I am not sure regulated or unregulated monopolies are a good thing.
Locally the water company put pipe in the ground 50+ years ago. Because
they are monopoly they have no competition. So, no need to provide
better service today than yesterday. So now they have pipes breaking
all the time and they patch the holes.
Telephone is the same. Since VZ had no competition, they did not have
to provide better service today than yesterday. So now they have wire in
the ground that is ancient and the static is terrible in some areas.
The fix is to for each customer that calls and complains enough, they
find the bad spot and run a new piece of Cat3 wire from pedestal A to
pedestal B and hang it on the fence so hopefully the local farmer or
road crew won't catch it in the mower.
I would argue that had these companies had competition they would have
maintained the infrastructure to be able to provide the best possible
service to avoid losing customers. So how did the consumer win in these
instances?
On 12/23/2010 3:06 PM, Fred Goldstein wrote:
At 12/23/2010 02:19 PM, MDK wrote:
That was the camel's nose in the tent, so to speak.
NN and content regulation is merely some more of the camel through
the door and in the tent with you.
Rate or price controls, coverage requirements, bandwidth
specifications, and so on would be the rest of the camel in the tent.
At that point, you don't control your own network, prices, or
service. You merely manage a utility that's either going to be the
surviving monopoly or go under, as the regulators continue to raise
your costs by demanding more from you, while regulating your revenues.
Actually, regulated utilities are a good thing. That's the point of
there being a utility: It provides a necessary service to the public
whose value is largely external to the utility itself, and which is
not normally competitive. Hence it is usually regulated in a manner
that ensures a fair profit for investors, while protecting consumers
against price gouges. These are usually safe investments, so called
"widows and orphans" stocks.
However, it's necessary to define what is and what isn't a utility.
Telephone companies are traditionally treated as utilities, though
they no longer wish to be, except when it convenes them. ISP, in
contrast, were created as the customers of the telephone utility,
protected *from* misbehavior *by* the utility by regulation. The
lifting of that utility-like rule -- in particular, Computer II -- led
to the neutrality kerfuffle.
Regulating ISPs per se *as* utilities, while popular among those who,
for instance, created that silly mock tiered-service flyer in 2006, is
a different issue. ISPs are being used as substitutes for utilities,
because the Bells offer ISP services and have withdrawn their utility
services. That does not argue against regulation of all utilities; it
argues for maintaining a distinction between utility and customer.
Because the FCC failed again to cite the Title II common carrier
function as a basis for its rules, and maintains an artificial
integration of content and carriage when the content is an ISP, its
new regulations are likely to be voided. If they had cited a Title II
function, it would have been unlikely to impact WISPs, who have never
been Title II carriers.
If you don't think they'll do that, please research "obamacare" where
in a short period of time, insurers are allowed to: Sign people
up. They will not be able to set their own rates, design their own
product, or benefit from efficient operations - as required ratio of
incoming to outgoing dollars is specified.
I'll bet some of you even thought it was a good idea at the time, as
long as it's not YOUR business.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Neofast, Inc, Making internet easy
541-969-8200 509-386-4589
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
*From:* RickG <mailto:rgunder...@gmail.com>
*Sent:* Thursday, December 23, 2010 8:58 AM
*To:* WISPA General List <mailto:wireless@wispa.org>
*Subject:* Re: [WISPA] Flexible rules promised for wireless
Yes, by the fact that a private person doing business is forced to
report anything to the government is wrong. It breaks the trues
spirit of capitalism & freedom that this country was founded upon.
Sorry to sound extreme but what will they force us to do next?
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 9:11 AM, Mike Hammett
<wispawirel...@ics-il.net <mailto:wispawirel...@ics-il.net> > wrote:
I don't think form 477 has anything to do with breaking anything.
-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
On 12/22/2010 12:44 AM, RickG wrote:
The first step to breaking the net was form 477.
On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 1:57 PM, MDK
<rea...@muddyfrogwater.us <mailto:rea...@muddyfrogwater.us>
> wrote:
The whole problem was creating monopolies in the first
place, and then
pretending you can "fix" what you broke by half-baked
notions of government
created markets...
There is NOTHING broke about 'internet' because it
hasn't been regulated.
Your issue is nothing but a complaint about the results
of what should never
have been done in the first place.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Neofast, Inc, Making internet easy
541-969-8200 509-386-4589
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Fred Goldstein" <fgoldst...@ionary.com
<mailto:fgoldst...@ionary.com> >
Sent: Monday, December 20, 2010 6:56 PM
To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org
<mailto:wireless@wispa.org>>
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Flexible rules promised for wireless
> Well, no, what IS PROFOUNDLY BROKEN is that the ILECs
are no longer
> required to be common carriers. They built their
network using
> common carrier privileges. They got their market
share using common
> carrier privileges. And then they turned around and
got their
> common carrier obligations lifted by the profoundly
corrupt
> Cheney-Rove FCC. So now they control the content on
their wires, and
> you can't lease them. That's just wrong. And the
Genachowski FCC
> isn't doing squat about that, though they absolutely
have the power
> to do so. We do need a national common carrier
utility. There is a
> clear distinction between carriage and content. ISPs
are content, not
> carriage. And WISPs are self-provisioned ISPs who
deliver content
> over unlicensed facilities without using a carrier,
and without being one.
>
>
> --
> Fred Goldstein k1io fgoldstein "at" ionary.com
<http://ionary.com>
> ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/
> +1 617 795 2701
>
>
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
<mailto:wireless@wispa.org>
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
<mailto:wireless@wispa.org>
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
-RickG
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WISPA Wireless List:
wireless@wispa.org <mailto:wireless@wispa.org>
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives:
http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org <mailto:wireless@wispa.org>
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
-RickG
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
Fred Goldstein k1io fgoldstein "at" ionary.com
ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/
+1 617 795 2701
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
Scott Reed
Owner
NewWays Networking, LLC
Wireless Networking
Network Design, Installation and Administration
Mikrotik Advanced Certified
www.nwwnet.net
(765) 855-1060
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
