Blown To Bits

Archive for the ‘The role of government—laws and regulations’ Category

End of the Internet?

Sunday, June 8th, 2008 by Harry Lewis
With get buy alternatives store wearable devices, individuals wear one as a bracelet, necklace, or buy cheap ampicillin pendant, and these devices can detect when the wearer has discount buy fallen or is unresponsive. When someone wearing the necklace presses buy cheap glucophage online the emergency button, it sends their location to a caregiver prozac without prescription or family member and also sends a text with their buying generic buy GPS coordinates to them. People can wear medical alert systems cialis online review on the wrist or around the neck, carry one in buy atrovent once daily a pocket, or install it in the home and activate buy atrovent without prescription it with voice commands. A person cannot have an FSA information no cheapest prescription buy cheap and an HSA unless they have a Limited Expense Health cialis sale Care Account FSA (LEX HCFSA). One advantage is that the glyburide for order full amount of money set aside is available on the generic buy withdrawal first day the FSA becomes active. People should ask their viagra discount employer what will happen to any unused FSA money at the.

This site claims to have inside information from Internet Service Providers (ISPs) that they are planning to go to the Cable TV model for the Web — basic service buys access to a list of web sites they stipulate, but if you want to wander off that territory, you’d have to pay them extra. $19.95 to get to Google, say, but $29.95 if you want access the New York Times web site (for which the New York Times itself charges nothing). That would be the end of the Internet as we know it, where anyone can put information up on a site and anyone else, for nothing more than their base ISP connection fee, can go see it.

“Net neutrality” is an important basic principle. I like to think of Internet connectivity as the US thought about rural electrification in the last century — something that might not be cost-efficient for private providers in the short run, but would yield enormous social and economic benefits to the US in the long run. If this report is true, imagine a world in which the electric company might supply you with electricity so you could run stoves and refrigerators on its approved list, but would charge you extra if you plugged in an appliance not approved by the electric company itself.

This is a complicated topic, but the fundamental problem is that there are not enough competing suppliers of Internet services. A quarter of the US still has only dialup; half has two suppliers, usually cable and telephone DSL; and a quarter has only one. The percentage of US households that have more than two choices for broadband connectivity is negligible. Under such conditions, the suppliers can contemplate tiered pricing schemes, which make absolutely no sense in terms of resources required — it costs no more to deliver packets from a billion different sources than from only one.

More on the Lori Drew case

Tuesday, May 20th, 2008 by Harry Lewis

I wrote a few days ago about the overreaching federal prosecution in this sad case. Blogger Susan Crawford has a good explanation today of just how great the stretch is, and how far the same principle could be taken by ambitious prosecutors to criminalize speech acts never meant to be prohibited by any existing law.