<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
     xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
     xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
     xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
     xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
     xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
     xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
     xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/">
    <channel>
        <title><![CDATA[Telecommuting to Avoid COVID-19? Thank the End of ‘Net Neutrality’]]></title>
        <atom:link href="https://usagag.com/2020/04/17/telecommuting-to-avoid-covid-19-thank-the-end-of-net-neutrality/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
        <link>https://usagag.com/2020/04/17/telecommuting-to-avoid-covid-19-thank-the-end-of-net-neutrality/</link>
        <lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 Apr 2020 17:17:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
        <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
        <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
        <generator>https://usagag.com</generator>
        <media:content url="/uploads/2020/04/smartphone-physical-cleaning-featured.jpg" medium="image">
            <media:title type="html">Telecommuting to Avoid COVID-19? Thank the End of ‘Net Neutrality’</media:title>
        </media:content>
        <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>National crises often illuminate bad government policy. The COVID-19 outbreak has done so for <a href="https://www.cato.org/blog/coronavirus-regulation">all sorts of policies</a>,
 from strict regulations on new medical tests, to restrictive medical 
licensing, to trade barriers, to limits on freight transport.</p><p>But crises also demonstrate good policy, and such is the case for the
 2017 Federal Communications Commission decision to do away with “net 
neutrality” regulation of the internet. Under net neutrality, which had 
been imposed by the FCC two years earlier, internet service providers 
were required to give equal treatment to all data traveling across their
 network, even if some data were especially burdensome. Economists 
argued that this dampened the financial incentive for ISPs to invest in 
their networks and contract with third‐​party internet firms to provide 
additional resources. The FCC, under then‐​new chairman Ajit Pai, 
accepted that reasoning and changed course.</p><p>The <a href="https://reason.com/2018/12/14/one-year-ago-today-the-fcc-killed-the-in/">FCC took a&nbsp;lot of heat for that</a> (and <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2017/11/27/fcc-chairman-ajit-pai-says-his-children-are-being-harassed-over-net-neutrality/">Pai’s children were even accosted</a>). The decision <a href="https://www.cnet.com/news/congress-just-killed-the-online-privacy-rules-now-what-faq/">took away people’s privacy rights</a>. The telecom industry was the big winner and <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevensalzberg/2017/11/26/when-the-fcc-kills-net-neutrality-heres-what-your-internet-will-look-like/">everyone else was the loser</a>. The <a href="https://www.hypebot.com/hypebot/2017/12/fcc-to-kill-the-internet-innovation-at-1030-today.html">internet and innovation itself were being killed</a>. Or so the critics said.</p><p>But then the new FCC decision went into effect in 2018 and … nothing bad happened.</p><p>Now, two years later, we’re benefiting from that policy change. In <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/coronavirus-crisis-vindicates-the-fccs-net-neutrality-rollback-11586906742">today’s <em>Wall Street Journal</em></a>,
 Penn law professor and telecom expert Christopher Yoo contrasts the 
effects of European internet regulation, which is akin to net 
neutrality, to U.S. regulation:</p><blockquote class="wp-block-quote"><p>The U.S. and EU have seen dramatically different 
investment and utilization. Between 2010 and 2016, American providers 
invested on average annually 2.35 times as much per household as their 
European counterparts. This allowed the average U.S. household to 
consume more than three times as much data as the average European 
household in 2017, according to Cisco. This is a&nbsp;significant jump over 
the 44% difference between U.S. and Europe that existed a&nbsp;decade ago. 
Emphasizing investments in infrastructure allows consumers to realize 
more of the benefits that the internet can provide.</p></blockquote><p>That investment is paying dividends now that Americans 
are&nbsp;sheltered‐​in‐​place because of the COVID-19 pandemic. People are 
finding ways to socialize over the internet, using such tools as 
FaceTime and Zoom. They are ordering groceries and other deliveries. 
They are keeping entertained with e‐​books and video streaming services,
 while artists provide at‐​home concerts and other entertainment. And 
many people are still earning a&nbsp;living and contributing to the economy 
by telecommuting.</p><hr class="wp-block-separator"/><p>GAG concludes:</p><blockquote class="wp-block-quote"><p>Network investment has allowed the U.S. to enjoy greater 
usage levels and higher capital spending than Europe over the past 
decade. This was a&nbsp;strong endorsement of U.S. policy even before the 
novel coronavirus rearranged patterns of bandwidth consumption around 
the world. That U.S. producers have responded to the recent surge in 
demand without having to throttle high‐​quality applications provides 
the most eloquent demonstration of the wisdom of that approach.</p></blockquote>]]></content:encoded>
                <dc:creator><![CDATA[GAGmen]]></dc:creator>
            </channel>
</rss><!--Time: 0.068444013595581-->