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: Sun Tzu who wrote (15612)	6/24/2006 1:18:20 AM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 46821

re: "By modifying the QoS, and playing with the time in transit, they can make it such that the quality is too poor for VoIP but ok for email. And that is what they are really after. Of course they are not coming out and saying it, rather they claim to be fighting for cheap prices for the consumers...now really, when was the last time a TelCo really cared about protecting the consumers?" I think you've succinctly described what the incumbents would truly like to see, but whether they'll be able to pull this off wihtout a hitch is doubtful, although I agree it remains to be seen. The higher the aggregate speeds of the high-speed Internet (HSI) access component of their bundled offerings, the tougher it will be for them to obliterate VoIP in a way that even this FCC would tolerate. I don't think anyone has an answer that makes sense where the rational pricing of future bandwidths, based on the present trajectory of escalating bandwidth requirements, is concerned. Except, of course, to throttle back on expectations once some unsurpassable tipping point (how's that for an oxymoron?) is reached. But oxymorons may be called for when the nature of the problem happens to be one of a conundrum, itself. And where throttling back is not necessary, perhaps we'll see the next increment shaping in yet a higher-tier of digital divide. One mistake I sense more of as time goes by is when folks confuse the marginal costs of producing higher bit rates on a single fiber path with the costs associated with administering that increased throughput on a global scale. One barely has anything to do with the other, when one set of costs is only marginal (say, on the last mile loop), while the other (say, the second mile section) is sensitive to increasing operating expenses. In other words, the bandwidth costs over leased lines between the ISP and the Internet (uptream and transit) don't scale proportional to the costs of the bandwidth that is available to users on the local loop.