April 2022

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30

« Warming to warming | Main | Redamn »

May 24, 2006


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.



My simplicity holds me down here.
Do I understand that: net neutrality will create new FCC regulation of access to bandwidth, but on the other hand, Hands Off and the telecoms, sans net neutrality, will be free to offer a bidding war to companies to get the fastest access in the future?

If that is near the target, it would seem that the issue leaves us between a rock and a hard place. I would normally come down on the side of less regulation and leaving the process open to market forces. Even if the telecoms will have power and control for a period, isn't that how entrepreneurs drive the process forward, by finding ways to offer the consumer something better for less?

Can someone say if my understanding of the issue is near the mark. I feel wholly confused.

Jim Caserta

Follow one of McCurry's links and you get:

Today’s average residential broadband user consumes about 2 gigbytes of data per month, Kafka estimated, which costs the service provider about $1. As downloading feature films becomes more popular, they might consume an average of 9 gigabytes per month, costing carriers $4.50.

Today’s average residential broadband user pays - $40 to TimeWarner or BellSouth - 40X markup!

It's not fair to have a talking head debate an engineer in a matter of technology.


"Today’s average residential broadband user pays - $40 to TimeWarner or BellSouth - 40X markup!"

Expects those markups to drop once you have the neutrality legislation in place. Because small, innovative, cheap providers love to get into more regulated markets.

The comments to this entry are closed.