Down the Tubes...
On Wednesday, November 16, 2005 at 02:00, Doc Searls, published an essay entitled "Saving the Net; How to keep the Carriers from flushing the Net Down the Tubes".
Doc is so far off base that I don't know where to start with my criticism -- let's try this bit from his third scenario:
>>To start we acknowledge the necessity of the transport metaphor; but also its insufficiency.<<
>>Of course, at its base level the Net is a system of pipes and packets. But it's not only packets, or "content" or anything for that matter. Understanding the Net only in transport terms is like understanding civilization in terms of electrical service or human beings only in terms of atoms and molecules. We miss the larger context.<<
>>That context is best understood as a place. When we speak of the Net as a "place" or a "space" or a "world" or a "commons" or a "market" with "locations" and "addresses" and "sites" that we "build", we are framing the Net as a place.<<
The transport metaphor is the proper one. The Net is a system for transporting packets, or "content", from one computer to another. That's all it is, plain and simple. Doc's comparison fails because civilization IS more than electrical service and human beings ARE more than atoms and molecules, while the Net is nothing more than a transportation system.
Doc can "build" as many "Alice-In-Wonderland" fantasies as he chooses and they will all fail because the fantasy will only appeal to a limited audience. Besides, Congress and the courts can see through fantasies just as well as you or I.
So let's talk about realities -- Each and every transport system that exists is made up of components that have been provided by some entity, and that entity has every right to be compensated reasonably for the use of their components. Obviously, the entity wants to maximize revenue and the user want to minimize costs -- and the balance is supposed to be controlled by the market, and it will be controlled by the market. The difficulty comes when various interests start using political power to manipulate the market.
Now, let me quote another paragraph from Doc Searls:
>>There's nothing wrong with being in the bandwidth business, of course. But some of these big boys want to go further with it. They don't see themselves as a public utility selling a pure base-level service, such as water or electricity (which is what they are, by the way, in respect to the Net). They see themselves as a source of many additional value-adds, inside the pipes. They see opportunities to sell solutions to industries that rely on the Net -- especially their natural partner, the content industry.<<
See -- Doc is objecting to the potential bundling of base-level services with additional value-adds, the selling of "solutions". Now, where have we heard that before?? Microsoft, of course, is the best example of using the technique of bundling to "rip-off" the general public and get away with it because of the lack of opposing political pressure.
Microsoft has set an example for the entire world -- we must expect others to follow suit. And, we must understand that the only workable solution must be political. If we want to change the system, then we must build the political muscle to oppose those that wish to manipulate the markets. Constructing fantasies WILL NOT WORK!!!!!
There are an awful lot of people running around in circles, painting all kinds of pictures and describing various scenarios, all in an attempt to persuade members of the public to get involved. We must understand that the public will only get involved if the cause is worthy, the cost reasonable and the time required is acceptable. Every body is busy these days, with all kinds of demands for their time, which simply means that those with causes must make it easier if they want support. Remember, very few people will respond to that "Tell your Congress person" suggestion because they know that it is a waste of time. The only real solution will turn out to be an organization like the National Rifle Association, NRA, or the American Association of Retired People, AARP -- a National Computer Association, Inc. NCAI, if you will. The Electronic Frontier Foundation, EFF, might be a start in that direction; however, some discussion on the subject is required.
However, selling the public is not the problem -- selling the problem solvers is the problem. Too many people with too many ideas -- all trying to sell each other on their individual ideas, me included.
Doug Skoglund - http://minimyway.blogspot.com - http://ifihadmyway.com
Please put a [MYWAY] in your subject line if you wish to contact me. (Or use my SAMail application)
Doc is so far off base that I don't know where to start with my criticism -- let's try this bit from his third scenario:
>>To start we acknowledge the necessity of the transport metaphor; but also its insufficiency.<<
>>Of course, at its base level the Net is a system of pipes and packets. But it's not only packets, or "content" or anything for that matter. Understanding the Net only in transport terms is like understanding civilization in terms of electrical service or human beings only in terms of atoms and molecules. We miss the larger context.<<
>>That context is best understood as a place. When we speak of the Net as a "place" or a "space" or a "world" or a "commons" or a "market" with "locations" and "addresses" and "sites" that we "build", we are framing the Net as a place.<<
The transport metaphor is the proper one. The Net is a system for transporting packets, or "content", from one computer to another. That's all it is, plain and simple. Doc's comparison fails because civilization IS more than electrical service and human beings ARE more than atoms and molecules, while the Net is nothing more than a transportation system.
Doc can "build" as many "Alice-In-Wonderland" fantasies as he chooses and they will all fail because the fantasy will only appeal to a limited audience. Besides, Congress and the courts can see through fantasies just as well as you or I.
So let's talk about realities -- Each and every transport system that exists is made up of components that have been provided by some entity, and that entity has every right to be compensated reasonably for the use of their components. Obviously, the entity wants to maximize revenue and the user want to minimize costs -- and the balance is supposed to be controlled by the market, and it will be controlled by the market. The difficulty comes when various interests start using political power to manipulate the market.
Now, let me quote another paragraph from Doc Searls:
>>There's nothing wrong with being in the bandwidth business, of course. But some of these big boys want to go further with it. They don't see themselves as a public utility selling a pure base-level service, such as water or electricity (which is what they are, by the way, in respect to the Net). They see themselves as a source of many additional value-adds, inside the pipes. They see opportunities to sell solutions to industries that rely on the Net -- especially their natural partner, the content industry.<<
See -- Doc is objecting to the potential bundling of base-level services with additional value-adds, the selling of "solutions". Now, where have we heard that before?? Microsoft, of course, is the best example of using the technique of bundling to "rip-off" the general public and get away with it because of the lack of opposing political pressure.
Microsoft has set an example for the entire world -- we must expect others to follow suit. And, we must understand that the only workable solution must be political. If we want to change the system, then we must build the political muscle to oppose those that wish to manipulate the markets. Constructing fantasies WILL NOT WORK!!!!!
There are an awful lot of people running around in circles, painting all kinds of pictures and describing various scenarios, all in an attempt to persuade members of the public to get involved. We must understand that the public will only get involved if the cause is worthy, the cost reasonable and the time required is acceptable. Every body is busy these days, with all kinds of demands for their time, which simply means that those with causes must make it easier if they want support. Remember, very few people will respond to that "Tell your Congress person" suggestion because they know that it is a waste of time. The only real solution will turn out to be an organization like the National Rifle Association, NRA, or the American Association of Retired People, AARP -- a National Computer Association, Inc. NCAI, if you will. The Electronic Frontier Foundation, EFF, might be a start in that direction; however, some discussion on the subject is required.
However, selling the public is not the problem -- selling the problem solvers is the problem. Too many people with too many ideas -- all trying to sell each other on their individual ideas, me included.
Doug Skoglund - http://minimyway.blogspot.com - http://ifihadmyway.com
Please put a [MYWAY] in your subject line if you wish to contact me. (Or use my SAMail application)
posted by Doug Skoglund at
10:11 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home