1. Skip to navigation
  2. Skip to content
  3. Skip to sidebar
Source link: http://archive.mises.org/5174/government-did-invent-the-internet-but-the-market-made-it-glorious/

Government Did Invent the Internet, But the Market Made It Glorious

June 12, 2006 by

It is incorrect to describe the internet as a “private” technology, a spontaneous order, or a shining example of capitalistic ingenuity. It is none of these. And that is why we are left a panoply of lingering inefficiencies, misallocations, abuses, and political favoritism. At the same time, almost all of the internet’s current applications — unforeseen by its original designers — have been developed in the private sector. In other words, government involvement accounts for the internet’s continuing problems, while the market should get the credit for its glories. FULL ARTICLE


Peter G. Klein June 16, 2006 at 4:49 pm

I have no idea. I have no “proposal.” All I am saying that the government should not have used taxpayer funds to create the ARPANET, to subsidize researchers at public and private universities and think-tanks, and so on. That’s it.

M E Hoffer June 16, 2006 at 8:02 pm

Good Dr.,

with this: “(3) Mr. Chiz’s reading of Boehm-Bawerk differs fundamentally from mine. The fact that the cost of transmitting packets is the same, regardless of content, has nothing to do with the efficient allocation of bandwidth. Under competition prices reflect the economic value of the content, not the cost of provision. Have we become Ricardians now? Is Mr. Chiz’s point that congestion pricing (a la Varian and Mackie-Mason) should be prohibited by law? (4) If my brief reference to network neutrality sounds like I favor allowing telcos to tax content providers, independent of any prior contractual relationship, then I must be a really bad writer. Of course they shouldn’t, but neither should telcos be legally prohibited from charging different fees for routing different kinds of packets, or from blocking certain content providers altogether. What net neutrality proponents want to protect is not consumers’ right to switch providers, as in Mr. Chiz’s EvDO exmaple, but content providers’ and consumers’ “right” not to be charged market prices.

Posted by: Peter G. Klein at June 14, 2006 12:48 AM

I was under the impression that you had an alternative pricing schema in mind.

Peter G. Klein June 17, 2006 at 2:32 am

No, I was just pointing out, for the benefit of readers who might not be aware, that there _are_ alternative pricing schemes, and that entrepreneurs should be free to try them out. Many (though not all) experts believe that the net’s current architecture, as established by the state’s early protocol choices, precludes some of these alternatives, and that this is a bad thing.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: