5 ms·
Part of me likes this approach, but another part of me is hesitant putting the local government in control of all of the network infrastructure. It could conce
by jpk 3y ago
Part of me likes this approach, but another part of me is hesitant putting the local government in control of all of the network infrastructure. It could conceivably allow local officials to turn it all off during a protest or something; similar to what we saw during the Arab Spring events.
- xenospn 3y agoThey can already do that with ease by instructing the companies that own it to shut it down. I’d argue that having local officials in charge offers more transparency than a nameless corporation.
- gooseyman 3y agoCleveland has a public owned utility for power that does publish an annual. https://www.cpp.org/About/Annual-Reports https://www.cpp.org/About/Annual-Reports The non-Cleveland owned utility data is also available, it’s just not as “Cleveland specific”
- jpk 3y agoSure, but the company has an incentive to resist such an order. So there's a check there. I guess all I'm saying is there should be a check, and transparency about when that check is tested.
- patmorgan23 3y agoI mean where the ISP that was shutdown during the Arab spring state owned? Also having one municipal network doesn't prevent others from building their own infrastructure.