[10892] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: The FCC strikes the Internet (fwd)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Karl Denninger)
Sun Mar 13 23:29:14 1994
From: karl@mcs.com (Karl Denninger)
To: fidelman@civicnet.org (Miles R Fidelman)
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 1994 18:53:59 -0600 (CST)
Cc: com-priv@psi.com
In-Reply-To: <Pine.3.89.9403131015.A23365-0100000@world.std.com> from "Miles R Fidelman" at Mar 13, 94 10:21:59 am
> On Sat, 12 Mar 1994, Karl Denninger wrote:
>
> > The Net <already> has flat-rate access in most metro areas. IF you really
> > think that is important from a public policy point of view, force the
> > telcos to provide flat-rate LONG DISTANCE and LOCAL phone service. Doing
> > <that> is at least a level playing field (you can communicate in either
> > voice or via data over such a line, at the CONSUMERs option).
> >
>
> Actually, flat-rate local service is the key point underlying all of
> this. Right now, the Internet becomes flat rate if:
>
> a. you are a large enough site to justify a leased line to your nearest
> Internet POP, or,
>
> b. you are a residential user, with unlimited local dialing and a local
> flat-rate SLIP provider, or,
>
> c. you are a small business/organizational user, with unlimited local
> dialing and a local flat-rate SLIP provider
>
> Note that case c. is the least common, and its the lack of flat-rate
> business calling that's the sticking point. Even cheap SLIP service
> becomes very expensive when you're paying $.01 or more per minute for
> dialup access.
Also note that you made the argument that the "democratic process" would be
served by having widely available flat-rate email and the like.
Note WELL that businesses cannot vote. Only citizens -- ie: residential
users -- can. Therefore, the effect of business and "organization"
connectivity on the democratic process, as it was ORIGINALLY intended (ie:
before the rise of PACs) is ZERO.
You only have to come to Chicago to find out how well this works in practice.
I live in a ward where the Alderman doesn't give a rat's ass about the
residents -- his campaigns and offices are financed by contributions from
local companies. This, despite the fact that not one of those companies
can re-elect him. Or can they?
Now what was it again that you wanted to promote? More entrenchment of big
business interests than we already have? I'll pass, thank you very much.
> Also note that the heaviest social benefits will probably come when small
> businesses, schools, libraries, etc. can get on the net at a
> price-per-desktop comparable to that of larger sites.
They can get quite close RIGHT NOW. In fact, a library can get on the cable
for the same cost-per-patron as most Fortune-500 companies. Do you have any
idea what the usage of an average library looks like?
Same for schools. You say "that's expensive". Oh really? In a 700
student school a kilobuck per month (56kbps line from any of the national
providers) is CHEAP. About $12/year/user (include staff + teachers +
support people in this; everyone gets on). ABSOLUTELY lost in the noise
when you consider that the average school spends upwards of $5,000 per
pupil per year.
The point isn't (and never has been) cost. Its about what the school
board, and the PEOPLE in the area want (since most of those board members
are elected).
You are barking up the wrong tree.
> One alternative to flat local business calling is better unbundling of
> local loop services. I.e., if I, as a third party, can co-locate some
> switching gear in a telco central office, and buy unbundled access to the
> copper local loops (at a flat-rate), I can probably offer pretty cheap
> flat-rate Internet service. The good news is that this is precisely the
> kind of unbundling that long distance carriers, cellular carriers, and
> budding PCS carriers are spending large amounts of time and money
> lobbying for.
Only if the cost of those loops and co-location is regulated in some fashion.
Finally, let's look at this. You wanted originally flat-rate email. Now
all of a sudden its SLIP access. That's MASSIVELY expanded service, is it
not? Yes, there are companies (mine is one) which will sell you that kind
of service. Are you arguing for <mandating> this? What if it turns out
that 2-3 years from now the "flat rate" ends up being "24 hour connected
for 90% of the users" and it becomes impossible to support that pricing
model?
--
Karl Denninger (karl@MCS.COM) | MCSNet - Full Internet Connectivity (shell,
Modem: [+1 312 248-0900] | PPP, SLIP and more) in Chicago and 'burbs.
Voice/FAX: [+1 312 248-8649] | Email "info@mcs.com". MCSNet is a CIX member.
