----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Scrivner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org>
Sent: Sunday, February 05, 2006 12:41 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] To Break the Law or Notto BreaktheLaw...That is

> Mark Koskenmaki wrote:
> >  It is the NATURE OF
> >GOVERNMENT REGULATION TO HARM BUSINESS.    They regulate for political
> >purposes
> >
> This is not based in fact. The role of government is to serve the
> interests of the people.

<smile> come on John, if we were face to face, you gotta know I'd make a
crack about the difference between the "role" of goverment and the "nature"
of government.

 It is not necessarily to serve the interests of
> one business sector over another or even to serve the needs of business
> as a whole. The government has always played a role in communications.
> The Internet was created by government programs to build ARPANET and
> DARPANET which later became the Internet. It was government's role that
> led to the open use of the Internet for private as well as public use.
> This was Al Gore's contribution to the Internet.

No, Al Gore had no contribution, other than an "also" vote in the Senate.

> Much of the radio technology we use was created from tax based
> government programs to build advanced microwave data solutions for our
> military and NASA. These are all government supported programs that
> helped you personally to be in business today. The FCC passed rules
> allowing for large chunks of spectrum to be made available in unlicensed
> fashion ultimately creating our industry.

But it wasn't created for us.   ISM is "Industry, Scientific, Medical" use.
It was to allow UNHINDERED experimentation with technologies.

> Let's stop the government bashing now. I am not going to stand here and
> watch as people tell half truths about the role government has played in
> this industry. This Internet itself would not exist without the work
> that has been done by our government.

It REALLY would not exist if it weren't for the work done and then given
away by a lot of intellectual types.   The network existed, but the tools to
use that communication were purely an effort by individuals.

 Let's get on track here and start
> either itemizing details you want to see changed in the form or move on
> to other issues. I am not going to change my mind in feeling it is
> paramount for our effort that we fill out these forms and stop
> suggesting any impropriety, either imagined or real, in the present or
> future intentions of the FCC regarding this information gathering.
> >I don't care what the "intent" is, that is
> >irrelevant.  It's what it can be used for that matters, because they WILL
> >use it for that, history has made this as clear as sunrise in the desert.
> >
> >
> >
> History has shown that the US helps build an environment that will
> inevitably lead to new innovations and technologies. Government does
> have a role in this and will not be stepping aside any time soon. Again,
> the government bashing needs to end now. If you are that upset with how
> the system is being run then you really do need to get involved in
> politics and start making change.

The "environment" that promotes innovation and new technologies is a lack of
regulatory control, and a freedom to take off in new ways and do new things
without being limited.

> >Wrong.   We don't want "The hammer" coming to smash us.   Giving them
> >much knowledge is fatal.  period.  Doesn't matter if that's not what they
> >want it for, doesn't matter if the knowledge itself will "give" us other
> >things.   They will take far more than they give - that is indisputable.
> >
> >
> Again, you assume the worst. If your representation is not assuming
> "evil" intentions then it is simply that you do not want to use that
> adjective but any other synonym saying the same thing.

I don't have to just assume the worst.  It always happens.    If you think
otherwise, please show me some examples.

> >We have the history of every industry that becomes regulated.
> >it evolves to one or a few monopolies.   And it took how many years of
> >lawsuits to break up Ma Bell?   Gee, ISP's fought tooth and nail to get
> >UNE's and then lost it in a court fight.
> >
> >
> UNE's represent a flaw in the '96 telcom act. I would not like being
> told I had to give you access to my network either. I am not defending
> the ILECs per se'. I do understand why this went the way it did though.
> That does not mean I have to like it. It just means that there were
> reasons why it went the way it did and they were not necessarily based
> in monopoly interests of government.

Where did I say it was "monopoly interests of government".  I said was an
example of how living by a regulated industry can mean your instant death
with no recourse, since both yoru reason to exist and your ability to exist
are at the whims of people not interested in you.   the law of intended
consequences is what we're talking about.

> >in my own initiative and creativity, but at the whims of someone I
> >power over me.
> >
> >
> Guess what. If you do not have those fears every day with the market
> forces at work against you then you are just fooling yourself anyway. If
> you are not building a business you can gladly acknowledge to the FCC
> and any other government entity then you probably need to start looking
> for another line of work. The future is going to be tougher for making a
> business case and turning a profit in this business. It is not the FCC
> who is making it harder. It is the total inertia of efforts from all
> directions attempting to force a new revolution of broadband ubiquity by
> any means available all around us. If you are not selling low priced
> broadband to everyone around you now then someone is trying to figure
> out how to do it right now. This could be the local municipality,
> economic development commission, state, other providers, electrical
> utilities, cell carriers, you name it. The rural electric cooperatives
> around me are doing a study to build broadband now. You have more people
> looking to take business from you than the government. The FCC is likely
> the lowest priority threat you have right now concerning the future of
> your business..

Not in the slightest.  I have no fear of Qwest, the power company, the
county, the city... nobody but the feds or the state.   I can deal with all
the rest, since I am in the  free market and my wits will serve to keep my
efforts a success - or not.   So long as it's up to me, I have no fear of
any of them.  I can beat them, no sweat.    What I can't deal with, is a
power that can capricioiusly take away even my freedom to BE in this
business.   Qwest is no threat in that regard.  Heck, I've GOT well funded
private and Muni competition now.   No cries from me about that being an
obstruction to me.

> >If the hammer comes to smash us, certainly not.   We won't even exist,
> >we, the operators, and our customers, will be the only mourners.
> >
> >
> Please define what the "hammer" is and how filling out the form is
> somehow going to unleash the "hammer".

Universal knoweldge of who is in the business means they can, without any
other consideration, issue mandates or restrictions.  And if it puts me out
of business, it just reduces thier paperwork.   Before any agency can
regulate someone, they first have to figure out who is doing it.

 I am reading your thoughts and
> wonder what transgression the government has wrought on you to give you
> such animosity.

Animosity?   Understanding what government does to industry and business is
"animosity"?   What nonsense is that?   This is just a simple discussion of
the realities of federal regulation.

 I hope you are wrong because if the world is as twisted
> as you portray then I would need to consider joining the Amish religion.

This has nothing to do with religion.   It has nothing to do with the world
being "twisted", it is simply the the nature of how political control over
things works.  It is the normal outcome of political regulation.

> I could not stay in this society if I felt the way you do towards our
> own government.

As some quip once stated...   Of all systems created, ours is the
worst....except for all the rest.

North East Oregon Fastnet, LLC 509-593-4061
personal correspondence to:  mark at neofast dot net
sales inquiries to:  purchasing at neofast dot net
Fast Internet, NO WIRES!

> Scriv
> -- 
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org


Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Reply via email to