Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

["Andrew C. Oliver" <acoliver AT buni.org>]

Phillip Rhodes wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1

> Reading the article you linked to, Andy, it sounds like private roads
> were actually quite successful.  Of course once we went to taxpayer
> supported roads this would drive private roads out of business, as
> how can an entity compete against one that can collect subsidies in
> the form of taxes?

Read: they lost money
Read: required wealthy contributors who valued their social value
Read into: required the 18th-19th century social pressures that 
reinforced such things.
Proof: Name the civic clubs you belong to.  For instance the founding 
fathers were all Masons.  You belong primarily to trade organizations 
related to your career but not much for the "public good".  I don't 
because the few times I've joined its all white haired folks and they're 
concerned with entirely different things than your average 20-30 
something with 2.5 kids.

> And when the fly-by-night goes belly-up, their competitor couldn't just
> buy out their existing infrastructure?  I really don't see this
> scenario you're talking about where your yard is being ripped up weekly.
> And Wi-Max technology should make that even less of an issue as it develops.

Two words for you: Dark fiber.

> As I've already said, as long as participation is voluntary, I don't
> object to it.  If all the people in a given geographic area want
> to pool their resources to build a high-speed network, I say
> more power to them.  I just don't think they should be able to force
> unwilling participants to subsidize it.

So for you the sidewalk ends at every house that doesn't feel like 
putting up a sidewalk.  That blows dude.

> And actually, from what you're saying, it almost sounds like your
> arguing more for something like what I am talking about when
> I speak of a "non-profit, voluntary, cooperative" than what I
> typically think of when you say "local government."   As far as
> the County or a City/Town doing this stuff, my objections to it
> are based on a couple of issues:
>
> 1. Any business which is subsidized by taxes is going to have
> an automatic (and IMO, probably insurmountable) advantage over
> a "pure" private business.  So once you have this tax-supported
> business in place, it becomes a de-facto monopoly as no private
> business is going to try and compete with that.  This limits choice
> in the long run.

Yeah...  USPS kicks the crap out of UPS and Fedex...oh wait...  However 
the USPS serves/served parts of the country/world that were not 
developed first.  Infrastructure has a social interest that requires you 
surrender some rights.

> 2. What if the City/County/Town simply makes a bad decision, like
> rolling out a network based on crappy technology?  Wouldn't you like the
> option of not participating if they wanted to deploy GPRS as their
> networking solution?

Vote against them, run for city county town...

> 3. What if their decisions are just bad economically?  How many times
> does a local government give a contract for building something like
> this to one company, instead of one offering a better deal, because
> the County Commissioner is buddies with the owner of the one outfit? Or
> because of outright kickbacks, bribery, etc?  If the local government
> is spending "our" tax money unwisely, wouldn't one want the option
> to not support that entity?

Often they are.  It is not profitable for time warner to put cable in 
rural communities to support their development.  IT may be profitable 
for local government but it may not be directly attributable (because it 
is in the form of tax revenue).

> And now that we're back to this, let's revisit the "Local Gov't Fair
> Competition Act."  All it does is require local government entities to
> publish a written business plan for their network, have public hearings
> before doing it, and - in an older revision - mandated a popular
> referendum to approve such a plan.  So why are you opposed to these
> things?

I'm opposed to them being profitable in the first 2-5 years.  Most 
infrastructure heavy companies aren't profitable for far more years than 
that.

-Andy

> TTYL,
>
> Phil
>
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iD8DBQFGnNYTdkzqYMZbBuwRAlelAKCAefAqRLBgaHENx76MGC5JH6LAzwCgxvVJ
> 3MOIEqvYyj8VPn5Y0jihN5o=
> =yaWw
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> ---
> Come and play at the InterNetWorkers Web site!  
> http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/
> You are currently subscribed to InterNetWorkers mailing list
> To unsubscribe visit http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/internetworkers


--
Buni Meldware Communication Suite
http://buni.org
Multi-platform and extensible Email,
Calendaring (including freebusy),
Rich Webmail, Web-calendaring, ease
of installation/administration.

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature