Greetings Economists,
I think this makes sense to me. If one considers what is popular like
GPS positioning these ought to government provided services. There is
an article in the NY Times talking about how standalone GPS devices
are failing in the face of cellphones having GPS. Which illustrates
your point quite well. Cellphones like the MS OS are swiss army knife
devices in which a feature like GPS is loaded on to make it sold, but
the feature is really free.
I say government regulated and controlled because too many aspects of
information or knowledge of the landscape are social needs and can't
be properly tied to prophet models. Just as cities put up signs for
everyone to rely on for location information cities need to control
and provide such 'signage' on the internet also as defined by popular
needs.
On Jul 9, 2009, at 3:24 PM, Jim Devine wrote:
This says that the only way we can organize the production and
distribution of info is via the government (though not necessarily in
a centralized way). Crucially, the only way to finance the mess is via
taxes. Of course, we could drop the simplifying assumption: the other
way to finance the mess is via monopolies that charge people more for
info than the production and distribution costs.
and JD writes;
The question is whether or not the
web is ultimately subject to democratic control by the taxpayers.
Doyle,
Absolutely hitting the nail on the head.
thanks,
Doyle Saylor
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
