creating a network free from corporate gatekeeping and censorship.
Decentralized storage solutions have provided alternatives to centralized cloud services, ensuring data sovereignty. Users can access their data without concerns about censorship or data loss, as information is distributed across a decentralized network.
Building the future
The path to a fully decentralized internet is not without challenges.
Investment must be made to address scalability issues and improve the user interface of decentralized services. The technology should be as easy to use as internet services while providing greater privacy protection and control.
At the same time, there is a need to educate the public about the stakes involved. The end of net neutrality is not just a policy change—it is a fundamental threat to digital freedom that requires a technological response.
The recent decision to repeal net neutrality in the U.S. serves as a stark warning for the future. It highlights the vulnerabilities of any centralized system, where the rules of the game can change at any moment, leaving users at a disadvantage. In decentralized systems, users are always part of the rule-making process.
Decentralized internet services are not just a technological innovation; they are the only viable solution to protect the principles of freedom, equality, and innovation that form the foundation of the digital age.
Views from: Stuart Gardner, CEO of Spacecoin.
Related: UAE's Crypto Law "Alphabet Soup"
This article is for general informational purposes only and should not be considered legal or investment advice. The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed in the article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.
免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。
