Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : The *NEW* Frank Coluccio Technology Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: axial who wrote (14754)	4/24/2006 12:55:25 AM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 46821

Hi Jim, I happen to agree with the following: "But there have been a few surprises. One of them was a study which concluded that in the United States, simple advocacy was unlikely to be either persuasive or effective in changing the status quo." What study was that? Could you cite it for us? FAC

To: axial who wrote (14754)	4/26/2006 12:34:30 AM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 46821

Jim, re: Blundell's article, which you read and commented on upstream (the uplinked post), I thought you'd be interested in reading some commentary from the Cook Report list. The following comes from Bob Frankston, who has given his permission to repost it here: -- I don't know anything about the IEA but looking at www.iea.org.uk < iea.org.uk > it may be John Blundell by himself. I agree with at least some of what it says but am cautious about extrapolating too far. At least it's not calling for the kind of blind deregulation I've seen from well-meaning think-free tanks here. "free" meaning without thought beyond doctrine. That said, I see this as part of a larger trend and, if anything, I'm becoming more convinced that the carriers will be gone within two years. I've had a number of conversations in the last few days. Most were discouraging with people who were amazingly clueless despite their technical savvy but I find it increasingly easy to answer the hard question of "where's the money". The ABC/NBC announcements represent a fundamental shift in the balance of power and, as this article shows, there is an increasing perception that the regulatory regimen is not just flawed but a completely and utter scam. That's not the majority view yet but the din of net neutrality is a sign of growing hostility towards the carriers. Again, the majority is still completely enthralled at the baubles from the cellular companies - it's as if John D Rockefeller were throwing out dimes and he really came across as the source of wealth for the masses. The carriers have no possible strategy for ever making money without holding the economies hostage in a way that would make Bernie Ebbers and the Enron cabal far more embarrassed than they are now. What is missing is an alternative model but the Business Times article may be a sign of awareness that there is an answer. A doomed industry without an alternative is kept alive even if it costs us the economy. A doomed industry with an alternative that is no worse and may be far far better is going to meet a swift and sure end. In the near term there is value in helping people see what is already obvious. Longer term I am thinking about protocols and the post-carrier world. What I don't plan to do is participate in discussions about which buggy whips are appropriate for controlling the flow of fuel through the carburetor according to the regulations that govern such things. OK, I'll probably do a little slumming but such discussions have about as much technical significance as the fine points of distinguishing between low-brow and high-brow diagnoses in phrenology. Alas, they still have political significance and better to cite them for foolishness than give them credibility.