NNSquad - Network Neutrality Squad
[ NNSquad ] Re: Wireless data a blessing (or curse) for carriers (what about "us"?) again
|
This is yet another example of the dynamic in http://frankston.com/?n=AssuringScarcity
playing out. They told us they would do it, the told us they are doing it, and
we see them doing it. (“them” being the “wireless”
industry). "We have had to be careful not
to invest too much -- because the only thing that would happen if we did would
be to increase in data traffic without an increase in our profits," he
said What about our “profits” in the economy, health,
safety etc etc etc? And to add injury to injury they could invest far less and
get more if they didn’t choose the highest cost (often self-dealing) approaches
– but they have to do so so they could appear to spend a lot while still giving
us so little. This makes it very clear why the telecom industry is a problematic
hangover from when we sold off our right to communicate to third parties
because we thought it was our only option. It’s a repeat of the old modem
crisis when they had to be banned lest they destroy the wired phone network. And
again http://rmf.vc/?n=4GAgain. I understand the desire for incremental neutrality rules but
how many times do we need to go through the same thing again and again before
it becomes obvious that we’re mired in repeating past mistakes again and
again. At what point do we take responsibility and move ahead? Can we shift from fighting over the dregs of telecom to
looking towards ambient connectivity (http://rmf.vc/?n=IAC)? -----Original Message----- Wireless data a blessing (or curse) for carriers http://bit.ly/3QmhYh (Washington
Post) http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/28/AR2009092803490.html?hpid%3Dsec-tech&sub=AR
(URL version not dependent upon Libya) --Lauren-- NNSquad Moderator |