Successful Blog

Net Neutrality 7-28-2006

by

Net Neutrality Links

I’m adding this link to the Net Neutrality Page.

Net neutrality ‘weaklings’ must answer to shareholders – FEAF

Tom Borelli, [The Free Enterprise Action Fund] FEAF portfolio manager, told The Register FEAF thinks companies that “run” to government – especially Microsoft who has a habit of usually going in the opposite direction when it comes to officials and regulation – are acting against “innovation.” They should focus on improving their products not legislation, he said.

“Our antenna goes up when big companies seek regulation. In our view that’s a sign of weakness. A free market should be out there competing and innovating, rather than running to the government to protect the market. That’s a defense strategy.” . . .

[snip]

The group has already used the shareholder resolution tactics over General Electric’s policy on global warming, which FEAF believes is damaging shareholders’ value, at an annual meeting in April. FEAF believes GE has succumbed to non-government organizations and environment advocates who Borelli calls “looters” interested in using GE’s resources to “achieve their social and political agenda.”

FEAF’s actions can be seen in a broader US context. With the argument over net neutrality breaking down along partisan lines, lobbyists and other interested parties are now springing to the fore to shape the issue.

–ME “Liz” Strauss

Related
NET NEUTRALITY PAGE

Net Neutrality 7-27-2006

by

Net Neutrality Links

I’m adding this link to the Net Neutrality Page.

Influencing the political process for advancment of technology

Need an example? Think about IM in the context of what it really is…delivering text messages. How much revenue do you think the Netheads make from IM? Combine AIM, MSN and Yahoo all together. How much revenue do you think the wireless carriers make from text messagin? Who wins the revenue war?

That isn’t the only place the Bellheads win. Look to political process. I’ve often wondered about our own ranks. Jeff Pulver. David Isenberg. Tom Evslin. Several others. Leading voices fighting the battle from without rather than stepping into the political fray of politics to redirect the system from within. If we’re going to win some measure of control away from the Bellheads, there is only one way. The political power base needs to shift. Netheads have to become the influencers of policy, something we are clearly not today.

–ME “Liz” Strauss

Related
NET NEUTRALITY PAGE

After the Music Died — It Got the Link Leak Virus

by

Tueday Night Music Comment Night

Open Comments Last Night was held down in Nashville. Folks were singing and dancing. Songs were stuck in our heads. Some folks admitted a predilection for men in uniforms, especially those who had swords. We danced so hard we lost the server. Then, the nasty link leak virus played a tune on things as well. Link Leak Virus is a special strain of the indie virus with blogtipping mutations that occur in threes edged its way in.

Cool links were shared.

If you listen you can hear, Joe singing Crimson and Clover over and over.

Successful Blog School of Music

The following members of the class of 2006 were in attendance:
Trisha, Joe, Tracy, Doug, Christine, Susan, Rick, Shirley, Starbucker, Candice, Cat, Ben, HART, Tom, Gerard, Samuel, Meikah, Dwayne, Chris,

Here’s a quick peek at some things that were said. [Read more…]

Net Neutrality 7-26-2006

by

Net Neutrality Links

I’m adding this link to the Net Neutrality Page.

No, it’s “In the Beginning…”

. . . The Net, as Bob Frankston puts it, is the real infrastructure. It’s the superset, not the subset. It’s the ultimate context. TV, phone, radio, publishing, commerce and everything else will eventually come to you over the Net, if it doesn’t already.
The problem is, the Net is really nothing more than the shortest data path between two devices. You want fast and free Internet for the same reason you want a fast and free connection between your computer and your keyboard and your screen.
Think of the Net as a giant three dimensional zero. Everything across it is zero distance from everything else. The cost of using it isn’t zero, but once it’s built, that’s what it rounds to. (As I explained here a few days ago.)
How do we build that out, and who do we trust to do it, without screwing it up? There is plenty of business in building it out, as there is in all forms of construction. But maintenance shouldn’t look like the cable TV or phone businesses, any more than highway maintenance should look like a theme park.
More to the point, why trust building the “first mile” of the Net to people who never wanted it in the first place, who have always felt threatened by it, who can imagine their customers as nothing other than “consumers” of one-way “content”, and who want to create scarcities and insert billing valves everywhere they can? Because they’re the only ones in a position to do it? That’s not a good enough reason. It’s also not true. . . .

–ME “Liz” Strauss

Related
NET NEUTRALITY PAGE

The Mic Is Open in Nashville — Let the Music Move You!

by

It’s Like Open Mike Only Different

Here’s how it works.

open mike night

The rules are simple — be nice.

It’s like any rambling conversation. Don’t try to read it all. Jump in whenever you get here. Just go to the end and start talking. EVERYONE is WELCOME.

Tonight we talk about music.

We might also talk about

  • songs that stick in your head.
  • songs that you remember from childhood
  • lyrics that changed your life.
  • songs that you . . .

AND THE EVER POPULAR,

What ever happened to the drinking moose and his friend the pig?

Tonight we’re in Nashville.

Nashville, TN

–ME “Liz” Strauss

Related articles

Open Mic Tonight 7pm Chicago — Let the Music Move You!

Net Neutrality 7-25-2006

by

Net Neutrality Links

I’m adding this link to the Net Neutrality Page.

Today’s cell phone system argues for retaining network neutrality

Net neutrality proponents foretell a grim future for the Internet if net neutrality is scrapped: one where technology stagnates because of high entry barriers and one where a small oligarchy controls what consumers can and cannot experience. . . . wouldn’t it be nice if history provided some guidance from which to evaluate these claims?

It turns out that we have a privately owned and controlled network all around us, one that closely mirrors the technical functionality of the Internet, but where there has never been a requirement for net neutrality: the US cellular phone network.

. . . So why aren’t there a wealth of amazing and interactive services available for mobile devices? Why is there no MySpace, Craigslist, Amazon, Flikr, or eBay accessible through this network? Why are cell phone payment systems and email systems nearly nonexistent? Why haven’t charities raised money or awareness of their causes through this system?

It’s simple. Because the cell phone carriers control what services are allowed to use their networks. There is no net neutrality on the cell phone network.

Read this one to find out what you would pay to set up the same thing you’re already doing via the cell phone carriers.

–ME “Liz” Strauss

Related
NET NEUTRALITY PAGE