RFC 8890: Why the Internet Must Prioritize End Users Over Other Stakeholders
RFC 8890 – The Internet is for End Users (2020)
As the author of RFC 8890, I argue that the IETF must ground its decisions in what benefits actual people, not just technical merit. Internet protocols inevitably carry political weight, affecting power dynamics and user rights. We cannot claim neutrality when our designs impact society; instead, we must explicitly favor end users to maintain the legitimacy and success of the global network.
The running code that results from our process inevitably has an impact beyond technical considerations, because the underlying decisions afford some uses while discouraging others.
- dlcarrier
Inevitably the internet will have two types of users:
1. The anti-bot bots that must stop you from proceeding, because they aren't entirely sure you aren't a bot
and
2. The bots that can get past them, which we all must eventually deploy, if we want a chance to visit a web page
- aftbit
The internet is for whoever wants to send bits to each other and is willing to pay for transit to do it. The WWW might be for end users, though that seems less obvious by the day.
- Bender
The internet is for porn [1] Mostly SFW, headphones
I know I know, it's original purpose was to be a weapon. [2] It has certainly devolved into a weapon to divide the people.
- vouaobrasil
I think fighting for a purpose-based ideology of the internet is actually doomed to fail because the form of the technology will dictate how its used and regulation and efforts will only slightly affect that.
E.g. If the internet is super-fast and has the capability to deliver video ads, it will be used for that. If everyone just had a connection with the speed of a 56K modem, that video-based ad model wouldn't work.
If we really want the internet to be a certain way, we have to change the underlying technology used, not the ideology behind it. Because if an technology has a capability, it will be used to do whatever is most successful in the capitalistic system, not what's best for 'end users'.
Regulation sometimes be effective, but...the model of regulation in a world of freely-evolving technology is a broken system most of the time.
- Atlas667
This is why ideology is so important.
Is the end user viewed as an ISPs client? a consumer of tech companies?
The idealistic language is fine but isnt based on any scientific approach to society. Its neutral at best.
The internet is for end users, but how if its not "by end users"?
If most protocols and standard implementations depend on adoption by ISPs and tech companies what does it mean to be "for the end user"?
Is prison architecture "for the prisoners"?
So how do we solve the "by end users" dilemma?