The real problem is the last mile. Content companies should be separate from companies who provide cable, wire line distribution. Then you would have some real competition and real net neutrality. If you understand network peering, the Netflix decision was probably reasonable. Letting companies like Comcast charge rent for 15 year old Motorola boxes and cheap converters is not.
Imagine turning the highway system over to private enterprise, who require transponders in your car if you want to use their road, setting different speed limits for different lanes, and charging more per mile for the faster lanes. Perhaps even charge different rates for different kinds of cars: for example they could make a deal with the automakers to charge more for older cars using the roads, making it more expensive to drive an older car, thus encouraging you to buy a new car.
A hundred years ago the state stepped in to save the college in this town, that was floundering, and might have gone under. With public money provided in exchange for low tuition rates for in-state students and a requirement that most of the students be in-state, the college flourished and grew into one of the finest public college in the nation. In recent years the state has supported the college less and less, until that support is now negligible: but the state still demands low tuition rates for in-state students, though the college could easily finance itself with full-tuition students. The college could go private, if the state would let it, but for beginners they would first have to buy their own campus from the state. The quality of the education provided there is now at risk, as the best faculty prefer to go someplace that pays better (as most places do). So the state has essentially reneged on the deal that served both the state and the college so well for a century. When I described this situation to a conservative colleague the other day, he said, “That’s what you get for allowing the government to stick its nose into your affairs.” So swapping bankruptcy for a century of growth, prestige and success was a bad idea back in 1906? I thought of that when I read Tigger’s comment about the Federal Government sticking its nose in. Why did he add “Federal” to that sentence? I have yet to see any evidence that state and local governments handle anything any better than the Federal government does, and plenty to suggest they handle it worse. In general, I find state and local government more likely to be corrupt or in the pockets of powerful interests. In libertarian utopia the state withers away, or shrinks to impotence. Very much like the dreams of communism. Neither is to be found in the read world.
@DoughfootIt wouldn’t be so much what kind of car you drive, but where you are going. Imagine Jumbo-mart paying a premium so if you are going there, you can use the fast lane, but if you’re going to Ma’s Groceries, who can’t afford a premium, you have to stay in the slow lane.
Motivemagus about 10 years ago
Yeah, this is a problem. A big one.
Theodore E. Lind Premium Member about 10 years ago
The real problem is the last mile. Content companies should be separate from companies who provide cable, wire line distribution. Then you would have some real competition and real net neutrality. If you understand network peering, the Netflix decision was probably reasonable. Letting companies like Comcast charge rent for 15 year old Motorola boxes and cheap converters is not.
neatslob Premium Member almost 10 years ago
Actually the federal government is taking its nose OUT, which the private companies are using to rake in more profits.
Doughfoot almost 10 years ago
Imagine turning the highway system over to private enterprise, who require transponders in your car if you want to use their road, setting different speed limits for different lanes, and charging more per mile for the faster lanes. Perhaps even charge different rates for different kinds of cars: for example they could make a deal with the automakers to charge more for older cars using the roads, making it more expensive to drive an older car, thus encouraging you to buy a new car.
Doughfoot almost 10 years ago
A hundred years ago the state stepped in to save the college in this town, that was floundering, and might have gone under. With public money provided in exchange for low tuition rates for in-state students and a requirement that most of the students be in-state, the college flourished and grew into one of the finest public college in the nation. In recent years the state has supported the college less and less, until that support is now negligible: but the state still demands low tuition rates for in-state students, though the college could easily finance itself with full-tuition students. The college could go private, if the state would let it, but for beginners they would first have to buy their own campus from the state. The quality of the education provided there is now at risk, as the best faculty prefer to go someplace that pays better (as most places do). So the state has essentially reneged on the deal that served both the state and the college so well for a century. When I described this situation to a conservative colleague the other day, he said, “That’s what you get for allowing the government to stick its nose into your affairs.” So swapping bankruptcy for a century of growth, prestige and success was a bad idea back in 1906? I thought of that when I read Tigger’s comment about the Federal Government sticking its nose in. Why did he add “Federal” to that sentence? I have yet to see any evidence that state and local governments handle anything any better than the Federal government does, and plenty to suggest they handle it worse. In general, I find state and local government more likely to be corrupt or in the pockets of powerful interests. In libertarian utopia the state withers away, or shrinks to impotence. Very much like the dreams of communism. Neither is to be found in the read world.
todyoung almost 10 years ago
and BIG contributors.
neatslob Premium Member almost 10 years ago
@DoughfootIt wouldn’t be so much what kind of car you drive, but where you are going. Imagine Jumbo-mart paying a premium so if you are going there, you can use the fast lane, but if you’re going to Ma’s Groceries, who can’t afford a premium, you have to stay in the slow lane.