Re: Another Point Of View (Round 2)

[James Love <love@tap.org>]

  Bill, I have changed your postpone status, so you should be receiving 
  messages.  If you read the older posts, which are archived at
  http://www.essential.org/listproc/isdn/
  
    you will see plenty of discussions of re-engineering the networks to
  handle data calls better.  Bell Atlantic, and several other RBOCs are now
  looking at this.... and we have asked several commissions to give the
  RBOCs 9 months to come up with some plans, and accept public comment on
  the alternatives....  You will also find discussions of PacBell "giving
  away" seven months of free internet access to persons who buy a second
  flat rate POTS line... kinda funny behavior for a firm suffering a
  meltdown due to the Internet... and you might even see Fred Goldstein's
  very excellent testimony in the MD ISDN case, pulling apart the the Bell
  Atlantic numbers in that case.  If you were closer to the rate cases, you
  would be surprised how see low the usage costs numbers are, in the
  confidential cost studies.  They are greater than zero, but often so
  small, they aren't very important.  Sure, there are some nailed up users,
  but most consumers use ISPs less than 40 hours per month right now, and
  the average number of customers per line at an ISP is somewhere between 20
  than 10, while the voice network is typically built for 7 to 1. 
  
      You would also see that US West and PacBell have both agreed to set 
  "virtual" flat rates, with 200 hours of B channell access, which would 
  accomodate everyone but the nailed up users.  We recommended a 200 hour 
  virtual flat rate in MD, with a higher (but still reasonable) tariff for 
  the nailed up lines. 
  
     Writing this all off as some type of socialist plot seems a stretch to
  me. The LECs are monopolies, and they are still fighting rules to
  encourage competitive entry (most of which will occur if rules require
  unbundling of services).  The forces which are fighting the LECs includes a
  broad coaltion of computer, software, IXCs and consumer groups.   This 
  what practical people do in the world we live in.  Utopian visions are 
  fun, I have plenty of my own.... but we also try to focus on the world as 
  it is.  
  
    jamie
  
  
  On Fri, 29 Nov 1996, Bill Frezza wrote:
  > >   Bill Frezza, have you no shame?.....  You were never kicked off this
  > >list.... you are a current subscriber, who has apparently choosen to use
  > >the postpone option..
  > 
  > Jamie - in all sincerity, I abruptly stopped receiving this list after my
  > Nader post. I don't even know what the "postpone" option is. I thought it
  > was rather heavy handed of you to boot me out.
  > 
  > Bill
  > 
  > 
  > 
  
  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
  James Love / love@tap.org / P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036
  Voice: 202/387-8030; Fax 202/234-5176
  Center for Study of Responsive Law
     Consumer Project on Technology; http://www.essential.org/cpt
     Taxpayer Assets Project; http://www.tap.org
  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~