Frazzled supports Obama's Evilz Internetz Power Grabb

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**whembly**

dogma wrote:
whembly wrote:

Here's a great image...

I find that a bit disingenuous, because I don't know how anyone who thinks about how companies like Google interface with ISPs could arrive at the first conclusion.

Erm... what?

whembly wrote:

What we really be doing is looking for ways we can increase competition among ISPs & companies providing Peering / Content Delivery arraignments.

Peering and CDNs by their very nature benefit ISPs with established, regional monopolies (or near monopolies) by enabling them to force companies like Google to partner with them exclusively if they want to generate the maximum amount of revenue from programs like AdSense. This makes it much more difficult for service providers without an established infrastructure in the region to move into that region.

I guess you might be able to bust ISP monopolies, but that still leaves peering and CDNs to restrict competition when the newly founded corporations, which were formerly elements of a single corporation, work to reach those agreements.

It ain't pretty, I'll give you that.

I'd still say the issue is primarily ISP who also owns "contents" (looking at Comcast/Verizon)... that's an obvious conflict of interest to me.

**dogma**

whembly wrote:

Erm... what?

I don't know anyone who has thought about the way Google interfaces with an ISP that arrived at conclusion 1, even my ~60 year old mother knows better. I would say people who don't think about the relevant matter are the ones who arrive at conclusion 1, because it is easily sold.

whembly wrote:

I'd still say the issue is primarily ISP who also owns "contents" (looking at Comcast/Verizon)... that's an obvious conflict of interest to me.

Agreed. But if you want to increase competition between ISPs you still need to work against peering and CDNs.