 LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | Android is multi-vendor and multi-carrier tool Trying to claim that Android is the glue that turns Google & Verizon in to some illegal cartel is straining credulity. Android is used on dozens of smartphones from many vendors and is also used on all of Verizon's competitors systems. Google has no reason to favor Verizon over any of Verizon's Android using competitors. But what they do have in common is a desire to limit an overreaching government in order to protect an Internet that has and will do better without government intervention. And what they also have in common are large well funded lobbying arms that will be much more effective in protecting the Internet if they coordinate their message and don't work at cross-purposes.
--
Are you happy with your rep in Washington, DC? |
|
Host:
Time Warner Intern..
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
2 edits | Trying to claim that Android is the glue that turns Google & Verizon in to some illegal cartel is straining credulity. Nobody said this, or even used the phrase "illegal cartel," except you. Trying to ensure no neutrality rules apply to wireless is very clearly about protecting future Android revenues, and sure -- Android's on multiple carriers -- and AT&T also doesn't want any neutrality rules applied to wireless.But what they do have in common is a desire to limit an overreaching government in order to protect an Internet that has and will do better without government intervention. Yes, my free marketeer friend, we've heard this song before. Except that companies like Verizon literally write many of our telecom laws to protect their monopoly and duopoly status, so this "government is inherently dysfunctional" while "industry simply wants no regulation" meme is not only dead wrong, it's tired. |
|
 tiger72SexaT duorPPremium
join:2001-03-28
Saint Louis, MO
kudos:1
3 edits | reply to Linklist
I too fail to see why Karl continues to push Android as the root of all evil. While it's well known that Karl's love for AllThingsApple clouds his judgement with regards to Apple's primary mobile competitor, it's a stretch to assume Android's the evil impetus suddenly driving this network neutrality sham that Verizon and Google are pushing.
In other words: Karl, when trying to trash Android, use a more believable argument. Kthx.
As for the Verizon/Google proposal - I believe that if it somehow was only good for Verizon and/or Google, we'll very soon hear from Time Warner, Comcast, ATT, Sprint, T-Mobile, coming out for and against the proposal for any number of reasons. ATT has no desire to see Google *OR* Verizon succeed, so i am waiting with bated breath to see what their response to this is. And wireline broadband no doubt sees wireless as competition and would likely also fight to ensure that no specific method of internet access gets preferential treatment.
I believe that it's not nearly as consumer friendly as they say, but I hope to see a *reasonable* response from the FCC or consumer groups which takes economic needs into account.
Unfortunately so far i've only seen full-on-liberal approaches (ie the internet should be controlled by the government to somehow maintain its status as a neutral communications medium) or full on pro-business (ie Verizon, Comcast, and Google should be able to provide a second, private internet for high-wealth customers, and a low-end internet for the rest of us).
I'd love to see an approach which works for both...
--
"What makes us omniscient? Have we a record of omniscience? ...If we can't persuade nations with comparable values of the merit of our cause, we'd better reexamine our reasoning."
-United States Secretary of Defense (1961-1968) Robert S. McNamara |
|
|
|
Host:
Time Warner Intern..
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
1 edit | I too fail to see what connection Karl found to Android. While it's well known that Karl's love for AllThingsApple clouds his judgement Sigh. I criticize Apple constantly. Your comment is silly.ATT has no desire to see Google *OR* Verizon succeed, so i am waiting with bated breath to see what their response to this is. As noted, AT&T doesn't want neutrality rules on wireless for the same reasons. Their only public response so far:"We remain committed to achieving a consensus solution to the Net neutrality issue, either with the FCC or with the Congress. In that sense, the Verizon-Google agreement demonstrates that it is possible to bridge differences on this issue." |
|
 funchordsHelloPremium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:6
1 edit | reply to Linklist
said by Linklist:Trying to claim that Android is the glue that turns Google & Verizon in to some illegal cartel is straining credulity. But you must either refer to this as Verizon+Google as a separate joint policy position differing from the actual preferred positions of the separate companies -- or -- you must believe that Verizon has it's hand up Google's puppet butt. I tend to believe the first, optimist that I am. I, however, see the result of the latter.
It's -not- in Google's best interest to make fast lanes on wireless because Google would then have to pay the extra toll. For what? Google versus who else now or in the future? Google doesn't possibly believe that it's lost it's ability to get and maintain a #1 position among net destinations and must resort to blocking or degrading others to keep it. So Google must simply not believe the wireless position suggested by the joint position.
The guys with nothing to lose here are Verizon. Either way, they're carrying the traffic. They've got the regulatory axe to grind. Why not try to make someone else be its puppet?
I'm just surprised that Google fell for it.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Cape Cod, MA -- KE1MO
Tweet! Tweet! -- »twitter.com/funchords |
|
LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | reply to Karl Bode
said by Karl Bode:Trying to claim that Android is the glue that turns Google & Verizon in to some illegal cartel is straining credulity. Nobody said this, or even used the phrase "illegal cartel," except you. Of course you IMPLIED it by using the title "Verizoogle" and don't deny that was what you meant.
--
Are you happy with your rep in Washington, DC? |
|
| That makes completely no sense. |
|
| reply to Karl Bode
I agree with Karl, and so did the Cnet editor on G4TechTV. |
|
tiger72SexaT duorPPremium
join:2001-03-28
Saint Louis, MO
kudos:1 | said by algollyer:I agree with Karl, and so did the Cnet editor on G4TechTV. Lemme guess, so do Engadget and Gizmodo.
I'm shocked, SHOCKED! |
|
