Issue link: https://cp.revolio.com/i/964464
THE DATA CENTER JOURNAL | 7 www.datacenterjournal.com Of course, regulatory officials can be as political as anyone, but the proof is in the proverbial pudding: did anyone notice any difference in their Internet experience during the rough- ly two years (2015–2017) in which the FCC enforced net-neutrality regula- tions? In other words, what evidence supports the claim that net neutral- ity's repeal will lead to all the horrible things that net-neutrality proponents predict? One also wonders how many net-neutrality proponents are also fans of "no-platforming" individu- als with whom they disagree, bely- ing their endorsement of a "free and open" Internet. A complication in this debate, however, is the limited competition among ISPs. One barrier to com- petition is certainly cost: delivering service to customers requires laying cables and other infrastructure. And no small part of that are so-called right-of-way use fees—just another excuse for governments to collect money to pay for their bloated pro- grams. But another barrier is de facto (if not de jure) monopolies resulting from government intervention in the market. In many ways, then, net neutrality is an attempt at a govern- ment solution to government-created problems. At least, greater government control of the Internet should have a better justification than anecdotes about Comcast or some other ISP throttling Netflix—as though binge- watching the latest television garbage is a worthy reason to curb a market that has succeeded despite (or thanks to) few regulations. Again, we should look to education and health care to see where seemingly reasonable appeals for more regulation lead: out-of-control costs, lousy service and perpetual calls for even more regulations. One common complaint is that the absence of net-neutrality regula- tions allows ISPs to create "Internet fast lanes" and charge providers and/ or customers more to use them. But no one complains that, for instance, FedEx and UPS offer expedited ship- ping for higher fees than standard shipping. Moreover, the idea that ISPs might throttle downloads of por- nographic videos in favor of more- redeeming content hardly seems controversial. Sure, an ISP could then in theory throttle downloads of politi- cally disfavored content, but again, perhaps it's better to wait for evidence of a problem rather than attempting to anticipate unlikely scenarios using the regulatory sledgehammer. Given that net-neutrality regula- tions were short lived and made little apparent difference during their tenure, data center operators face uncertainty. What the FCC taketh away, it can also giveth back—for instance, if political power shis back from Republicans to Democrats over the next two to three years. Will the loss of net neutrality created a tiered Internet that stifles innovation, or will it free up the market from restraints on innovation? And how will data center operators benefit or suffer in light of government policies and ISP behavior? Only time will tell, but one critical consideration is that the Inter- net started and grew in a largely un- regulated environment, whereas ISPs operate in a highly regulated and even monopolistic environment (thanks to government controls). If nothing else, that fact—combined with the disaster that regulation has created in other industries—should raise suspicions about net-neutrality regulations. Data center operators will largely have to just ride the political wave and adjust their business practices accordingly. CONCLUSIONS Regulations are oen well intentioned, and governments that implement them are usually attempting to address a real problem. Unfortunately, however, they oen create a culture in which regulatory compliance trumps customer service—similar to how standardized testing causes teachers to "teach the test" rather than truly educate pupils. For data center operators, the GDPR is a done deal and its enforcement is nearly at hand. Net neutrality is off the table for now, but it could return in a few short years, if not sooner. Both of these regulatory schemes are attempts to address problems, but like all such government efforts, they don't (because they can't) anticipate all the new problems they'll create as a result. Although we can ponder the theory and practice of government regulations, data center operators must deal with the reality of them: the compliance costs and, perhaps, fines. Data protection/privacy is a serious consideration even apart from regula- tions, and the GDPR may be the impetus for improvement—at least for some organizations. Customers will bear the real cost, but the higher costs could also reduce demand. Net neutrality is a fuzzier issue: each side offers arguments that seem reason- able, at least on the surface. A chief objection to reinstituting net neutral- ity, however, is that the Internet grew in a largely unregulated environ- ment and nothing fundamental has changed. Either way, the next two years might provide evidence in favor of regulations—or they might not. For now, data center operators face a reprieve from regulations or a lack of government protection, depending on their view. Time will tell whether convincing evidence in support of net neutrality emerges and whether regu- lations are implemented—perhaps regardless of the evidence. n