Everyone's opinions are shaped by their experiences and perhaps even more so by their desires for a favourable truth. Wi-Fi, and particularly Muni Wi-Fi got the hammer from Andrew Seybold, who needs no introduction and Mike Iandolo of Alcatel-Lucent.

The phrase of the day, repeated ad nauseum was "There is no free lunch." I resisted the temptation to observe a monopoly is probably as close to a free (certainly of effective competition) lunch as you can get, but that's not the point. No one expects something for nothing, but they reasonably expect cost-plus pricing, which cellular clearly isn't and Wi-Fi, subsidised by collateral sales or as a public good certainly is.

"Worldwide, the wireless telephony broadband service providers don't want to acknowledge the possibility that mobile/portable/nomadic Broadband Internet Access will default to Wi-Fi. But every new portable/ mobile/nomadic communications or communications device sold that incorporates Wi-Fi increases the likelihood that Wi-Fi will become... or most chillingly to them... perhaps already is, the dominant "final delivery" technology of Broadband Wireless Internet Access."

Steve Stroh

"The Googles of the world, they are the Custer of the modern world. We are the Sioux nation"

Richard Parsons, Time Warner Inc. Chief Executive (Referring to the Civil War American general George Custer who was defeated by Native Americans in a battle dubbed "Custer's Last Stand.")

"I say to you that the VCR is to the American film producer and the American public as the Boston strangler is to the woman home alone."

Jack Valenti, President, Motion Picture Association Of America, Inc. (in 1982 in testimony to the House of Representatives)

Incumbents are never wrong.

Some posts are just here to illustrate browsing coincidences, that make a point:

New Zealanders are more concerned with identify theft than other forms of personal, financial, national or internet security.

Stuff

VS

According to the Internet Crime Complaint Center and reported in U.S. News and World Report, auction fraud and non-delivery of items purchased are far and away the most common Internet crimes. Identity theft is way down near the bottom.

Bruce Schneier

Perhaps that is rational, perhaps losing one's identity, despite the lesser likelihood is worse than the more likely but potentially less impactful events. Maybe. I'd be impressed if those surveyed had put that much work into it. More likely I suspect the reason is more about the information supplied to the random samples by the "selection for sales" of commercial media.

Even worse:

A new survey from the C.S. Mott Children’s Hospital, The National Poll on Children’s Health, has found that US parents rate Internet Safety as being a more serious health threat to children than school violence, sexually transmitted diseases, abuse and neglect.

Yes, the Internet.

No, I’m not kidding.

TechCrunch

I don't blame people for making decisions based on the rough formula of:

^{IntensityxImpact}/_{Understanding}

but let's not forget that is the formula and the less you know, the more the drum is beaten, the more vile the outcome, the more it will loom in our primate brains as a real threat.

One of the more galling mantras recited by the property absolutists, those who would prolong monopoly, is the Right to a Return on Investement. It's absurd, return on investment is a risk, and the reward is supposed to be related to the level of the risk. Telco's that require guarantees that they will gain all the return off their infrastructures are wanting (and while we might all want such a sinecure, wanting isn't getting, unless you are big enough to threaten the State) champagne returns for beer investment.

Capitalism is the right to choose your investment against the choice made for you by command and control centralised models. This does not protect our brave captains of commerce from the risk of regulatory or legislative change. Holding the State to ransom isn't something many companies can contemplate, I can't think of another description for what Telstra did in Australia. Change is a given, it doesn't come with a guarantee, nor does return on investment.

There is little risk in infrastructure, I expect frequencies, in the air, and in glass, will be returning at a rate correlated to the risk for ever. The risk at the services level will be shared, but the rewards will not be with infrastructure operators. The dairy that sells the winning Lotto ticket gets no share of the proceeds, it may gain valuable reputation, but that's all. Monopoly infrastructure operators definitely believe they have a right to a share in the rewards for the risk taken by their customers.