Petroleum is a limited commodity, while broadband is an installed capacity. That's as far the analogy can take you.
There is no pit for trading interconnections capacity 9yet), no future's market, no contracts for December OC-64.
You really go on there - petro has an immediate impact on transportation on businesses at all strata, whereas interconnection costs do have the same immediacy.
I could go on. It's weak writing, weal modeling, and not very in-depth or thoughtful.
Markdykeman
· 1 year ago
Alan:
First of all, I appreciate the fact that you took the time to comment on the article and did so in a civil manner, so thanks for that.
I'll try to address a few of your comments or points here:
- I don't disagree with you in that these are two different materials and that the analogy that I try to draw between them isn't particularly strong, but I don't think it's out of the question either. No doubt that oil is a limited resource traded as a commodity, which I did try to acknowledge near the end of the article, and Internet access is not. In my opening paragraph I inadvertently tied the impact of both oil and Internet access too closely together, my bad. - However, I wasn't doing a deep analysis on how we buy and sell these two items - this isn't the Economist of the Harvard Business Review, afterall. - If there was a point that I was trying to make throughout all of this, it was more around the fact that cheap broadband Internet access has led to the market for, and growth in, Web applications. I tried, perhaps unsuccessfully, to draw a comparison between commodity prices and economic performance. I still believe that many of the modern Web applications, regardless of where or not they have a quantifiable value to the consumer, would not have experienced the kind of growth that they've had if broadband Internet access was more expensive that it is today.
I appreciate your feedback and that will help me in future writing.
David Bullock
· 1 year ago
I'd go one step further and say that "oil" is the oil of the modern economy until we replace it with something better like nuclear power.
Broadband is just another thing we're dependent on that oil keeps running.
I CAN imagine using eBay and Amazon at 14Kbps, and if broadband wasn't available they'd accommodate those bandwidth constraints.
On the other hand -- podcasting, videoblogging, Flickr, Youtube and the rest aren't really the modern economy. Modern entertainment maybe.
I think we're conflating wants with needs.
Markdykeman
· 1 year ago
David:
Fair point on conflating wants with needs. Do we need Web 1.0, Web 2.0? Probably not, although many people have become accustomed to it. Yes, we could probably use dial-up or other slower communication methods, much as I could ride a bicycle to work rather than drive in my car. However, since I live more than 25 miles from my workplace, I'm not inclined to spend the time required to travel by bicycle. I also recognize, however, that I can't use my bicycle to haul a trailer with 20 tons of freight in it, so oil does represent a critical resource with real value.
Anderson
· 1 year ago
This article, without a doubt, is in the top 5 of the dumbest tech related articles I've read in the past year. The amount of stupid that the writer managed to pour into this entry easily matches Dan Quayle's "life on Mars" speech.
A person with clearly no understanding in economics or technology, just mumbles randomly about two complex issues. At first I thought about writing a response which lists the things that he got wrong or things I disagree with, but this article is just as coherent as a random 6 yearold explaining the importance the superconducting cables needed for the main dipoles and quadruples of the LHC.
Eyebee
· 1 year ago
[viddler_video=c9e6ebb3]
Markdykeman
· 1 year ago
Fair point and thank you.
Kyle James
· 1 year ago
Mark, Cheap high speed internet is vital to any web based company without a doubt, but your completely ignoring the game changer that is right around the corner. Throw all this out the window once High Speed Wireless hits the market. The new 3G networks are just the beginning of this and we really haven't seen what all is in the works since the beginning of the year and the government auctioning off the wireless spectrum especially the C Class to Verizon. With very high speed wireless connections potentially being able to go where current wired high speed broadband not able and this service eventually being billed as part of your cell phone bill infrastructure (as we currently understand it) limitations will be obsolete and access in large metropolitan areas won't be restricted to wiring. It's not unrealistic to think this is two years out or less.
I
(someone please correct me if I messed up some of the technical details, but hopefully it's easy enough to see where I'm going here)
invee
· 4 months ago
For the speed & Good service one can select the Best Broadband service my father selected the Best Broadband service i am using the Broadband service in my office for the internet purpose i choosen the unliomited plan as shown in the article i test whether my speed is good or not using the site http://www.ip-details.com/.
Wholesale
· 4 months ago
you are right,Oil and broadband Internet access are the twin fuels of both brick and mortar businesses and Internet based businesses. http://www.crazypurchase.com
All Comments
There is no pit for trading interconnections capacity 9yet), no future's market, no contracts for December OC-64.
You really go on there - petro has an immediate impact on transportation on businesses at all strata, whereas interconnection costs do have the same immediacy.
I could go on. It's weak writing, weal modeling, and not very in-depth or thoughtful.
First of all, I appreciate the fact that you took the time to comment on the article and did so in a civil manner, so thanks for that.
I'll try to address a few of your comments or points here:
- I don't disagree with you in that these are two different materials and that the analogy that I try to draw between them isn't particularly strong, but I don't think it's out of the question either. No doubt that oil is a limited resource traded as a commodity, which I did try to acknowledge near the end of the article, and Internet access is not. In my opening paragraph I inadvertently tied the impact of both oil and Internet access too closely together, my bad.
- However, I wasn't doing a deep analysis on how we buy and sell these two items - this isn't the Economist of the Harvard Business Review, afterall.
- If there was a point that I was trying to make throughout all of this, it was more around the fact that cheap broadband Internet access has led to the market for, and growth in, Web applications. I tried, perhaps unsuccessfully, to draw a comparison between commodity prices and economic performance. I still believe that many of the modern Web applications, regardless of where or not they have a quantifiable value to the consumer, would not have experienced the kind of growth that they've had if broadband Internet access was more expensive that it is today.
I appreciate your feedback and that will help me in future writing.
Broadband is just another thing we're dependent on that oil keeps running.
I CAN imagine using eBay and Amazon at 14Kbps, and if broadband wasn't available they'd accommodate those bandwidth constraints.
On the other hand -- podcasting, videoblogging, Flickr, Youtube and the rest aren't really the modern economy. Modern entertainment maybe.
I think we're conflating wants with needs.
Fair point on conflating wants with needs. Do we need Web 1.0, Web 2.0? Probably not, although many people have become accustomed to it. Yes, we could probably use dial-up or other slower communication methods, much as I could ride a bicycle to work rather than drive in my car. However, since I live more than 25 miles from my workplace, I'm not inclined to spend the time required to travel by bicycle. I also recognize, however, that I can't use my bicycle to haul a trailer with 20 tons of freight in it, so oil does represent a critical resource with real value.
The amount of stupid that the writer managed to pour into this entry easily matches Dan Quayle's "life on Mars" speech.
A person with clearly no understanding in economics or technology, just mumbles randomly about two complex issues.
At first I thought about writing a response which lists the things that he got wrong or things I disagree with, but this article is just as coherent as a random 6 yearold explaining the importance the superconducting cables needed for the main dipoles and quadruples of the LHC.
Cheap high speed internet is vital to any web based company without a doubt, but your completely ignoring the game changer that is right around the corner. Throw all this out the window once High Speed Wireless hits the market. The new 3G networks are just the beginning of this and we really haven't seen what all is in the works since the beginning of the year and the government auctioning off the wireless spectrum especially the C Class to Verizon. With very high speed wireless connections potentially being able to go where current wired high speed broadband not able and this service eventually being billed as part of your cell phone bill infrastructure (as we currently understand it) limitations will be obsolete and access in large metropolitan areas won't be restricted to wiring. It's not unrealistic to think this is two years out or less.
I
(someone please correct me if I messed up some of the technical details, but hopefully it's easy enough to see where I'm going here)