[171281] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: The FCC is planning new net neutrality rules. And they could
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Patrick W. Gilmore)
Fri Apr 25 00:37:56 2014
From: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick@ianai.net>
In-Reply-To: <02f601cf603e$1c191b40$544b51c0$@com>
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2014 00:37:40 -0400
To: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
--Apple-Mail=_F05D8003-6B79-4998-A06C-6C191567A19B
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=us-ascii
The fact there are "regulated monopolies" does not mean regulation =
cannot be used to keep a monopoly from forming. And using a turn of =
phrase to prove a point of logic and/or history is a pretty sad =
argument. Yeah, the phrase "regulated monopoly" exists, therefore =
monopolies can't exist without regulation! Q.E.D. Oh, wait, got my =
abbreviation wrong, I meant: W.T.F.?
Larry is confused. He can claim he is not, but posting to NANOG does not =
change the facts. Then again, just because I posted to NANOG doesn't =
prove I'm right either. Worst of all, this thread is pretty =
non-operational now.
So believe as you please. I'm going to believe that the FCC allowing =
monopolies (regulated or not) to charge content providers as they please =
will be bad for me and about 300 million other Americans.
Besides, what has this to do with my original questions?
--=20
TTFN,
patrick
On Apr 25, 2014, at 00:23 , Kiriki Delany <kiriki@streamguys.com> wrote:
> Might one example of what Larry is talking about be cable providers? =
Also
> telephone companies.=20
>=20
> They are often awarded exclusive contracts within cities.
>=20
> Do regulations prohibit anyone from becoming a cable company, in =
addition to
> capital costs and difficulty of easements?
>=20
>=20
> -Kiriki Delany
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Larry Sheldon [mailto:LarrySheldon@cox.net]=20
> Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2014 9:16 PM
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: The FCC is planning new net neutrality rules. And they =
could
> enshrine pay-for-play. - The Washington Post
>=20
> On 4/24/2014 10:44 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
>> On Apr 24, 2014, at 23:38 , Larry Sheldon <LarrySheldon@cox.net>
>> wrote:
>>> On 4/24/2014 10:23 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
>>=20
>>>> The invisible hand of the market cannot fix problems when there is =
a=20
>>>> monopoly.
>>>>=20
>>>> Put in economic terms, a player with Market Power is extracting=20
>>>> Rents. (Capitalization is intentional.)
>>>>=20
>>>> Regulating monopolies allows a market to work, not the opposite.
>>>=20
>>> Regulating monopolies protects monopolies from competition.
>>>=20
>>> Monopolies can not persist without regulation.
>>=20
>> You are confused.
>=20
> No. I am not.
>=20
>> Unless you are talking about "persist" on a time horizon spanning=20
>> generations.
>=20
> A monopoly can persist, as a maximum, as long as regulation protects =
it.
>=20
> Just look at the words! "Regulated Monopoly" has no definition =
without a
> monopoly.
>=20
> If so, then nothing can persist, with or without
>> regulation. And more importantly, I am not willing to wait that long=20=
>> for a fix.
>=20
> "fix" is another monopoly preserver.
>=20
>>> A regulated monopoly is a monopoly, with all of the powers granted =
to=20
>>> monopolies by regulation.
>>=20
>> Regulations can work to ensure monopolies do not form. This is not=20
>> supposition, but historical fact.
>=20
> There is no case where regulation of monopolies prevented monopolies.=20=
> The sentence doesn't even make any sense.
>=20
> If that were actually true, there couldn't be any "regulated =
monopolies"=20
> could there?
>=20
>> It is an open question whether our current regulator regime is =
capable=20
>> of repeating that feat, however.
>=20
> There are a number of cases in history where the absence of regulation =
has
> prevented monopolies.
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> --=20
> Requiescas in pace o email Two identifying characteristics
> of System Administrators:
> Ex turpi causa non oritur actio Infallibility, and the ability to
> learn from their mistakes.
> (Adapted from Stephen =
Pinker)
>=20
>=20
--Apple-Mail=_F05D8003-6B79-4998-A06C-6C191567A19B
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
filename=signature.asc
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature;
name=signature.asc
Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.22 (Darwin)
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTWeaUAAoJEHZX8udmu5TX8oYIAOabzzbt3wbTI7gA6ZDhGzAY
QFsJe0Vsn5aAVfYM+xYiuMyAJxlfToehj4dW6ZIS28OB+SpN1JNtvvY4chu7CmgV
gQgbsBS/CtkflTdHWYvvGlAlBc9jfpNoqQubUzV1cc1mQoT6GAO+uR5moxaaU8k2
GVbQG4BkLUVf4nAoSbfFq+e1/xmwFolO4Pc4tysYrlWKOJqe90gPq3Htt59PsycA
4SAzJac1H+hiUZyMkgNeiMhUDSn5OGFLYLDiPXGBltbzNCaK1td0Djw/bt7brAhx
VLjlawo6lehsCHVDmtQLUU0GwZV6D3SuPDpRfhOr1pTr63zUZRdr6un7n1NtVMo=
=RGqR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--Apple-Mail=_F05D8003-6B79-4998-A06C-6C191567A19B--
