Over the past 20 years, the FCC has dealt with net neutrality 6 times, and this month it will do so for the 7th time because of artificial intelligence.

For those unfamiliar with net neutrality, it’s based on the common carrier: A common carrier holds itself out to provide service to the general public without discrimination (to meet the needs of the regulator’s quasi-judicial role of impartiality toward the public’s interest) for the “public convenience and necessity.” A common carrier must further demonstrate to the regulator that it is “fit, willing, and able” to provide those services for which it is granted authority¹.

The idea that an internet service provider (ISP) is a common carrier is a constant battle. Without it, an ISP could slow one company’s content and speed up another company’s for money – despite the quality of content. It’s not hard to see why network neutrality is important in an age of influence, fake news, and manipulation of information from bad actors. Where people differ is who the bad actors are.

But what does that have to do with AI?

…Make no mistake about it, the major AI platforms are not weak wallflowers compared to the ISPs. There is a pressing need for regulatory oversight of the Big Tech companies that have delivered Big AI, including basic concepts such as openness, privacy, and interconnection.

Yet, access to AI for purposes as diverse as medical research or writing a term paper would be compromised without a fair and open internet. The issue before the FCC on April 25 is bigger than the catchphrase “net neutrality.” The 2024 iteration of the open internet debate is the reiteration of an issue that first surfaced in 2004: whether the dominant and essential network of the 21st century will go unsupervised…

“AI makes the fight for net neutrality even more important“, Tom Wheeler, The Brookings Institution, April 9th 2024.

In essence, the perceived value of accessible information has increased. The actual issue itself doesn’t really have to do with artificial intelligence, only the perceived value of the information that the networks connect to.

Access to information is important, regardless of perceived value. If you pay for an internet connection you should be able to get everything available to you instead of turning your internet access into glorified cable television, where you get more content if you pay more while you have no actual control over the content.

What is also interesting is that even if network neutrality is successfully defended, ChatGPT is presently considered 82% more persuasive than humans, as mentioned here earlier this week, and since access to ChatGPT is fairly low cost, it allows smaller pockets to compete with larger pockets for your minds.

And conversely, it allows your voice to compete with larger pockets.

1. Per Wikipedia, accessed 13 Apr, 2024 ↩︎