[opendtv] Re: EE Times: 5G Needs Mmwave Regs—Pronto
- From: "Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2017 02:48:34 +0000
Craig Birkmaier wrote:
I never said that it is not necessary to deal with spectrum allocation,
or spectrum management. What I said, is that the private sector is
just as capable, probably more capable of managing the issues than the
government.
Whoever does the job has to be above their own special interest, Craig. Just
exactly as the Department of Commerce had to do, in order for the public
interest to be met, as opposed to just allowing the very few to hog all
available publically owned resources. So, you are talking out of both sides of
your mouth.
The way the FCC allocates spectrum now, and the local caps they establish,
interference limits, and so on, is exactly the kind of job they have to do, wrt
OTA broadcast. It makes no difference at all, whether at some times in the
past, some of the special interests attempted to pay off whoever, to get an
unfair advantage. Equally, today as well as 110 years ago, guaranteeing the
neutrality of the nationwide telecoms is also in the public interest, in very
much the same way. Just as the neutrality of the postal service had to be
guaranteed, for centuries.
Hazlett explains that the broadcasters and the Commerce Department met
annually to work out the rules for the road.
In the '90s we started to allow the companies that paid dearly
for spectrum to determine the technical standards and business
models for this spectrum. The result has been rapid innovation,
and major cost reductions for consumers.
Sorry, Craig, wrong again. The FCC regulates which "greedy bastards" can
operate on what slices of spectrum, in cellular comms, specifically to
guarantee that adequate competition remains. Since you seem to not know this,
here's the first link that popped up. You can find plenty more:
http://www.ehow.com/facts_6154016_regulates-cell-phone-companies_.html
Your vague rhetoric just now implied that the FCC in the 1990s got out of the
picture, allowing greedy bastards to have their way (and remarkably, that this
was good!). False. On the contrary, the FCC took on whole new jobs, as it now
regulates this new cellular industry too. For exactly the same reasons as the
Department of Commerce had to do in the 1920s. ONLY COMPETITION can allow an
industry to self-regulate. You still haven’t grasped this concept, even though
your arguments wander in this direction occasionally. The FCC did permit the
different cell providers to choose their own standards, but only within their
own spectrum allocations (which is now resulting in some inevitable waste of
cellular spectrum, of course).
SO thank you for agreeing with me - we do not need government
agencies and regulators setting technical standards.
I HARDLY agreed with you. I simply explained that when you have to regulate
something globally, it cannot be a US government agency doing the job. You seem
to have a stubborn fixation, as extremists tend to have, that gives you tunnel
vision. We don’t have a world government, so instead, we set up organizations
like the ITU and the IANA, to take on those jobs. How is that better than
having the FCC doing the job, within the US?
Your BS rhetoric does you no favors, Craig, I say again. It makes you sound
incoherent, devoid of logic.
Bert
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
Other related posts:
