Net Neutrality, currently a popular topic of debate with many different outlooks including two extremes, both of which have pros and cons. One of the extremes for Net Neutrality is the Non-Net Neutrality (NNN) ideology, which is to allow governments the ability to enforce laws upon the content, and to allow Internet Service Providers (ISPs) the authority to control data flow and the content distribution of the internet. The other extreme is for complete Net Neutrality, the idea of a completely free internet that cannot be influenced by Internet Service Providers, governments, or any other restrictions enforced, or created by external sources that block or restrict data flow and content. Although both extremes have their pros and cons…show more content… The pros of Non-Net Neutrality allows for government laws to be passed on the internet, preventing illegal content from being accessed by the public. These restrictions would prevent the distribution of offensive and illegal content such as child pornography. The Internet Service Providers would have access and control over user history, this would allow ISPs the ability to track and control data flow, which could lead to a great increase in reports of illegal activities. Allowing ISPs to control data flow would also increase data efficiency, allowing those who require a higher use of data streaming to have a higher bandwidth and limit, and those who require less data to have a lower limit, along with a slower but still acceptable internet speed. This will allow ISPs to maintain Quality of Service, the idea of maintaining the lowest latency possible, where it is needed allowing the more popular Content and Service Providers (CSPs) and users who require more data streaming services the data and speed they need. This would also allow ISPs to decrease the effects of the current economic loop that the current system is trapped in, where increasing internet user activity leads to more required bandwidth, which then results in increased content provided by the CSPs after the bandwidth has been increased. The ideology of Non-Net Neutrality leads to efficiency and control over the internet,…show more content… Governments would be able to prevent certain offensive and illegal content from being distributed, however, only to the extent of what can be considered illegal or obtrusive to society. The economic benefits would allow ISPs to control the flow and properly direct data flow to where it is needed, without discriminatory restriction allowing for efficient internet management. ISPs would also in theory be allowed to charge CSPs, which currently are paying the same price for the same amount of service as Internet Users, which can be seen as unfair towards the populace, as large corporations could be negligible amounts of money in return for a near unlimited use of high quality services. The cons of this would be very vague and debatable, and much similar to that of the Non-Net Neutrality ideology. The cons of Limited Net Neutrality would be the vague boundaries defined by what is and what not acceptable, as well as giving ISPs is the power to monetize the internet. If the government or the ISPs were given the power to block information, unless defined very clearly, then it would grant ISPs and the government too much power over the internet. The overall idea behind what would be Limited Net Neutrality, would be to create a stable