<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
Let's go back to the 19th century for a minute. You own a railroad
(call it Railroad A); there is a steel mill in city X, and a coal
mine in city Y. You make money hauling coal from Y to X at a market
determined rate (the steel mill gets its iron ore from somewhere
else on another railroad), and hauling steel from X to many places,
and the coal mine, steel mill and iron ore mine make money.
Everybody's happy.<br>
<br>
Then you see a chance to buy a bankrupt coal mine in city Z, which
is a bit farther from X than Y is from X, so your freight hauling
rates for coal from <i>your</i><i></i> mine in Z to the steel mill
in X are higher than what you have been charging from Y to X, so the
steel mill continues to buy from Y rather than Z. But since your
railroad and your coal mine are parts of the same company, you can
instead haul freight from <i>your</i> coal mine at Z to the steel
mill at X at a <i>loss</i>, and make up the difference by stealing
business from Y, who does <i>not</i> have the advantage of his own
railroad going to X. For reasons like this, the Congress back in
the 1880s created the ICC (Interstate Commerce Commission) and
designated the railroads as <i>common carriers</i>, meaning that
they must publish a price for hauling commodity C from X to Y or
from Y to X, known as a <i>tariff</i>, and charge <i>all</i>
customers, including subsidiaries of the railroads, according to the
same tariffs. Or better yet, railroads should not <i>own</i> other
business which are customers of the railroad.<br>
<br>
This same philosophy was extended in the 20th century to trucks,
airlines, bus lines and telephone/telegraph lines (not sure about
river barges): if your business is carrying it, you have to treat
the cargo (or passengers or messages) of your own subsidiaries (if
you have any) the same as any other customers' cargo (or passengers
or messages). With some exceptions and modifications, this has
worked well in those businesses, and <i>informally</i> the internet
carriers have followed the same practice until the last few years.
The new regulations do not involve government telling internet
relaying organizations or last-mile ISP carriers how to do their
business, only how <i>not</i> to do it: namely, putting a web based
business owned by someone else at a disadvantage, or out of
business, in favor of a competing web based business owned by the
internet carrier.<br>
<br>
If a Comcast owned video rental download business had to compete
fairly with Netflix, or with a company which might become the next
Netflix, rather than loading the outside customer with extra charges
to avoid fatally slow delivery of its products, this would encourage
innovation rather than stifle it. <i>Allowing</i> ISP manipulation
of the speed and time delay of its service on the basis of <i>who</i>
the customer is, would effectively stifle <i>anyone other than</i>
Comcast, AT&T, etc. from being able to create innovative
products.<br>
<br>
Almon Strowger's funeral home business suffered when his
competitor's wife became the town telephone operator and switched
funeral customers to her husband's business. He invented the rotary
dial and stepper switch to fix that problem. Let's continue to
honor his memory.<br>
<br>
Allan Richardson<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 3/9/2015 12:00 PM,
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:ale-request@ale.org">ale-request@ale.org</a> wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:mailman.3.1425916801.6636.ale@ale.org"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Send Ale mailing list submissions to
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:ale@ale.org">ale@ale.org</a>
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale">http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale</a>
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:ale-request@ale.org">ale-request@ale.org</a>
You can reach the person managing the list at
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:ale-owner@ale.org">ale-owner@ale.org</a>
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Ale digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Republicans? ?Internet Freedom Act? would wipe out net
neutrality | Ars Technica (Damon L. Chesser)
2. Re: Republicans? ?Internet Freedom Act? would wipe out net
neutrality | Ars Technica (DJ-Pfulio)
3. Re: Republicans? ?Internet Freedom Act? would wipe out net
neutrality | Ars Technica (Paul Cartwright)
4. Re: Republicans? ?Internet Freedom Act? would wipe out net
neutrality | Ars Technica (DJ-Pfulio)
5. Re: Republicans? ?Internet Freedom Act? would wipe out net
neutrality | Ars Technica (Jim Kinney)
6. Re: Republicans? ?Internet Freedom Act? would wipe out net
neutrality | Ars Technica (Solomon Peachy)
7. Re: Republicans? ?Internet Freedom Act? would wipe out net
neutrality | Ars Technica (Robert Reese)
8. Re: Republicans? ?Internet Freedom Act? would wipe out net
neutrality | Ars Technica (Robert Reese)
9. Re: Republicans? ?Internet Freedom Act? would wipe out net
neutrality | Ars Technica (Robert Reese)
10. Re: Republicans? ?Internet Freedom Act? would wipe out net
neutrality | Ars Technica (Paul Cartwright)
11. Re: Republicans? ?Internet Freedom Act? would wipe out net
neutrality | Ars Technica (Brian Mathis)
12. Re: Linux-like gui text editor for MacOS? (Chad Huneycutt)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sun, 08 Mar 2015 12:16:51 -0400
From: "Damon L. Chesser" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:damon@damtek.com"><damon@damtek.com></a>
To: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:ale@ale.org">ale@ale.org</a>
Subject: Re: [ale] Republicans? ?Internet Freedom Act? would wipe out
net neutrality | Ars Technica
Message-ID: <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:54FC75F3.7030200@damtek.com"><54FC75F3.7030200@damtek.com></a>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; Format="flowed"
Like the other poster, I don't see a monopoly. I jump from comcast to
AT@T as it suites me. I could go dish if I want. You can go digital TV
over the air with a very minimal investment for 100% free delivery. Of
course, I don't subscribe to ANYBODIES tv content, only Internet
service. But seeing as how you can watch so much junk on the Internet,
via smart TVs, via providers like Crackle, HBO, Hulu, etc, where is the
monopoly?
Does not Comcast have a right to say who will use their circuit and for
how much? And your contract with Hulu has nothing to do with Hulo's
contract with Comcast. Don't like them? Dump them. Here is a news
flash: Cable TV is a dying bread as more and more people cut the wire.
As more and more people cut the wire, the costs keep getting added to
the less and less and the profits are actually rising with a decreasing
subscriber base. It's crazy. smaller and smaller groups say they
"NEED" the tv cable and there is no way around it. News flash: stop
watching cable TV and the need for paying for less goes away. NO
federal law required. No dualopoly, or "open market" required. People
just are not using cable any more and the market is going away.
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-03-19/u-s-pay-tv-subscriptions-fall-for-first-time-as-streaming-gains">http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-03-19/u-s-pay-tv-subscriptions-fall-for-first-time-as-streaming-gains</a>
and I totally fail to see how separating out "content providers" from
"creators" would do anything other than make it more expensive to
"create content".
If you don't like them, don't pay for them. That is what I do and it is
working quite well, for me. I only pay for Internet service and I jump
ship at the tiniest provocation on to the next provider.
On 03/08/2015 10:57 AM, Pete Hardie wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Comcast being ISP and content creator is part of the problem. They
will prioritize their content over someone else's ,and since they have
a monopoly on delivery, it is de facto unfair
On Sun, Mar 8, 2015 at 10:47 AM, Byron Jeff
<<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:byronjeff@mail.clayton.edu">byronjeff@mail.clayton.edu</a> <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:byronjeff@mail.clayton.edu"><mailto:byronjeff@mail.clayton.edu></a>> wrote:
On Sun, Mar 08, 2015 at 07:41:27AM -0400, DJ-Pfulio wrote:
> I lived in Houston before moving here - not in a baby-bell area.
My phone was
> $11/month. Moved to Smyrna - BellSouth - $26/month.
>
> 'nuff said.
>
Standard land line. How quaint!
VOIP and Google Voice has deregulated this market already. I have a
Callcentric DID with E911 service for $4.50 a month. Incoming
calls routed
in via GV. By virtualizing my home number, I never have to worry
about that
number being tied to a particular provider ever again. If I ever
give up my
AT&T cell service, I'll do exactly the same with my cell number.
> Don't get me started about power issues where I lived in Houston.
>
> Comcast needs to be broken up, but not in the same way that AT*T
was. More like
> how natural gas has been deregulated in Georgia.
There isn't a direct correlation between the two. The primary
difference is
the fact that natural gas is exactly the same no matter who's
marketing it.
However with digital content, each provider offers different
content that
has to be delivered. Comcast has comcast only content that neither
Charter,
AT&T, or Dish offers. So instead of GNG, which can centralize all gas
delivery operations for every marketer using the same
infrastructure, in
your proposed scenario each provider would have to have a
connection to the
head end of the delivery provider and the delivery provider would
have to
carry enough bandwidth to deliver every content providers content
at the
same time.
Don't you think there will be a cost attached to that? One of the
reasons I
finally turned off my natural gas service was the fact that GNG was
charging me nearly $40/month simply for the priviledge of
providing gas to
my meter. No matter if it's 1 therm or 100, the base delivery and
tax was a
$40+ base. Can you imagine how much a centralized content delivery
provider
would charge simply for access?
How exactly is the market closed? Right now I can get Comcast (which I
would never do, long story), AT&T UVerse, Dish, and DirectTV. In
fact in
the last 5 years I've had service with each of the above and
except for
Dish I've kicked each and every one of them to the curb at one
point in
time or another. There's nothing to preclude Verizon or Google from
entering the fray.
Comparing digital content delivery to natural gas deregulation is
an apples
to gorillas argument, seems to me.
BAJ
>
>
> On 03/07/2015 04:24 PM, Jim Lynch wrote:
> > The Judge made my life harder. Before his ruling, I picked up
the phone and
> > called AT&T when the network wasn't working. It got fixed.
Afterwards, I
> > called AT&T and after a bit, they told me it wasn't their
problem, so I called
> > Racal Milgo and guess what? It wasn't their problem either.
It took 2x 3x
> > maybe 4x the amount of time to get the network back.
> >
> > Progress...
> > On 03/07/2015 04:14 PM, James Taylor wrote:
> >> Now you're making us all feel old....
> >> -jt
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Ale mailing list
> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Ale@ale.org">Ale@ale.org</a> <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:Ale@ale.org"><mailto:Ale@ale.org></a>
> <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale">http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale</a>
> See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
> <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo">http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo</a>
--
Byron A. Jeff
Chair: Department of Computer Science and Information Technology
College of Information and Mathematical Sciences
Clayton State University
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://faculty.clayton.edu/bjeff">http://faculty.clayton.edu/bjeff</a>
_______________________________________________
Ale mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Ale@ale.org">Ale@ale.org</a> <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:Ale@ale.org"><mailto:Ale@ale.org></a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale">http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale</a>
See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo">http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo</a>
--
Pete Hardie
--------
Better Living Through Bitmaps
_______________________________________________
Ale mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Ale@ale.org">Ale@ale.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale">http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale</a>
See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo">http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br /><br />
<hr style='border:none; color:#909090; background-color:#B0B0B0; height: 1px; width: 99%;' />
<table style='border-collapse:collapse;border:none;'>
<tr>
<td style='border:none;padding:0px 15px 0px 8px'>
<a href="http://www.avast.com/">
<img border=0 src="http://static.avast.com/emails/avast-mail-stamp.png" />
</a>
</td>
<td>
<p style='color:#3d4d5a; font-family:"Calibri","Verdana","Arial","Helvetica"; font-size:12pt;'>
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
<br><a href="http://www.avast.com/">www.avast.com</a>
</p>
</td>
</tr>
</table>
<br />
</body>
</html>