Net Neutrality Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Net Neutrality - Essay Example â€Å"How, What, Impossible,† many would say, when they know that today internet providers have the capability of controlling what everyone goes through, does and believes in for the purpose of getting profit i.e., violate network neutrality. Discussion Internet is at war as one of its basic structural principles is threatened. Telecommunication companies are pressuring major political institutions to intervene and modify neutrality. Users and native internet companies are defending tooth and nail. The debate is open, but the reality is that most people affected by the violation of this principle know its meaning and implications (wiseGEEK, 2003). Companies and Net Neutrality The net neutrality means that bits are not discriminated, and there is no such thing as first or second class for such categories as destination, source, protocol or content. From this definition it follows that any company that provides internet services (ISPs) can manipulate, manage, hinder or prevent u ser access to some Internet services according to their specific interests. Telecommunication companies control access and transport network information. Undoubtedly, Internet service providers are identified as the main threat. Operators have proposed prioritizing some services over others, and some even speak of the payment of â€Å"tolls† and quotas to companies that fill the web content. According to a research it is clear that "The telecom operators want to do much more business with internet by increasing the charges for access as well as monetizing the content that others want to view as if it was their own network. Another goal of the ISP would "limit services (such as IP telephony or video conferencing) within their networks and extract revenues from people who earn a lot of money on the Web, like Google." (Quora, 2010) They provide the â€Å"data pipes† ensuring that any person [at a price] can connect and access all network resources. Currently, these entiti es hold true to a â€Å"code of honor† that prevents them from taking control of the content by these ways. This code means net neutrality: all content and services distributed through the pipes must be treated equally, regardless of person or entity (Quora, 2010). Neutrality still seems intact, but many users report behaviors of operators that already violate this basic principle of the network and most of the information highway studies confirm the dirty war of the companies providing internet against p2p networks. But network neutrality is not limited to a dispute over the division of the economic pie concerning technology or the battle against piracy but it is a concept that has entered the political game. According to some studies, the ISPs will accompany some European governments, in matters concerning the net transfer of money to the other side of the Atlantic in areas such as digital advertising. Perhaps for this reason, politicians have not been clear. There is no co mmunity legislation regarding Network Neutrality (Quora, 2010). The problem is that this policy is not neutrally supported by any law or regulated by any relevant entity. Therefore, their survival depends on "common sense" of users and, primarily, the network providers. The latter is the source of danger as the common sense of the big companies is generally shaped by the opportunities to make money and it can’t be ruled out at some point that they may take control of internet

Job Performace Case Study Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Job Performace Case Study - Essay Example Yet, the labour objected taking the same job classification out of the bargaining unit. This indicates the inherent suspicion that characterizes labour union-management relations and is partly responsible for the fall in job performance of the job testers. The labour union clearly showed this at the hearing. It blamed the management for not only disciplining the defaulting employees but also offering the same job classification to the same defaulting employees when the job classification was removed from the bargaining unit. This suggest the unions ‘I don’t care’ attitude because the testers handled only a job classification in the production process. Their poor performance would not have been undetected by other salaried employees. But the feeling that the management should be responsible for its ‘experimental’ decision might have informed the ‘I don’t care’ attitude. The testers were not considered part of the labours or other em ployees’ purview. In addition, one of the differences between salaried job under the non-bargaining unit and hourly job under the bargaining unit is the lack of supervision of non-salaried employees. The company management expressed its inability to discipline the testers despite having knowledge of testers’ poor performance. It means that ‘casualized’ employment focuses on cost minimization measured in terms of output of employees at the expense of employees’ conduct. Negotiating the issue of the failure of experimental program would have been the normal (or moral) thing to do. The management informed the union in the first place, when it intended to experiment the program. This gave rise to the side bar agreement. Under this agreement, the movement of the tester job classification to the bargaining unit was based on the condition of program success (quality of product). Given this and the subsequent failure of experimental program, the management ought