Mike, you've completely missed the point. Does the gov't compete with truckers when it improves the freeway? Utopia is an _infrastructure_, the state has no intention of offering any kind of service to end users. Suppose you had your choice of sewer systems? That might be cool to have sewage services compete for your business, but how many pipes would we have running under our streets?
A fiber-optic network like Utopia is _exactly_ the kind of thing the government /should/ provide. When the network is built you'll see Qwest, Comcast, Xmission, Snoop Dog, and your Mom all offering competing services on that network in a way that simply is not possible now. As it is I have RESNET because that's all I can have, my parents have Comcast because DSL doesn't work there and my sister has Qwest because Comcast sucks and Qwest is the only other choice. Now of course that's not entirely true, she could get earthlink and pay only them for her service, but guess who part of that cash goes to: Qwest. It's just a billing convenience, there still isn't any competition. So what do we do about these local monopolies? We regulate them and say that they have to let local joe republican phone service use their network at a set price so that the consumer feels like he has a choice. Is this fair? No, the phone company paid to build their POTS network and it belongs to them, but it's necessary until there's a real viable alternative. That alternative is Utopia because it's not a service at all, just an infrastructure like your roads, water, power grid, and sewer. Will Qwest start offering phone service over Utopia? You betcha! Will Comcast offer Television over Utopia? No doubt! If I want to plug in my old 56k to the POTS and offer Jorgensen Uber-slow Network service over fiber can I start a business? Absolutely! (Will I make any money that way... I hope not.) Some services are what we call natural monopolies. The sewer system is one great example, it just isn't practical to have competition in the sewer business, so it needs to be a monopoly. What do we do to protect the public then? We put the sewers into the hands to the government and we all pay for it. Utopia is the same kind of thing because it just isn't practical to let every tom, dick, and michael rip up our streets again and again to put more fiber down there. Do you really suppose that more than one company is going to lay fiber to your house anyway? Are you worth that to them? Would you have a choice? Sure, you can use a cesspool instead and have waste removal companies place bids to take your poo away, but I think I'll just hook up to the local system. Utopia is better than sewer because you do have a choice, just like you have a choice what car to buy, even though we all drive on the same roads. And as for Hatch, I always try to assume that people are stupid before I decide they're evil. Never blame on malice what could better be blamed on ignorance. I figure Hatch is an idiot who believes he's doing the right thing. Lets all vote for someone smarter next time if we can. On Fri, 16 Jul 2004 22:00:58 -0500, Michael Halcrow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 16, 2004 at 09:43:57PM -0600, Josh Jeppson wrote: > > ZDNet has an article about "municipally owned high-speed > > communications services" in Utah. Specifically iProvo and Utopia. > > The government has no business taxing its citizens and using the funds > to compete unfairly against private high-speed network providers. Way > to monkey wrench the economy, Provo! While you're at it, make sure > Orrin Hatch doesn't forget to legislate your shiny new network to > death. From the looks of it, this whole ``free market'' thing must be > getting quite annoying for Utah's constituents. > > Mike > > ____________________ BYU Unix Users Group http://uug.byu.edu/ ___________________________________________________________________ List Info: http://uug.byu.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uug-list
