Free Webhost

[Craig White]

On Sun, 2009-05-10 at 17:13 -0700, Ed wrote:
> Would anyone like to start a state initiative that limits our ISPs to
> managing only the bandwidth of their service as provided to users
> (enforcing Network Neutrality), require that all customers must be
> provided only static IP addresses, and full port ranges* - with rare
> technical & temporary exceptions granted by the corporation
> commission, the option to the customer of IPv6 or IPv4 at no cost
> diffrerential as of 2010, and finally that any customer that is
> experiencing a "to the property line/to the wall" monopoly on wire or
> optical line based service may elect to be covered under a corporation
> commision managed, rate & service monoply controle.
> 
> oh, and any physical network infrastructure may not be replaced unless
> it has the identical regulatory regime and third party accesses as the
> prior infrastructure, with the most liberal (open access) being
> propogated forward into any improved infrastructure - with all prior
> infrastructure (wire to fiber - this is you) grandfatherd
> retroactively. Public services must be under a ratchet when it comes
> to increasing access to the channels, there is no ethical reason to
> improve our infrastructure and lock in our citizens into a monopoly.
> this is simply incremental servitude and a public bad. a kickback at
> best, a fraud on the state at worst.
> 
> *if you need to have ports blocked, pay a bit extra, it's a service -
> not the base condition. one of many that could be offered
> 
> just sayin' this should not be a problem for Arizonans - and probably
> the only thing that might save Arizona from becoming the west's most
> backward state.
> 
> or you can just be meat on the hoof for out of state interests. its
> plantation technology and bad.
----
Ed, you raise an interesting issue but I'm not certain how useful/viable
a citizens based referendum will be only because if history has shown us
anything about the Arizona Legislature, they will simply overrule the
citizens interests.

I believe that one must consider the admonitions by Larry Lessig,
especially on the issue of 'the last mile' (google it, he has several
speeches out there including some that have been linked/discussed on the
list before).

Net Neutrality is very much a current issue and of course the moneyed
interests are lobbying hard for their views but mostly at the federal
level because this is likely where the legislation would ultimately come
from.

Clearly left unstated is the fact that probably like everywhere else,
there really is little competition for Internet services for the
consumer. In Arizona, we have Cox cable and US West and neither seem
motivated to actually compete on pricing so our service rates never go
down even though the infrastructure has long since been built and their
cost of providing Internet services have gone way down.

There was an interesting story in Wilson, North Carolina where the city
couldn't interest any of the providers so they built their own...
http://www.greenlightnc.com/about/faq/

Of course this has proven to be cheap, free to the local citizens so the
telcos and cable providers in North Carolina have freaked out and gotten
legislation currently under consideration in the state to prevent any
other cities from doing the same thing as they claim it to be
anti-competitive.

Of course the same could be said for the public options for health care
where the insurance companies and the drug companies would stand to lose
several hundred billion dollars of profit each year.

It would be nice if we actually educated the consumers about these very
real options and how industry limits our choices, is not competitive and
in general, will cause America to ultimately fall behind other countries
in the technology race since we no longer have the best/fastest network
backbone.

Craig


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.