3 ms·

Here's an "interesting" counter-point from an academic who has strong ties to the cable industry. http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_26474974/no-municipal-br

Here's an "interesting" counter-point from an academic who has strong ties to the cable industry. http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_26474974/no-municipal-broadband-is-risky-proposition http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_26474974/no-municipal-b... http://daniels.du.edu/faculty-staff/ronald-rizzuto/#sthash.XejKuEyU.dpuf http://daniels.du.edu/faculty-staff/ronald-rizzuto/#sthash.X... This is discouraging to me because, in my idealistic mind, academia should transcend "lobbying" and produce information for the public to consume. I don't have a problem with academics earning a livable wage from their research efforts, but I have an increasing sense of corporate "plants" in the academic realm that generate the results from research that benefits the corporation. It seems like things have gotten backwards - research used to be used to make a better product/service/commodity for which a company can charge a premium. Now it seems like research is used to justify stagnation tactics. Anyway, germane to the actual content of the article, this is encouraging, but as has been noted, many of these are very small communities anyway. There's not as much of a loss if they are not part of the larger loss of a metro area. The notable exceptions are Boulder (which is, honestly, considered to do its own thing) and Cherry Hills Village. CHV is a curiosity for me because that's where the extravagantly wealthy of the Denver metro area live and is a fairly "red" area so I wonder if this is becoming enough of an issue that it's transcending party lines and affiliations. Poor service knows no political alignment, I guess. Enough rambling.

jobposter1234 12y ago
Can you elaborate on this sentence? > There's not as much of a loss if they are not part of the larger loss of a metro area. I appreciate you posting the link, it was an interesting counter-point. Yet your comment doesn't really address anything he writes about, instead going off-topic with something about lobbying. Focusing on his article, what is your response to his study of 75 municipal-operated ISPs/telecoms all costing the region (often significant) money? Is there a reason you consider his main point wrong? (Specifically, his point that the discussed regulations only require voter approval before undertaking a costly ISP infrastructure business.)

jobposter1234 12y ago

Can you elaborate on this sentence? > There's not as much of a loss if they are not part of the larger loss of a metro area. I appreciate you posting the link, it was an interesting counter-point. Yet your comment doesn't really address anything he writes about, instead going off-topic with something about lobbying. Focusing on his article, what is your response to his study of 75 municipal-operated ISPs/telecoms all costing the region (often significant) money? Is there a reason you consider his main point wrong? (Specifically, his point that the discussed regulations only require voter approval before undertaking a costly ISP infrastructure business.)