Section 8 - Powers of Congress
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
First the internet is not commerce between foreign Nations, and among the several States, or with the Indian Tribes. So that would only apply to multi-state ISPs, not all ISPs offer service in more than one state. There are literally dozens of local ISPs where I live. Since the backbones are national and international the feds could regulate them but it can't regulate local ISPs.
No, your explanatory skills are poor. You did not explain what you meant by It shouldn't. Those were all the words you used. GP however said electric company, phone service, and cable TV. Your "shouldn't" could be used for any one, a combination, or all of them.
I agree, ownership of infrastructure should be separated from ownership of service that it can provide.
We have competition for electric service because one companies maintains the grid, and the other companies with power plants feed power onto it.
That's true in California but it's not true everywhere, actually in the US CA is unusual as the state has regulations that separate ownership of generators and distributors.
Has it occurred to anyone else that treating "utilities" like utilities is what's caused water shortages and rolling brown-outs in CA?
No, your problem is you're NOT treating them like utilities. You're treating them like commodity brokers. Your brownouts and shortages are the result of underregulation, not overregulation
The problem with the CA rolling blackouts was not deregulation or under regulation, it was bad regulations. I just read of a myth in India that goes like this:
Villagers notice a body floating in a river and drag it out. Then more and more bodies are seen floating which are also taken out and buried. Eventually the villagers go to a village elder and ask how to fish all the bodies out. He tells them to stop fishing them out and walk upstream to see why people are dying.
Now let's apply this to CA's rolling blackouts. There are rolling blackouts, why? Because power distributors can not raise their prices because regulations say they can not. Regulations also separate power generators from distributors, businesses can not do both. So they are not able to buy power from generators to sell to end users. Why can't they buy power from generators? Because the generator have no regulations on how much they charge distributors for power.
Bad regulations caused CA's rolling blackouts not deregulation.
Meanwhile, unlike bandwidth, new technology will not magically wave more water into existence.
Smart use of water and technology can stretch water though. Irrigation as typically done in CA allows water to evaporate more than otherwise. Sprinkling and allowing large surface ares of water allows more to evaporate than using soaker hoses on the ground so water can seep down to the roots. Watering in the morning when it's cooler also decreases evaporation. The use of compost and munch also reduces water needs, as well as artificial fertilizers which themselves require a lot of water as well as petroleum. The problem with these techniques are that they are not so good on massive scales.
If you want to say you don't want government involvement, that's fine as an argument, but there's evidence that deregulation in California and abuse of this deregulation by Enron and other such companies had more to do with the situation
CA energy was not deregulated but you like so many other have fallen for the lie that the rolling blackouts in CA were caused by deregulation. Sure some regulations were dropped but others were added. See this post of mine.
If I recall correctly, there was also a situation where no power plants had been built in ages, so they had to import power from other states and growth in CA and the other states was a factor..
Did you also know that there was a wind farm in CA that sat idle when it could have generated megawatts of electricity?
Gaming of a deregulated energy system by crooked companies like Enron played a major part in those rolling brown-outs.
Except CA did not deregulate energy. Unfortunately many others think like you, that it was deregulated. Sure some regulations were dropped but others were added. First, generation and transmission were separated. The same company that generated energy could not also distribute it. Secondly while distributors had price controls, ie could not raise their prices, generators did not. Here's a paper from Stanford on California Electricity Deregulation[pdf].
Has it occurred to anyone else that treating "utilities" like utilities is what's caused water shortages and rolling brown-outs in CA?
Treating utilities as utilities isn't what caused the roll blackouts in CA. Neither did deregulation. CA electric companies were not deregulated, instead some regulations were dropped and others added. One such regulation was that power generators could not distribute power, ie generation and transmission were separated. Another regulation added was that power distributors could not raise their prices, ie there were price controls. But generators were allowed to and when a transmitter has to pay more but can't charge more to cover their costs then they can't stay in business long.
Nor were they about a shortage of generation capacity, during the blackouts there was a wind farm capable of generating megawatts of power that sat idle. Why did it sit idle? Because no body would erect the cable transmission lines.
Consider that ALL other forms of communications (radio, television, telephone) are regulated by federal entities. ISPs have been getting a free pass up to this point.
One question, where is the power to regulate ISPs given to the federal government by the Constitution of the USA? Or for that matter radio, TV, or telephone?
Why not? They already sort of have government granted monopolies of certain areas of the country, there's very little competition, etc. Regulation would be the key to prevent a company from taking advantage of these situations to adversely hinder a user's right to consume what they have paid for.
It does not make sense, what does make sense would be to get rid of the monopolies and encourage competition.
Utilities have maximum rates too, which is why electricity is cheaper at night
Utilities may charge different rates depending on when electricity is used where you are but they don't everywhere. Where I live there's only one rate, $.10 per KWH if I recall right.
The electric company doesn't provide communications. I had carte blanche phone service all my life until I switched to a cell phone, and now I have it again - $50 per month, no minutes, free voicemail, free texting, free internet (Boost Mobile). I don't have to pay by the minute to watch cable TV. Why should internet service be any different?
It shouldn't.
It shouldn't what? The electric company shouldn't communicate energy usage? If people could see in realtime what their energy consumption is then they would know where and how they could reduce the energy used. Those who go Off the Grid use meters that show their usage patterns. Some electric companies offer monitoring services where they can turn off a heavy energy using appliance, like air conditioners, during high demands. In return the customer receives a cut in prices.
No they should not be regulated as a utility. Instead what we need is to foster competition. And a duopoly is not competition. Add fiber and wireless then you may have competition.
They work full-time jobs, and in some cases have families, and yet they pull down more than they could ever watch or really listen to. I guess I don't understand downloading just to download.
If they're downloading movies, music, or TV shows and they're single I can't see downloading that much but if it's a family I can see it. Of course I'd rather see families spend more tyme together doing activities indoors and outdoors after homework away from computers and TVs.
I'm torn on this one, I hate regulations. But at the same time many of those providers who are putting caps in place *sold* their service as unlimited and I believe they should be forced to honor the original agreement.
Regulations are not needed what is needed is the enforcement of contracts. When I signed up for my cable access the only limit in the contract I signed was that I was not allowed to run a web server on the connection. There was no limit on bandwidth used though it did say the speed was guarantied but would be up to, I don't recall, so they could conceivably throttle my speed. However if I ever have a problem, I'm lucky in that not only is cable available here but I can also get DSL.
What sounds like a great idea is to make the broadband ISPs pay back the hundreds of billions of taxpayers dollars they were given. That money can then be loaned, not given, to entities that will build the broadband infrastructure.
Look, I'm a conservative and all, but Kennedy had some things dead on. Like this:
"Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty.
Except the typical American is not willing to do much the assure liberty. Otherwise more of them would have raised their voices over the PATRIOT Act and the telecos working with the NSA to monitor phone calls, among other things.
Oh, and what do you mean by conservative? I am proudly a liberal, I believe in liberty and small government.
The traditional media have struggled to cover this, and there has been a lot of criticism of outlets such as CNN for not being on the ball.
CNN itself has said a lot of their reporting comes from Twitter and CNN's own iReport service. International journalists are warned away from going to demonstrations by the government, I don't know how many tymes I heard it said that the government could not guaranty reporters safety, but it's been a lot. I know it may sound spineless of reporters to not report but if you're dead you can't. I would hope that those who can blend into the crowds.
Slashdot Mirror
Section 8 - Powers of Congress
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
First the internet is not commerce between foreign Nations, and among the several States, or with the Indian Tribes. So that would only apply to multi-state ISPs, not all ISPs offer service in more than one state. There are literally dozens of local ISPs where I live. Since the backbones are national and international the feds could regulate them but it can't regulate local ISPs.
Falcon
No, your explanatory skills are poor. You did not explain what you meant by It shouldn't. Those were all the words you used. GP however said electric company, phone service, and cable TV. Your "shouldn't" could be used for any one, a combination, or all of them.
Falcon
service.
I agree, ownership of infrastructure should be separated from ownership of service that it can provide.
We have competition for electric service because one companies maintains the grid, and the other companies with power plants feed power onto it.
That's true in California but it's not true everywhere, actually in the US CA is unusual as the state has regulations that separate ownership of generators and distributors.
Falcon
Ah, only if there were more reporters like Edward R. Murrow. I wonder if we'll ever see another reporter like him.
"Good night, and good luck."
Falcon
Actually, we didn't have rolling brownouts until the Republicans got to "de-regulate" the market. I was there and I saw it happen.
See this post. Power was not deregulated.
Falcon
Has it occurred to anyone else that treating "utilities" like utilities is what's caused water shortages and rolling brown-outs in CA?
No, your problem is you're NOT treating them like utilities. You're treating them like commodity brokers. Your brownouts and shortages are the result of underregulation, not overregulation
The problem with the CA rolling blackouts was not deregulation or under regulation, it was bad regulations. I just read of a myth in India that goes like this:
Villagers notice a body floating in a river and drag it out. Then more and more bodies are seen floating which are also taken out and buried. Eventually the villagers go to a village elder and ask how to fish all the bodies out. He tells them to stop fishing them out and walk upstream to see why people are dying.
Now let's apply this to CA's rolling blackouts. There are rolling blackouts, why? Because power distributors can not raise their prices because regulations say they can not. Regulations also separate power generators from distributors, businesses can not do both. So they are not able to buy power from generators to sell to end users. Why can't they buy power from generators? Because the generator have no regulations on how much they charge distributors for power.
Bad regulations caused CA's rolling blackouts not deregulation.
Falcon
Meanwhile, unlike bandwidth, new technology will not magically wave more water into existence.
Smart use of water and technology can stretch water though. Irrigation as typically done in CA allows water to evaporate more than otherwise. Sprinkling and allowing large surface ares of water allows more to evaporate than using soaker hoses on the ground so water can seep down to the roots. Watering in the morning when it's cooler also decreases evaporation. The use of compost and munch also reduces water needs, as well as artificial fertilizers which themselves require a lot of water as well as petroleum. The problem with these techniques are that they are not so good on massive scales.
Falcon
If you want to say you don't want government involvement, that's fine as an argument, but there's evidence that deregulation in California and abuse of this deregulation by Enron and other such companies had more to do with the situation
CA energy was not deregulated but you like so many other have fallen for the lie that the rolling blackouts in CA were caused by deregulation. Sure some regulations were dropped but others were added. See this post of mine.
Falcon
If I recall correctly, there was also a situation where no power plants had been built in ages, so they had to import power from other states and growth in CA and the other states was a factor..
Did you also know that there was a wind farm in CA that sat idle when it could have generated megawatts of electricity?
Falcon
Gaming of a deregulated energy system by crooked companies like Enron played a major part in those rolling brown-outs.
Except CA did not deregulate energy. Unfortunately many others think like you, that it was deregulated. Sure some regulations were dropped but others were added. First, generation and transmission were separated. The same company that generated energy could not also distribute it. Secondly while distributors had price controls, ie could not raise their prices, generators did not. Here's a paper from Stanford on California Electricity Deregulation[pdf].
Falcon
Has it occurred to anyone else that treating "utilities" like utilities is what's caused water shortages and rolling brown-outs in CA?
Treating utilities as utilities isn't what caused the roll blackouts in CA. Neither did deregulation. CA electric companies were not deregulated, instead some regulations were dropped and others added. One such regulation was that power generators could not distribute power, ie generation and transmission were separated. Another regulation added was that power distributors could not raise their prices, ie there were price controls. But generators were allowed to and when a transmitter has to pay more but can't charge more to cover their costs then they can't stay in business long.
Nor were they about a shortage of generation capacity, during the blackouts there was a wind farm capable of generating megawatts of power that sat idle. Why did it sit idle? Because no body would erect the cable transmission lines.
Falcon
Consider that ALL other forms of communications (radio, television, telephone) are regulated by federal entities. ISPs have been getting a free pass up to this point.
One question, where is the power to regulate ISPs given to the federal government by the Constitution of the USA? Or for that matter radio, TV, or telephone?
Falcon
There always will be. The difference is that, with regulation, there is a loophole somewhere. With deregulation, there are loopholes everywhere.
With deregulation there are no loopholes, there are only loopholes when there are regulations.
Falcon
Why not? They already sort of have government granted monopolies of certain areas of the country, there's very little competition, etc. Regulation would be the key to prevent a company from taking advantage of these situations to adversely hinder a user's right to consume what they have paid for.
It does not make sense, what does make sense would be to get rid of the monopolies and encourage competition.
Falcon
Utilities have maximum rates too, which is why electricity is cheaper at night
Utilities may charge different rates depending on when electricity is used where you are but they don't everywhere. Where I live there's only one rate, $.10 per KWH if I recall right.
Falcon
The electric company doesn't provide communications. I had carte blanche phone service all my life until I switched to a cell phone, and now I have it again - $50 per month, no minutes, free voicemail, free texting, free internet (Boost Mobile). I don't have to pay by the minute to watch cable TV. Why should internet service be any different?
It shouldn't.
It shouldn't what? The electric company shouldn't communicate energy usage? If people could see in realtime what their energy consumption is then they would know where and how they could reduce the energy used. Those who go Off the Grid use meters that show their usage patterns. Some electric companies offer monitoring services where they can turn off a heavy energy using appliance, like air conditioners, during high demands. In return the customer receives a cut in prices.
Falcon
as they should, that'll be possible
No they should not be regulated as a utility. Instead what we need is to foster competition. And a duopoly is not competition. Add fiber and wireless then you may have competition.
Falcon
They work full-time jobs, and in some cases have families, and yet they pull down more than they could ever watch or really listen to. I guess I don't understand downloading just to download.
If they're downloading movies, music, or TV shows and they're single I can't see downloading that much but if it's a family I can see it. Of course I'd rather see families spend more tyme together doing activities indoors and outdoors after homework away from computers and TVs.
Falcon
I'm torn on this one, I hate regulations. But at the same time many of those providers who are putting caps in place *sold* their service as unlimited and I believe they should be forced to honor the original agreement.
Regulations are not needed what is needed is the enforcement of contracts. When I signed up for my cable access the only limit in the contract I signed was that I was not allowed to run a web server on the connection. There was no limit on bandwidth used though it did say the speed was guarantied but would be up to, I don't recall, so they could conceivably throttle my speed. However if I ever have a problem, I'm lucky in that not only is cable available here but I can also get DSL.
Falcon
sounds like an excellent idea.
sounds like a bad idea!
What sounds like a great idea is to make the broadband ISPs pay back the hundreds of billions of taxpayers dollars they were given. That money can then be loaned, not given, to entities that will build the broadband infrastructure.
Fslcon
it was the United States of America and San Francisco?
No, it'd be California, the 8th largest economy in the world, or New Hampshire. Libertarians chose the state for the Free State Project.
Falcon
Look, I'm a conservative and all, but Kennedy had some things dead on. Like this:
"Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty.
Except the typical American is not willing to do much the assure liberty. Otherwise more of them would have raised their voices over the PATRIOT Act and the telecos working with the NSA to monitor phone calls, among other things.
Oh, and what do you mean by conservative? I am proudly a liberal, I believe in liberty and small government.
Falcon
Rat, is that you?
Falcon
Darn, where did I put that unobtainium?
The traditional media have struggled to cover this, and there has been a lot of criticism of outlets such as CNN for not being on the ball.
CNN itself has said a lot of their reporting comes from Twitter and CNN's own iReport service. International journalists are warned away from going to demonstrations by the government, I don't know how many tymes I heard it said that the government could not guaranty reporters safety, but it's been a lot. I know it may sound spineless of reporters to not report but if you're dead you can't. I would hope that those who can blend into the crowds.
Falcon
I seem to recall there being some buzz in the independent media about Georgia invading South Ossetia
South Ossetia was part of Georgia. Many residents being Russian, they wanted to break away from Georgia.
Falcon