On Sat, Jan 2, 2010 at 10:56 PM, Gakuru Alex <alexgakuru.lists@gmail.com> wrote:

> In this talk about Cost/Benefit let's not be like the mice who wanted to
> bell the cat. Let's criticise but more importantly let this be practical
> with suggestions. I have also ditched Suffericon voice. Sasa niko Yuu tu
> sana, for example.

How practical are our "open choices"? Won't we all sooner or later
find selves 'recycling' (esp. mobile) oligopolistic service providers
- in the situation of a few sellers providers but vast buyers ->
collusion -> cartels-> absent/weak consumer protection ->
exploitation-> helplessness (hence new technologies= fantasies)

"If wireline providers charge more for service packages that involve greater speeds and/or higher usage limits, consumers purchasing these packages may not enjoy the benefits of competition from wireless broadband, or may do so only indirectly to the extent that consumers as a whole display a willingness to substitute slower wireless service for faster wireline service," the agency said in its filing.

The comments were submitted as part of the FCC's push to bring affordable broadband services to all U.S. homes. Obama has made universal access to a high-speed Internet the cornerstone of his technology agenda. And Congress has mandated that the FCC, an independent agency, come up with a plan by February.

Consumer groups, which have been critical of the FCC's approach on broadband, said the comments by Justice and the NTIA indicate the administration agrees there are not enough options for Internet users.

"They are going out of their way to say competition is important and that there isn't enough and this is a new approach," said Mark Cooper, president of the Consumers Federation of America. "The FCC has been looking at spectrum as the great savior, but then they have to answer the question of what happens if spectrum gets captured by incumbent wireline companies."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/04/AR2010010403062.html?wpisrc=nl_tech