5 ms·

> Ryan Avent, who argues that Google has been providing crucial public infrastructure... Krugman proceeds assuming that were true, but it's not. There are plen

> Ryan Avent, who argues that Google has been providing crucial public infrastructure... Krugman proceeds assuming that were true, but it's not. There are plenty of free alternatives to Google Reader. All this proves that old saying; never pick a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel.

jasonhanley 14y ago
Exactly. None of Google's free products amount to anything close to "crucial public infrastructure". Google Apps could be critical for a lot of businesses, but they're charging for that now, and presumably making money. Now, Internet ISPs, on the other hand, might fall under the category of "crucial public infrastructure" and could probably use some government oversight.
- michaelwww 14y ago
  I found this from the FCC and it's very interesting: http://www.broadband.gov/plan/ http://www.broadband.gov/plan/ In the 1860s, we connected Americans to a transcontinental railroad that brought cattle from Cheyenne to the stockyards of Chicago. In the 1930s, we connected Americans to an electric grid that improved agriculture and brought industry to the Smoky Mountains of Tennessee and the Great Plains of Nebraska. In the 1950s, we connected Americans to an interstate highway system that fueled jobs on the line in Detroit and in the warehouse in L.A. Infrastructure networks unite us as a country, bringing together parents and children, buyers and sellers, and citizens and government in ways once unimaginable. Ubiquitous access to infrastructure networks has continually driven American innovation, progress, prosperity and global leadership. In communications, the government stimulated the construction of radio and television facilities across the country by offering huge tracts of the public’s airwaves free of charge. It did the same with telephony through a Universal Service Fund, fulfilling the vision of the Communications Act of 1934 'to make available, so far as possible, to all the people of the United States, a rapid, efficient, Nation-wide, and world-wide wire and radio communication service with adequate facilities at reasonable charges.' ... Today, high-speed Internet is transforming the landscape of America more rapidly and more pervasively than earlier infrastructure networks. Like railroads and highways, broadband accelerates the velocity of commerce, reducing the costs of distance. Like electricity, it creates a platform for America’s creativity to lead in developing better ways to solve old problems. Like telephony and broadcasting, it expands our ability to communicate, inform and entertain. Broadband is the great infrastructure challenge of the early 21st century.
mtgx 14y ago
Krugman is such a faux-expert, that is way overhyped. He clearly doesn't understand the technology very well, and he seems to be confusing RSS, the protocol, with Google Reader the app. And even then, RSS is not a "critical public infrastructure" that the government should maintain or whatever. It seems like he's just fishing for (more) fame/hits here, as there was no reason for him to write about this.
- michaelwww 14y ago
  He writes "Google's decision to shut down Google Reader has upset a number of people I know" so I guess he felt it necessary to weigh in.
- olefoo 14y ago
  He's commenting as an expert in Economics, not internet protocols. In this case, he's looking at the economic effects of a service that is valuable to it's users, and that appears to be both slightly unprofitable and a nautral monopoly. He's not coming to any definite conclusions, he's exploring a set of ideas; not drafting policy. Your comment adds nothing to the discussion; so what are you getting out of making it?
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
  - Gormo 14y ago
    > He's commenting as an expert in Economics, not internet protocols. Unfortunately, he isn't either. He isn't an expert in internet protocols because he doesn't have a sufficient understanding of how the internet works. He isn't an expert in economics because there's no such thing as an expert in economics. I mean this seriously: [macro]economics isn't an empirical science; no experimentation, no experience, therefore no expertise. Mastering untestable theoretical doctrine doesn't count as substantive expertise.
    - olefoo 14y ago
      Not to get too deeply into the weeds of philosophy of science; but macroeconomics very is at least as much of a science as climate science. Observations are made, hypotheses are tested against reality, and predictions are derived that fail or succeed. That said it also suffers from a similar pathology where academic investigation is systematically distorted, occasionally suppressed outright and researchers in the field are sometimes attacked ( literally ) for the views that are ascribed to them.
pseut 14y ago
Avent's article is about Google in its entirety, not about Reader alone.

jasonhanley 14y ago

Exactly. None of Google's free products amount to anything close to "crucial public infrastructure". Google Apps could be critical for a lot of businesses, but they're charging for that now, and presumably making money. Now, Internet ISPs, on the other hand, might fall under the category of "crucial public infrastructure" and could probably use some government oversight.

michaelwww 14y ago
I found this from the FCC and it's very interesting: http://www.broadband.gov/plan/ http://www.broadband.gov/plan/ In the 1860s, we connected Americans to a transcontinental railroad that brought cattle from Cheyenne to the stockyards of Chicago. In the 1930s, we connected Americans to an electric grid that improved agriculture and brought industry to the Smoky Mountains of Tennessee and the Great Plains of Nebraska. In the 1950s, we connected Americans to an interstate highway system that fueled jobs on the line in Detroit and in the warehouse in L.A. Infrastructure networks unite us as a country, bringing together parents and children, buyers and sellers, and citizens and government in ways once unimaginable. Ubiquitous access to infrastructure networks has continually driven American innovation, progress, prosperity and global leadership. In communications, the government stimulated the construction of radio and television facilities across the country by offering huge tracts of the public’s airwaves free of charge. It did the same with telephony through a Universal Service Fund, fulfilling the vision of the Communications Act of 1934 'to make available, so far as possible, to all the people of the United States, a rapid, efficient, Nation-wide, and world-wide wire and radio communication service with adequate facilities at reasonable charges.' ... Today, high-speed Internet is transforming the landscape of America more rapidly and more pervasively than earlier infrastructure networks. Like railroads and highways, broadband accelerates the velocity of commerce, reducing the costs of distance. Like electricity, it creates a platform for America’s creativity to lead in developing better ways to solve old problems. Like telephony and broadcasting, it expands our ability to communicate, inform and entertain. Broadband is the great infrastructure challenge of the early 21st century.

mtgx 14y ago

Krugman is such a faux-expert, that is way overhyped. He clearly doesn't understand the technology very well, and he seems to be confusing RSS, the protocol, with Google Reader the app. And even then, RSS is not a "critical public infrastructure" that the government should maintain or whatever. It seems like he's just fishing for (more) fame/hits here, as there was no reason for him to write about this.

michaelwww 14y ago
He writes "Google's decision to shut down Google Reader has upset a number of people I know" so I guess he felt it necessary to weigh in.
olefoo 14y ago
He's commenting as an expert in Economics, not internet protocols. In this case, he's looking at the economic effects of a service that is valuable to it's users, and that appears to be both slightly unprofitable and a nautral monopoly. He's not coming to any definite conclusions, he's exploring a set of ideas; not drafting policy. Your comment adds nothing to the discussion; so what are you getting out of making it?
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- Gormo 14y ago
  > He's commenting as an expert in Economics, not internet protocols. Unfortunately, he isn't either. He isn't an expert in internet protocols because he doesn't have a sufficient understanding of how the internet works. He isn't an expert in economics because there's no such thing as an expert in economics. I mean this seriously: [macro]economics isn't an empirical science; no experimentation, no experience, therefore no expertise. Mastering untestable theoretical doctrine doesn't count as substantive expertise.
  - olefoo 14y ago
    Not to get too deeply into the weeds of philosophy of science; but macroeconomics very is at least as much of a science as climate science. Observations are made, hypotheses are tested against reality, and predictions are derived that fail or succeed. That said it also suffers from a similar pathology where academic investigation is systematically distorted, occasionally suppressed outright and researchers in the field are sometimes attacked ( literally ) for the views that are ascribed to them.

pseut 14y ago

Avent's article is about Google in its entirety, not about Reader alone.