Here’s an article that sums up the net neutrality argument as far as I’m concerned:

The desire of AT&T, Verizon, et al to end network neutrality and assert fees for access to connected customers represents a death wish. Imagine the prospects of an info tech industry without “software neutrality” where Intel charged a fee to enhance software performance. Pay Intel and your applications run faster. The incentives driving Moore’s Law disappear in this pay-to-play model. Intel’s profit maximizing incentives become serving the interests of software companies willing to spend the most on “enhancing software performance” not the end users of computers. The meritocracy driving competition between software companies disappears as Intel picks winners and losers based on willingness to pay. Innovation becomes permission based at Intel’s discretion.

The Internet does not exist without net neutrality.

Net Neutrality Not An Optional Feature of Internet Posted in Wired + Guest Columns, By Daniel Berninger, 6 Feb 2006

We’re not tallking an HOV lane, where certain classes of service would get faster access; we already have those; users and servers can buy various speeds of access, and companies such as Akamai make a business out of picking the fastest routes. We’re talking charges for specific types of applications. Continue reading →