Total Pageviews

Friday, June 29, 2018

Quartz - Tirole on how to regulate platforms

But at the platform level, competition confronts the existence of large returns to scale and/or network externalities, leading to natural monopoly situations and a winner-take-all scenario. Network externalities can be direct: I am on Facebook or Twitter because you also are; I will use Uber or Lyft if many drivers do so. Network externalities can also be indirect: We may not care directly about the presence of other users on the platform, but that presence leads to improved services, as in the case of many apps or delivery services. For example, I want to use Google’s search engine or Waze if you also use them, as the quality of predictions improves with the number of users.
Natural monopoly situations lead to widespread market power, and a concomitant willingness to lose money for a long time to “buy” the prospect of a future monopoly position—think of Amazon or Uber.
https://qz.com/1310266/nobel-winning-economist-jean-tirole-on-how-to-regulate-tech-monopolies/ 

Friday, June 22, 2018

Petty's Grievances: The 5G Hopes & Fears of Vodafone UK's CTO | Light Reading

Petty's Grievances: The 5G Hopes & Fears of Vodafone UK's CTO | Light Reading: "What now looks certain is that Vodafone -- along with many other European operators -- will use 5G first as a bigger pipe in areas where mobile data is gushing like an oil blowout. That has driven Vodafone toward the "non-standalone" variant of 5G, which combines the 5G New Radio (NR) standardized in late 2017 with an existing 4G network, to support mobile broadband services in urban hotspots. This makes commercial sense because 5G is about four times as "spectrally efficient" as 4G, according to Petty, and therefore a less costly option.

Lowering operating expenses may be the only way to improve margins, in this mobile broadband scenario, as Vodafone does not expect consumer spending to rise with the introduction of 5G." 'via Blog this'

Monday, June 18, 2018

What if autonomous vehicles actually make us more dependent on cars?

What if autonomous vehicles actually make us more dependent on cars?: "Autonomous vehicles may be able to park themselves away from urban centres, but they still need to be parked – and make return journeys to collect passengers, adding empty cars to the roads and contributing to congestion and air pollution.

 And there are lots of unanswered questions about how urban systems will work with the introduction of self-driving vehicles. For example, it’s not clear how self-driving vehicles will co-exist with pedestrians and cyclists. If they are programmed to stop whenever a pedestrian or cyclist gets in their way, there will be pressure to further separate vehicles, pedestrians and cyclists.

The vision of future cities in the 2050s may then start to look more and more like the vision of the 1950s, with futuristic new models dominating the foreground, while human activities such as walking and cycling are relegated to concrete overpasses and gloomy subways." 'via Blog this'

Zero Rating, Net Neutrality, and the Chilean Regulation: Marco Correa PĂ©rez (Wikimedia)

"The Chilean net neutrality regulation is one of the first national legislative efforts to recognize the principle of preventing
arbitrary discrimination of Internet traffic. One of the main challenges in interpreting and implementing this law within
Chile has been the regular practice of zero-rating, in which certain telecommunications providers prioritize certain
applications through free data. Although this practice was initially characterized as a breach of net neutrality by
the regulatory body (the Subsecretariat of Telecommunications (Subtel)), zero-rating is still practiced by mobile
telephone companies as part of their subscription offers.

This white paper summarizes the research and findings of
a larger academic project that seeks to analyze both the legal status of zero-rating in Chile and the evolution of the
Subtel criteria, which has led to the proliferation of this practice in the country" 'via Blog this'

Monday, May 21, 2018

Own initiative investigation into Hutchinson 3G UK Limited (Three)’s compliance with the net neutrality and roaming regulations - Ofcom

Own initiative investigation into Hutchinson 3G UK Limited (Three)’s compliance with the net neutrality and roaming regulations - Ofcom: "Update note 8 May 2018

 We have revised the scope of this investigation to include the Roaming Regulation and the related CIR in addition to the EU Open Internet Access Regulation. The investigation will examine Three’s practices of:

 Traffic management practices such as ‘throttling’ or intentionally slowing down particular categories of traffic (e.g. video traffic, Peer-to-Peer and Virtual Private Network traffic) when customers are roaming;

Restricting tethering – the practice of using one device to connect another one to the internet – on certain plans offered by Three, including when customers are roaming;

and
Imposing restrictions on the devices in which a SIM can be used – e.g. where a SIM purchased for a mobile phone cannot be used in a tablet.

We are aiming to complete our evidence gathering phase in this investigation by July 2018." 'via Blog this'

Digital Economy Act 2017 s.103 - Code of Practice for social media platforms

Digital Economy Act 2017: "103 Code of practice for providers of online social media platforms

(1)The Secretary of State must issue a code of practice giving guidance to persons who provide online social media platforms for use by persons in the United Kingdom (“social media providers”).

(2)The guidance to be given is guidance about action it may be appropriate for providers to take against the use of the platforms they provide for conduct to which subsection (3) applies." 'via Blog this'

Thursday, May 17, 2018

Wetmachine » Yes, the 2017 Net Neutrality Repeal Is A “Rule” Under the CRA.

Wetmachine » Tales of the Sausage Factory » Yes, the 2017 Net Neutrality Repeal Is A “Rule” Under the CRA.: "I agree it is an uphill fight to get the CRA passed and signed by President Trump. But hey, it was always supposed to be impossible to get actual net neutrality rules the court would sustain, and it was always supposed to be impossible to get broadband declared Title II. Then it was supposed to be impossible for the Title II decision to survive judicial review.

As I often say, if I limited my advocacy to what was “possible” I’d never get anything done. But if it actually does pass, and get signed, then the 2017 Net Neutrality Repeal Order goes bye-bye like a bad dream." 'via Blog this'