nanairo

35 ms·

331.
by nanairo 16y ago
Maybe not, but that's not what the Google-Verizon letter says. It does not suggest that massive government regulation (or in fact any regulation: no need to turn it into a dichotomy) will do more harm than good. Their point is that it's unn
332.
by nanairo 16y ago
I hope you are right... suddenly it doesn't seem that many other consumer electronic companies are interested in material science. Are Dell, HP, Motorola, Lenovo, etc... trying to catch up with laser manufacturing?
333.
by nanairo 16y ago
Sure. So you point out that wireline broadband is less competitive (in the USA) than wireless. But wireless with 3-4 competitors is hardly a free market either. I don't debate that wireline is less competitive (again, in the USA), I argue t
334.
by nanairo 16y ago
I won't argue your actual point, but your examples about free newspapers is wrong. There is much evidence that newspapers because newspapers are heavily dependent on their revenue from advertisement (around 70%-80%), advertisements have a l
335.
by nanairo 16y ago
No, sorry. The point made was that a lot of communication is being moved using TCP/IP. So they use the same infrastructure.
336.
by nanairo 16y ago
What happens if you want to move to another phone provider which operates through the Internet? As people have said, nowadays most phone connections do anyway. So why should the ISP phone connection be any faster than another one? And while
337.
by nanairo 16y ago
Why would they be a more vibrant market? The fact that wireless licences are limited should actually make it less competitive. What's your argument?
338.
by nanairo 16y ago
You are right, me bad. :)
339.
by nanairo 16y ago
But if you were correct then the regulation would be irrelevant. It would only make a difference if wireless broadband providers will indeed take advantage of loose network neutrality regulations. On the other hand Google/Verizon agrees tha
340.
by nanairo 16y ago
If I remember my Economics studies your argument applies to a free market. But broadband companies have a very large initial capital investment which raises the bar for entrants. For wireless you also have a limited number of frequency lice
341.
by nanairo 16y ago
Google agrees that having an open internet has been beneficial to the development of the internet. But somehow this is not needed for wireless broadband because there already is a lot of competition? What???
342.
by nanairo 16y ago
Wouldn't that be really easy to dodge? Something like iPlayer or Hulu integrated with your TV: is that internet or TV? What if you can get the news from a website, or its app? The app "just happens to use IP for the packets".
343.
by nanairo 16y ago
Actually it seems to me that they are already putting the hands forward to make sure Google TV is not covered. Is this possible? Anyone remembers exactly how the Google TV pitch was?