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

["Cristóbal Palmer" <cristobalpalmer AT gmail.com>]

On 7/25/07, Phillip Rhodes <mindcrime AT cpphacker.co.uk> wrote:
> And it does that how?  All it prevents is low-ball competition
> funded by taxpayer subsidies.

This isn't about competing with for-profit ISPs. This is about
government stepping in where for-profit ISPs won't. Yes it's possible
that large ISPs like TWC might lose some small markets. Should we
care? No. TWC is beast created by a cable system that allows for local
monopolies. They're making their money on an un-level playing field
already. You should be concerned with good outcomes, not profit.
You're not a rational consumer if your primary concern is other
people's profit.

> It doesn't prevent LocalGov from
> competing on a level basis.

There never was and never has been a level playing field for
communications infrastructure. It's highly capital-intensive, and for
every major technological leap (eg. electricity, radio) there has been
some level of government involvement in the rollout. Give up your idea
of a level playing field. It doesn't exist now and never will.

> of citizens from forming private wireless mesh networks.

That connect to the commercial internet how? Who pays for transit? You
haven't fixed the problem of connecting rural communities to the rest
of the world.

> TWC / Bellsouth duopoly (if such a beast exists)

You're looking at it. Who else provides broadband around here? Maybe
we should _define_ broadband. Oops... we have to define broadband as
being 200 Kbit or faster to get any meaningful range of providers. How
many of you want a connection that maxes out at 200 Kbit down? From
Wikipedia: "the US FCC use 200 kbit/s in their definition."

> such as satellite
> internet, and ClearWire Wireless.

Both of these blow goats. Have you tried either? These are in no way,
shape or form "broadband" access... unless you're the FCC. If my local
government tried to roll out one of those technologies, yes I'd be
pissed. I'd make my voice heard. No, I don't need your law to shield
me from that risk.

> Or petitioning the government to remove artificial
> barriers to entry that discourage more private companies from entering
> the market.

Such as? Please let's eliminate these, yes.

Cheers,
--
Cristóbal M. Palmer
celebrating 15 years of sunsite/metalab/ibiblio:
http://tinyurl.com/2o8hj4