[ale] OT: Craig Newmark of Craig's List on Net Neutrality

[Jim Popovitch]

Pete Hardie wrote:
> Personally, I think it's closer to the company that built my
> subdivision's roads requiring me
> to rent a vehicle from them to drive on those roads.

Hey, it's almost like that today.  You have to have a license (and a 
licensed vehicle too) to use the roads provided by others.  You also 
have to have insurance, pay ad valorem taxes, get tested, and (if 
required) use special equipment.  Additionally, based on your age and 
conduct you can be restricted from said roadways during certain times of 
the day.

> Enforcing Net Neutrality might slow down the deployment of higher
> speed connectivity.  But allowing the *monopoly wire providers* to

Just don't forget that those "monopolies" invested a significant amount 
of the $$ to build the "roadway" you now want to make the rules for. ;-)

> block out any traffic that either does not pay them for favored
> access, or competes with a service that the monopoly wants to provide,
> means that we will not get good versions of that service - witness the
> quality of lon-distance service once Ma Bell was forced to allow
> competition.   Sure, there were many fly-by-night shoddy LD services,
> but the market weeded them out, and we now have good, cheap LD.
> 
> As long as Bellsouth want to offer any bone of a service, they will be
> able to block better services - look at DSL, now that they are not
> required to allow equal access to Speakeasy/SpeedFactory/etc.

No one is preventing Speakeasy/SpeedFactory/etc from doing what the 
Cable companies did (bury their own lines). ;-)

-Jim P.