>>Done properly, it will be less costly to provide, but it is not going to be free in its higher quality forms (read: where commercial grade expectations are ultimately satisfied, and where true public-net
convergence with other m-m apps are concerned).<<
Frank (C),
This is material for a thesis.... I will attempt to make it short... ha, ha, ha... (I have to because I would like to go play some golf!) Sorry, it will be a long post, but you generated it by pushing the right combination, so here it goes:
In your own statements of the post you make reference to in QWST thread, (if I understood it correctly), you are somehow "conceding" that the "link" that the ISP's necessary connection to the Net via the local regular telephone networks is what exposes them to a "regulatory" scenario (fee or otherwise).
Otherwise, if no such link were to exist, how can one make the case for a fee? A whole new "regulatory" agency that would have "jurisdiction" over VoIP... I doubt it.
I general, I agree with the above quoted statement, and the entire post as you wrote it as well.
You could say that the above is the "conventional wisdom", the way "cool and smart minds view the world given past history".
However, (yes there is a "but"), I am not stranger to "unusual and unexpected events, sometimes it surprises me, (modesty aside), how I have been able to "see" certain events that were "too radical" to even consider.
As an example, (one I am most proud of), some time ago, I told friends and foes that the Latin American loans would explode in the face of all those MBA bankers (primarily Americans, but there were also some Europeans and Japanese too), that granted them, as if money grew on trees, to a bunch of wild (and powerful), Tequila bred, Latin American politicos, corrupt as they come. Some of them educated in the London School of Economics.... That made them even more dangerous.
These bankers were about to learn what they never learned in graduate school.
And that was, that the business ethic principles in America and in Latin America, are indeed "a world apart". Not to be sarcastic, but since then, both sides have gotten closer to each other, by the degradation, (in some cases), and increased wisdom (in most), of one side, and the slight improvement of the other, but that is a whole different story of its own...
Particularly, this situation was, more acute in Mexico because a strange "alignment of the planets", given numerous circumstances that affected the entire picture.
Namely, the "recent" (1975/76) "discovery" of oil reserves, that made Mexico from being a net importer of oil to a net exporter (fifth largest or so) of the same... The end of the presidency of a "younger" (leftist) president, (all mighty Luis Echeverr¡a), who brought in as "aides" an entire "squadron" of young Mavericks (and incredibly radical, power hungry, not to mention MONEY hungry, and of course, corrupt enough to "re-define" what you would be allowed to do under the then, existing definition of corruption...) The next president, (Lopez-Portillo), made it even worse, but the stage was set by Mr. Echeverr¡a.
Without the lengthy detail, (as it is not the main subject of this discussion), a good portion of the money that was lent out, ended up in many and substantial cases, to "adorn" the mansions of the well positioned leader, with luxury, once described to me by an architect doing some work in one of this mansions, that (I quote), "the Queen of England could not afford"....
By the way, such functionary, last I checked, now resides in a Los Angeles Jail, since he was caught as the leader, (amongst other things), of a sophisticated, stolen luxury car band of thugs. They would steal them in the US, and then "sold" them in Mexico, under the protection of the Mexican Police Department.
Why you may ask? simple, he was also the very all mighty Supremo of the same Police Department..... A comforting, cozy, and fuzzy thought, would you not agree?
Let's not forget, that it was about the time that the words "petro-dollar", "petro-bonos", and oil embargo, became "household". Here Mexico was a "windfall beneficiary", as the embargo was the deed of others. Nevertheless, it all helped to make the situation even more volatile. (As in more money available).
I mean, all of a sudden we had Latin American oil secretaries, elevated to the ranks of "Oil Sheiks"... Surely you can imagine what happens if a scorpion, all of a sudden, grew wings?. I thought so.
The ensuing disaster, (that to this day, has kept Latin America in the basement of economic progress), was somehow crystal clear, (at least to me). I discussed this with friends. I told them that not only there was going to be a massive devaluation, (after 22 years of stability), but the only way the Mexican government was going to stop the bleeding, would be by nationalization of the banking industry...
Of course, they did not believe me, Latin America was in the middle of a boom, "with no end in sight", They were the "darling of the ever wise American bankers, "Latin America would emerge from their economic sleep, and never be under the Yanqui boot ever again"...
Yea right... They label me as a radical, (even communist, now where have I heard that before? I wonder...), short sighted, you name it.
Well, I got the last laugh... and let me be clear, I do not agree, nor will ever agree to government control of anything.
Mr. L¢pez Portillo made my day, by nationalizing the banking industry in Old Mexico in September 1st 1982. After a "famous" (infamous) speech, describing how Mr. Portillo, in his own mind, "fought like a rabid dog" against the decision to devalue and nationalization. Surely, such dog, must have lost its teeth long before the fight.
However, the point is here, that one needs to observe the market always, as it always tells you what will happen, it is the MIRROR of human behavior. In addition, one must learn to "read between the lines".
To their credit, the American Banker learned quickly, but it was close, if you do not believe me, ask Citicorp, at $6.00 a share or so.
Quite a difference today eh?
I still have faith in human ingenuity, and engineers, I believe they will prevail over the Beavis and Butthead crowd. What worries me is the numbers, that is, the growth ratio between engineers over Beavises and Buttheads, it is getting a little off the ideal, meaning, yes we need the idiots to profit from, but the growth ratio is way off.
We need more engineers, less "mentally challenged", to be kind...
Save the flames, now, all you social workers out there, I am simply "telling it as I see it".
Indeed, the Employment Agency we have, operating under the fallacious name of The Education Department, is not producing what it is supposed to.... Again, this is a different subject, though somehow related.
I do not advocate the doom and gloom scenario either, I do not believe in "building your bomb bunker", stash away gold, and go hide, as the entire financial structure collapses. Are you listening Mr. Kasinsky? (Spl.)
In fact, my opinion of gold is this: "Gold is the currency of the barbarians". Gold as a reserve currency (or store of value) is dead, and the Central Bankers know it, they simply are not telling. They are selling.
This is were Ayn Rand and I part company, (then in fairness Ayn Rand lived in a different time). However, the rest of the Randian followers still believe that a currency must be backed by gold... I say, WRONG.
Now, you ask, what the hell does the above rubbish have to do with VoIP? Answer = technically nothing, but, we are also taking "futurism" here, we are trying to predict how events will turn out.
This is where the connection is. "Vision of the Future".
The question is: How will humans behave in the face of radically new environment?
Translation = Will the FCC (the government), be successful in imposing their regular and customary, "thieving fee"? and, Will the populi, ("We the people"), accept this continuos government ("authorized"), leaching theft, without protest, or counteraction?
The, (all mighty), market will determine that. How?
Radically new environment? Yes the new technology, affecting us in every single way we live our lives, I do not have to go into detail here, better prepared people have already express it.
We are into the Third Wave as Alvin Toffler has already said:
I quote: Chapter 27, Page 392 of Mr. ALvin Toffler's book:
"The Third Wave" 1980.
------------------"The Political Mausoleum"---------------copy starts
"It is impossible to be simultaneously blasted by a revolution in energy, a revolution in technology, a revolution in family life, a revolution in sexual roles, and a world wide revolution in communications without facing ----sooner or later --- a potentially explosive political revolution.
All the political parties of the Industrial World (Second Wave World), all of our congresses, parliaments, and supreme soviets, our presidencies, and our prime ministerships, our courts and our regulatory agencies, and our layer upon our geological layer of government bureaucracy --- in short, all the tools we use to make and enforce collective decisions --- are obsolete and about to be transformed. A Third Wave civilization, can not operate with a Second Wave political structure...
Just as the revolutionaries who created the Industrial Age could not govern with the leftover apparatus of feudalism, so today we are faced once more with the need to invent new political tools. This is the political message of the Third Wave.
-----------------------copy ends-----------------------------------
It gets even better, but... later, as golf tee off time gets closer..
I know of at least a group of well funded individuals that are making a strong and careful attempt to create an environment very similar to what Ayn Rand had in mind. I have no idea if they will succeed, but they surely are making a good effort. Technollogy, (and a little madness), is making it possible.
As to their madness, well is in't it what it takes?...
The point is that in the US we have a population of 260 million people or so. Last time I checked, the world is well over 5 billion, so the US population represents a mere 5% of the total. Now add another say 15% for the populations of Western Europe, and Selected areas of Asia, Latin America, and Africa. (Gross numbers).
Consider the following:
We have discussed, and accepted that the Internet and high tech in general, is indeed opening the world to an integrated economy, a "single economy" etc. providing (and converting) consumers with wealth never available to many.
The fact that the FCC, SEC, IRS, FAA, and you name it federal agency, have been established to control, regulate, steal, etc. etc. etc. the population of this country, which roughly represents ONLY 5% of the whole pie.
The fact that such technology and access to the Internet, is allowing many things to take place, creating entire new industries that did not exist two years ago, etc. etc.
The fact that "electronic trading" in any stock market in the world, from anywhere in the world is rapidly becoming a reality.
All those things and more have already changed how we do things.
Now, what will happen when say, pick any number, 35%, 45% or more of the world population will have the same access to information and technology the same way as in the US, Western Europe and selected areas of Asia, Latin America and Africa.
Are we going to continue to do things the same way?
Don't you think, there is a market out there, so the Bill Gates of the world, invest 500 million dollars, or whatever it will take, to build a WHOLE NEW NETWORK, (Teledesic, Iridium etc.). I mean, after all, Mr. Gates is worth (of what is recorded), 52 Billion $.
Now then, what is a mere 1/2 billion of that? Does it reach 1 % ? Oh well...
What about the political structure of "things", Might it be possible that the view of the "power of the people", may, somehow "influence" "political thinking" (not to mention actions), once the people have access to real information, indeed to the ability of networking amongst themselves?
I mean, look at what is happening right here in SI, what is its membership today? Was this possible three years ago, what do you thing is going to happen to the penny stock market? Will it become an important source of financing to small companies, with an audience that is eager to invest and be informed?
And yes, dare I say it, What is the possibility of the SEC capable of "controlling" (and regulating), the non-existent "hype" (and opportunity of fraud), that DOES NOT take place in some of these threads?
As to the politicians?
Let me put it in the words of Henry Louis Mencken (1880-1956) U. S. Editor and Critic.
"The typical lawmaker of today is a man devoid of principle--a mere
counter in a grotesque and knavish game. If the right pressure could
be applied to him he would be cheerfully in favor of polygamy,
astrology, or cannibalism".
-- [Quoted in Galt, John (pseud.) _Dreams Come Due_. Reviewed in the Laissez Faire Books catalog, May 1990, p. 17.]
I do not believe the above paragraph needs to change, when you apply it to today's politicos.
So, Frank "C", you may ask, after reading all my bladerdblah above:
Bottom line, what is my point and view as to the FCC succeeding in imposing a fee to VoIP?
Answer = short term, I doubt it, but they will sure try, and they may succeed, I will bet on the side of NO.
Answer = Long term, not a chance! Do you remember the Soviet Union? it went the way of the dinosaur, lovely is it not?, I mean this!
Unless governments view their subjects as clients (and treat them accordingly), they are in for a rough ride.
I hope the above did not put you to zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
Long lives Laissez Faire Capitalism.
Z.
O.K. Assignment completed, I go golf now.... |
