Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
“Since 2014, OSPs have invested more than $300 billion in internet infrastructure, according to the report, produced by consulting firm Analysys Mason. This amounts to $75 billion per year -- more than double the average annual investment of OSPs made from 2011 to 2013.”
All this goes back to my original quote as follows:
“The internet infrastructure that we have today, largely exists because of corporations.”
“Since 2014, OSPs have invested more than $300 billion in internet infrastructure, according to the report, produced by consulting firm Analysys Mason. This amounts to $75 billion per year -- more than double the average annual investment of OSPs made from 2011 to 2013.”
All this goes back to my original quote as follows:
“The internet infrastructure that we have today, largely exists because of corporations.”
Software upgrades by cloud services are separate from the physical infrastructure of private telecom companies that were public works.
Even in the case of telecom companies building the infrastructure they had state backing like AT&T.
My point is without public works online developers like google would have nothing to work with.
More foolishness, I answered your question on brute force.
As for groups getting together to dominate others...
There would be a network of capital that is under usage, if capital is under usage by multiple people, another group cannot take over that capital to foment power as they must work under consensus. So a majority won't be enough in most cases.
If you are talking about a criminal gang forcing everyone to obey their rule, you then underestimate the physical capacity of a minority group.
If a small group of people try to claim a road for themselves, there force will be limited to themselves. If it is the majority of users, then good luck getting a consensus on how to organize and take over.
Your problem is is that you still imagine power grabbing in the context of pre-built infrastructure. Without that legal power for private power, people can only control what they are physically able to maintain.
And force is limited by how many are involve, and if many get involve then that is practically a cooperative of like-minded people who would find their own capital to use.
You didn't answer my question. You assume if we somehow got rid of government, everyone would simply agree with you. You never say why, you never address what to do with people who would continue to simply think you are wrong.
I'm also confused, a network of capital is now under the usage of a group of people? I am still under the control of a group of people then. But wait! You'll say. You are an equal partner in that! Ok, how? How do you enforce that? You have yet to say how you'll enforce any of this. I also don't want to be an equal partner. I do more work than someone else. I deserve more than them. I don't want to be an equal owner. I worked 90 hour weeks for years to build something, why would I want to share it with someone who just kind of happened to show up and be in the same place?
"Good luck getting a consensus on how to organize and take over" That's a government. As every country on the planet has. Getting a consensus on how to organize has always been easy.
"People should only have the power to control what they are physically able to maintain" so you want poverty and subsistence farming with no modern technology. Again, most people simply think that's a terrible idea.
Again, you have no plan on how to implement this, and no plan on how to maintain it if implemented. You just kind of hope people will act the way you want them to.
You didn't answer my question. You assume if we somehow got rid of government, everyone would simply agree with you. You never say why, you never address what to do with people who would continue to simply think you are wrong.
I'm also confused, a network of capital is now under the usage of a group of people? I am still under the control of a group of people then. But wait! You'll say. You are an equal partner in that! Ok, how? How do you enforce that? You have yet to say how you'll enforce any of this. I also don't want to be an equal partner. I do more work than someone else. I deserve more than them. I don't want to be an equal owner. I worked 90 hour weeks for years to build something, why would I want to share it with someone who just kind of happened to show up and be in the same place?
"Good luck getting a consensus on how to organize and take over" That's a government. As every country on the planet has. Getting a consensus on how to organize has always been easy.
"People should only have the power to control what they are physically able to maintain" so you want poverty and subsistence farming with no modern technology. Again, most people simply think that's a terrible idea.
Again, you have no plan on how to implement this, and no plan on how to maintain it if implemented. You just kind of hope people will act the way you want them to.
There is something here you don't understand.
If say twenty people use a public road. Those twenty are the users and have to agree on what to do with it...
but wait, you'll say how to I force anyone to go by this agreement, well here is the thing you miss. As private property is artificial and cannot sustain itself without outside support, control is based on usage.
If twenty people physically control something you can't get rid of anyone of them without physical force (which is aggression or a crime if you will). Anything besides that is ignored because that is the reality of the situation.
If you don't like a roommate you have, you still have to acknowledge there opinion on maintenance just from the reality that they physically take up that space. The only other option is leaving yourself.
Your other point is a different subject. Roads don't produce anything, they are on maintained. In terms of something with output like a factory, I never said that should be shared equally, such decisions would vary.
But everyone still has a say in ownership and labor distribution. How? from the fact that they work there. It is like living in a country, people might not benefit equally from the economy, but everyone has one vote from the nature of being a citizen. You have to work with the people around you least you use force which is a crime.
But then you ask why won't people form a group to exert force on others? because there is no long term gain. If there is no means to accumulate wealth beyond storage capacity, what do you gain from terrorizing others?
Of course people can still do that, but they do that here too in our current system, they're called gangs.
the internet is actually a military science nvention
Which is in the public sphere.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
