Interesting People mailing list archives
Re: MIT Tech review vs the Internet
From: David Farber <dave () farber net>
Date: Sun, 6 Jul 2008 08:11:26 -0700
________________________________________ From: Bob Frankston [Bob19-0501 () bobf frankston com] Sent: Sunday, July 06, 2008 11:04 AM To: krulwich () yahoo com; David Farber Subject: RE: [IP] MIT Tech review vs the Internet I’m confused. Today we have a synthetic marketplace defined out of whole cloth by a government operated corporate welfare system. By decoupling the networking from the government/carrier defined/controlled paths we can have a real marketplace. Basically it’s what anti-trust is about – except in this case unlike Standard Oil – the monopoly is a government creation. From: Krulwich [mailto:krulwich () yahoo com] Sent: Sunday, July 06, 2008 10:01 To: dave () farber net Cc: Bob19-0501 () bobf frankston com Subject: Re: [IP] MIT Tech review vs the Internet Do we really want our future limited to whatever can be conceived of today by governments or other public service bodies? If we have to choose between abundance of what we have today (which is the future proposed below) and the future that can be brought on by the free market (be it wimax, LTE, city-wide wifi, or something we haven't seen yet), I'll take the free market. --Bruce --- On Sun, 7/6/08, David Farber <dave () farber net> wrote: From: David Farber <dave () farber net> Subject: [IP] MIT Tech review vs the Internet To: "ip" <ip () v2 listbox com> Date: Sunday, July 6, 2008, 4:01 PM ________________________________________ From: Bob Frankston [Bob19-0501 () bobf frankston com] Sent: Saturday, July 05, 2008 8:47 PM To: David Farber; nnsquad () nnsquad org Cc: Dave Burstein; Bob Metcalfe; Andrew B Lippman; Bob Buderi Subject: MIT Tech review vs the Internet After months of online discussions debunking the various myths about the Internet being just like a highway or railroad<http://www.frankston.com/public/?name=Railroad> and citing the limitations of the Nemertes Study (http://www.frankston.com/?name=IPClog) it’s disappointing to read Technology Review revisiting this old ground and presenting the Internet as a series of tubes being clogged by users consuming too much “Internet”. Do I need to again cite Andy Lippman’s observation that networking is something we do and not a service we have to buy. The question is not how do ISPs recover their costs -- the question is why we keep insisting on funding our infrastructure by charging for services instead of recognizing that the infrastructure is not a profit center. It’s a means by which we create value everywhere else in society. If you run the infrastructure for a profit all you do is assure scarcity<http://www.frankston.com/?name=AssuringScarcity>. Creating scarcity is an amazing feat considering the abundance available at essentially no cost compared to the value. Today’s Internet is a powerful example and implementation of the far more general concept of creating solutions by focusing on the relationships between end points outside the networking without having to depend on seeking permission or buying special status from every provider along the way. TR could be helping us understand the future rather than just reviewing past misunderstandings. ------------------------------------------- Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/ Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com ------------------------------------------- Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/ Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Current thread:
- Re: MIT Tech review vs the Internet David Farber (Jul 06)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- MIT Tech review vs the Internet David Farber (Jul 06)
- MIT Tech review vs the Internet David Farber (Jul 06)
- Re: MIT Tech review vs the Internet David Farber (Jul 06)