[BC] Here it comes....

[Kirk Harnack]

Dana wrote:

> Today, Comcast threatened to block all Internet traffic from ISP Level 3,
> unless Level 3 pays them a huge fee for the increased bandwidth from their
> now
> carrying Netflix traffic. In simpler terms, I buy Internet from Comcast
> for a
> monthly fee. I also am a member of Netflix. NOW Comcast wants to tell me I
> can't use Netflix unless Netflix gives them a mil or so a month-just
> because.
> And who will wind up paying the mil or so?  ME and other Netflix
> subscribers.
> The way I see it, as long as my usage remains under the 250 gB cap that
> Comcrap has me on, it should be none of their business what I do with said
> bandwidth!
> 
> NOW do you see why net Neutrality is SO important?

Dana,

Thought experiment...

Suppose you were the expert at repairing Orbans and I was the expert at
repairing Omnias.  And you and I are both contract engineers.  It turns out,
over time, that I send you 1 Orban per week to repair and you send me one
Omnia per week to repair.  Over time we discover that it's just about an
even deal, so we quit billing each other for services rendered.  

Then, I start sending you 3 Orbans per week and you're still sending one
Omnia to me for repair.  After a few weeks you're feeling a little put-upon
and your start billing me for repairing 2 of the Orban repairs every week.

Now tell me how the Orban/Omnia repair disparity is any different than
Level3 and Comcast?  Level3 gets the Netflix CDN deal and they start sending
3x more data to Comcast.  Comcast isn't sending any more data to Level3 than
they were before.  

Infrastructure isn't unlimited, and it isn't free.   What's Comcast supposed
to do, lay there and take it?

How does Net Neutrality change the cost picture that eventually you must
bear to get the service you want?  If NN forces Comcast to drop packets
equally, you won't be happy with your movie.  If NN forces Comcast to
upgrade further to handle your movies, then someone has to pay for that
upgraded infrastructure.  

Has Comcast acted in bad faith in the past?  Sure.  Of course they have.
They do some things that seem downright evil - or horribly incompetent. Like
any other company with a payroll to meet and debt to service, they look for
ways to sell more stuff and make more money.  Sometimes they get it really
wrong.  So do restaurants, airlines, public schools and even the donut shop.
Gov't gets it so wrong we end up replacing a bunch of them every few years.

Best way to keep Comcast, Level3, Verizon, and all the rest honest and
competitive is to have real competition.  Lower the onerous cost of entry by
reducing - not increasing - the legal obstacles to creating competition.
Remember, only government can create a monopoly.  

Contrast with, say, the shoe industry.  Relatively low barrier to entry.
Few gov't regulations.  HUGE selection of shoes, boots, sneakers.  Huge
choice of "carriers" from Wal-Mart to Macy's to Shoe Carnival to your
nearest street corner or abandoned gas station.  Nobody complains about a
lack of selection in the shoe trade and no reason to complain about prices,
either.  Competition, baby.  And the gov't doesn't get in the way of it too
much.

Net Neutrality?  You're gonna love it just like your regulated wired phone
service.  

Kirk