4 ms·

It's quite a leap from having an ISP (unusually) shut down its service in an area to concluding that internet connectivity should be a public utility. Surely th

It's quite a leap from having an ISP (unusually) shut down its service in an area to concluding that internet connectivity should be a public utility. Surely there must be some middle ground.

qeternity 8y ago
It's funny because the best arguments for internet being a utility have nothing to do with government reliability (or lack there of) but rather economic arguments like natural monopolies. It seems like OP just has an anti-market agenda.
- TeMPOraL 8y ago
  Both perspectives support each other. Natural monopolies are one thing, but if you want people to have stable and reliable Internet - as most tech companies do - then it's best when Internet access is not something companies are allowed to differentiate on.
weberc2 8y ago
It would be like concluding that water is best handled by the private sector because Flint, MI.
wycy 8y ago
The middle ground, or the average of two positions, isn't necessarily any more correct than either of the two original positions. It's the argument to moderation fallacy.
WorldMaker 8y ago
It's not that big of a leap: Silicon Valley mindset believed it get dive in to physical infrastructure, "disrupt it", and make a difference. Turns out it couldn't, because of the natural monopolies that are already controlled by incumbents with little incentive to do better, and because it turned out physical infrastructure is "harder" than they wanted to deal with. You can't "disrupt" the power company, and you can't "disrupt" the water company. Not without a giant warchest to rebuild pipes and electric lines. Not without causing a lot of accidental incidental damage. No one actually wants that, they want to pay their utility bills and move on with their lives. It's past time we admitted that internet service is in the same category.
remir 8y ago
Cooperatives could be a good middle ground: they have to turn a profit, but the members have their say in how things are run.

It's quite a leap from having an ISP (unusually) shut down its service in an area to concluding that internet connectivity should be a public utility. Surely there must be some middle ground.

qeternity 8y ago

It's funny because the best arguments for internet being a utility have nothing to do with government reliability (or lack there of) but rather economic arguments like natural monopolies. It seems like OP just has an anti-market agenda.

TeMPOraL 8y ago
Both perspectives support each other. Natural monopolies are one thing, but if you want people to have stable and reliable Internet - as most tech companies do - then it's best when Internet access is not something companies are allowed to differentiate on.

weberc2 8y ago

It would be like concluding that water is best handled by the private sector because Flint, MI.

wycy 8y ago

The middle ground, or the average of two positions, isn't necessarily any more correct than either of the two original positions. It's the argument to moderation fallacy.

WorldMaker 8y ago

It's not that big of a leap: Silicon Valley mindset believed it get dive in to physical infrastructure, "disrupt it", and make a difference. Turns out it couldn't, because of the natural monopolies that are already controlled by incumbents with little incentive to do better, and because it turned out physical infrastructure is "harder" than they wanted to deal with. You can't "disrupt" the power company, and you can't "disrupt" the water company. Not without a giant warchest to rebuild pipes and electric lines. Not without causing a lot of accidental incidental damage. No one actually wants that, they want to pay their utility bills and move on with their lives. It's past time we admitted that internet service is in the same category.

remir 8y ago

Cooperatives could be a good middle ground: they have to turn a profit, but the members have their say in how things are run.