tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13751054.post7274407922262261071..comments2023-06-08T11:58:31.030-04:00Comments on On-Tech E-Rate Musings: National broadband? NIMBY!On-Techhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13423450823765892451noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13751054.post-27001093506433872452009-04-21T10:20:00.000-04:002009-04-21T10:20:00.000-04:00I wondered about that, but I don't know much about...I wondered about that, but I don't know much about the contribution side of this program, so I kept my thoughts to myself. (I can hear some of you thinking, "He keeps some of his thoughts to himself?") Since you asked:<br /><br />I think it would mean an increase in the regulation of the Internet (which is not good), a decrease in competition in the ISP sector (which is also not good) and an increase in the cost of Internet access for everyone (which is definitely not good). <br /><br />On the other hand, it doesn't make sense to have everyone's Internet access paid for by a tax (oops, I meant user fee) on long distance phone service, so if the Universal Service Fund is going to be used to subisdize Internet access, then ISPs should be paying into it.<br /><br />Oh, and there would be one unintended good consequence: forcing ISPs to fill out Form 499 may make it more difficult for some scammers like these guys: http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-422A1.pdfOn-Techhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13423450823765892451noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13751054.post-1697599843178383412009-04-21T09:46:00.000-04:002009-04-21T09:46:00.000-04:00What do you think the effect would be if the ISP's...What do you think the effect would be if the ISP's were required to also contribute?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12654019469229036721noreply@blogger.com