Hello!
The comments on this profile are unclaimed and thus are unverified.
Do they belong to you? Claim these comments.
Sam Rose
Is this you? Claim Profile »
4 years ago
in Supreme Court Strikes Major Blow to Property Rights on The Technology Liberation Front
Aw, come on, trumpit. You must to be smarter than that. This isn't about blocking "COMMUNITY progress". It is about making it easier for people with huge amounts of money to do whatver they want.
The constitution was made by people trying to escape the hegemony of others with more power and money than themselves. They set up property rights so that people could not be slowly backed into surfdom due to human greed. Property rights of individuals is "COMMUNITY progress" over tyranny. The supreme court ruling opens the door to destroy progress that was made over 200 years ago. The supreme court ruling is regression, NOT progress. End of story.
Thankfully, in my own state of Michigan, our constitution specifically bans what the supreme court just ruled if allowed. And, the supreme court ruling says that State laws still trump their ruling. Other states and city governments would do well to totally ban the practive of allowing state and municipal governments to seize property on behalf of commercial developers.
The constitution was made by people trying to escape the hegemony of others with more power and money than themselves. They set up property rights so that people could not be slowly backed into surfdom due to human greed. Property rights of individuals is "COMMUNITY progress" over tyranny. The supreme court ruling opens the door to destroy progress that was made over 200 years ago. The supreme court ruling is regression, NOT progress. End of story.
Thankfully, in my own state of Michigan, our constitution specifically bans what the supreme court just ruled if allowed. And, the supreme court ruling says that State laws still trump their ruling. Other states and city governments would do well to totally ban the practive of allowing state and municipal governments to seize property on behalf of commercial developers.
4 years ago
in Muni Wi-Fi Systems & Crowding-Out Concerns on The Technology Liberation Front
You have some good points. But you are characterizing and whitewashing the nature of the big telecoms, like Verizon, SBC, etc. Their demsonstrated goal is to crush all competitors, large and small. The incumbent telecoms may strive for innovation. but they are not the only model capable of communications innovation. And their systems and histories of methodically crushing competition is BAD for innovation.
And, you are ignoring that muniwireless and telecom corporate wireless service can sustainably coexist together. You're forgetting that there are people who do pay taxes to their municipality for extra unused bandwidth that will go unused. many of those same people cannot afford to pay inflated verizon wireless ISP prices to subsidize the Verizon CEO's new yacht. Those people have already paid for the bandwidth going unused by the cities, they could greatly benefit from it, and should be allowed access to it.
If verizon can make a product a few years down the road that is better than muniwireless, thy can sell to people wealthy enough to afford it, and who will probably actually need the performance it can give. Those same wealthier people will probaly also be able to actually afford the newer equipment that can take advantage of the beter commercial service. A good chunk of people in cities can't pony up the cash for the latest and greatest new gizmos and devices. So, these services should be able to coexist. We shouldn't hand the new medium solely to groups who have a history of trying to monopolize it. We should open it up to as many groups and people as we can, so that people can use it in many different ways.
Muniwireless and corporate wireless can coexist. it is not an either/or.
And, you are ignoring that muniwireless and telecom corporate wireless service can sustainably coexist together. You're forgetting that there are people who do pay taxes to their municipality for extra unused bandwidth that will go unused. many of those same people cannot afford to pay inflated verizon wireless ISP prices to subsidize the Verizon CEO's new yacht. Those people have already paid for the bandwidth going unused by the cities, they could greatly benefit from it, and should be allowed access to it.
If verizon can make a product a few years down the road that is better than muniwireless, thy can sell to people wealthy enough to afford it, and who will probably actually need the performance it can give. Those same wealthier people will probaly also be able to actually afford the newer equipment that can take advantage of the beter commercial service. A good chunk of people in cities can't pony up the cash for the latest and greatest new gizmos and devices. So, these services should be able to coexist. We shouldn't hand the new medium solely to groups who have a history of trying to monopolize it. We should open it up to as many groups and people as we can, so that people can use it in many different ways.
Muniwireless and corporate wireless can coexist. it is not an either/or.
