On 4/26/14, Larry Sheldon <larryshel...@cox.net> wrote: > h/t Suresh Ramasubramanian > > FCC throws in the towel on net neutrality > > http://www.zdnet.com/fcc-throws-in-the-towel-on-net-neutrality-7000028770/
Why isn't it as simple as I'm paying my ISP to deliver the bits to me and Netflix is paying their [cdn?] provider to deliver the bits to me. Netflix is already paying their provider to deliver the bits to me, so why do they have to also pay my ISP to deliver the bits to me? It seems the FCC is on a roll - not only giving up on net neutrality but building up the local monopoly: http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2014/db0423/DOC-326703A1.txt "The concept of targeting subsidies for broadband and voice service to pockets of rural America where they are needed most is central to the FCC's 2011 reforms. Later this year, "price cap" carriers will be given the opportunity to accept Connect America Fund support in high cost areas based on detailed local cost estimates, calculated by a cost model. Incumbent carriers must choose to accept or decline the offer of support for all entire high-cost locations they serve in a given state; if they decline, the subsidies will be made available to other providers, awarded through a Phase II competitive bidding process." Why do the incumbent carriers get the right of first refusal for subsidies? They're the ones that haven't served their local population so it seems like they should be the *last* to be offered subsidies. Lee > Forward! On to the next windmill, Sancho! > -- > Requiescas in pace o email Two identifying characteristics > of System Administrators: > Ex turpi causa non oritur actio Infallibility, and the ability to > learn from their mistakes. > (Adapted from Stephen Pinker) >
