Invisible wrote:
> I would have thought that for something like communications, or indeed 
> any type of network, a monopoly is almost a design requirement.

Anything real-time, yes. That doesn't mean it has to be owned by the 
government.

> If you had three different telephone companies, they'd invent three 
> types of telephone, with three incompatible numbering plans, and three 
> incompatible sorts of cabling with incompatible signalling protocols. 
> They'd then go out and lay three sets of cabling, build three sets of 
> telephone exchanges, and when everything was finished you'd *still* only 
> be able to call people who are with the same provider as you.

You're assuming that there even *was* dialing and numbering plans and such. 
The phone network here was a monopoly for technical reasons long before 
anyone invented a dial phone.

> Similar arguments go for things like power distribution, or rail 
> networks. 

Rail networks aren't a monopoly. They didn't even have compatible rails for 
a long time, since it wasn't really that much of a problem to switch cars.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
    Ada - the programming language trying to avoid
    you literally shooting yourself in the foot.

Post a reply to this message