If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
Net neutrality has been in the news. The must-read article of the week is by Lawrence Lessig in Wired about the regulation of technology. He says that in hindsight, Microsoft may not have needed so much government intervention–competition (e.g., Linux) proved more capable at tempering the monopoly than regulation was. How does this relate to net neutrality? Well, that’s different, he says. We do need regulation there, because there’s nothing even close to breaking the monopoly power on Internet access. (I’ll have to think about that one.)
The recent FCC approval of the AT&T merger
has also spurred a lot of net neutrality commentary. The requirement for AT&T to
observe net neutrality principles for at least two years is called a "limited but
important victory" in a NY Times editorial. Susan Crawford,
on the other hand, thinks the deal "missed a major battleground": the
verbosely-titled AT&T Yahoo! High Speed Internet U-verse Enabled is exempt from that promise.



