I think there's a good argument for making the Internet be an utility like electricity is, but I think that also means there won't be anymore competition effectively (at least in terms of deployment), and they will upgrade their networks much more slowly. So the money for upgrades might have to come from the government (which actually did happen already, but with few results:
That being said, we also can't just say "let the free market deal with it", because right now there's no free market in the broadband space. ISP's have managed to basically outlaw competition from their areas, so before we even begin to accept the idea of "competition is the solution, not regulation", then we need to actually make that true, and make sure all such restrictions against new entrants are lifted, and generally make it much easier for new competition to appear and exist.
If it becomes super easy to move from one ISP to another the moment one of them pisses you off, and there are at least several good choices, then this could work.
> I think there's a good argument for making the Internet be an utility like electricity is, but I think that also means there won't be anymore competition effectively (at least in terms of deployment), and they will upgrade their networks much more slowly
It depends. Some of my academic work looks at network neutrality and ISP investment incentives in the long-run (as well as the effect on content providers and consumers) when the ISP is a geographic monopoly. The investment incentives (improvements to bandwidth) should theoretically improve over a net-neutral policy if network neutrality is dismissed, but it's not guaranteed to be all that great.
Intuitively, if we really wanted to see innovation, we should do away with the typical geographical (natural) monopolies we see with Comcast, et al. For example, for years Austin plagued with internet problems and (especially) relatively low bandwidth offerings compared to places like Dallas (with FiOS, etc.). However, quickly after Austin was chosen by Google as a place for Google fiber, AT&T began offering GB/S speeds (as part of Uverse? Not sure the exact name). The point is -- if we want to see improvements in the network, opening up competition will encourage firms to innovate.
A fun story to consider is how MCI started out against the monopoly AT&T.
The incumbents don't currently upgrade their networks where they have no competition. My neighborhood's DSL (USWest -> Qwest -> Centurylink) has been at the same speed since 2000, and Comcast wants some prohibitive amount of money for a SOHO setup, which is the only way they give you a static IP address. Regulation would probably be more efficient than the status quo right now.
Could you clarify the following and maybe provide a link?
"right now there's no free market in the broadband space. ISP's have managed to basically outlaw competition from their areas, so before we even begin to accept the idea of "competition is the solution, not regulation", then we need to actually make that true, and make sure all such restrictions against new entrants are lifted"
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140115/15035825890/losing...
I think there's a good argument for making the Internet be an utility like electricity is, but I think that also means there won't be anymore competition effectively (at least in terms of deployment), and they will upgrade their networks much more slowly. So the money for upgrades might have to come from the government (which actually did happen already, but with few results:
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2007/pulpit_20070810_0026...
That being said, we also can't just say "let the free market deal with it", because right now there's no free market in the broadband space. ISP's have managed to basically outlaw competition from their areas, so before we even begin to accept the idea of "competition is the solution, not regulation", then we need to actually make that true, and make sure all such restrictions against new entrants are lifted, and generally make it much easier for new competition to appear and exist.
If it becomes super easy to move from one ISP to another the moment one of them pisses you off, and there are at least several good choices, then this could work.