Two articles on the Internet. Together they got me thinking about what would happen if the rest of the world abandoned the existing Internet which is pretty-much controlled by the USA and moved to the so-called "internet 2.0" which they would control?
This is also an interesting issue to watch in terms of globalism. We dont have any government or legal systems that work on a global level because we have never needed anything like that before in history. But the Internet is pushing business to a global level which is bound to uncover a lot of new issues for mankind.
the second mover
In b-school we talk about the "second mover advantage." The first mover is the person or company that creates the initial product and the initial market. The second mover likes the market and learns from the first mover's mistakes, launching a second but superior product. As American's we take a lot of pride in being the innovator but the innovator is not always the party that survives.
If Europe or Asia gets annoyed enough with US control of the Internet, they might just pack their bags and leave to a new system of their own design. A new system that includes improved security, spam and identity protection and generally improves on the weaknesses of our existing system.
Our Internet was invented by the military and was never intended for commercial use by the general public which is why it has so many flaws for commerce. The problem is that those flaws are very hard to fix while continuing to use the existing internet. A nation with the political will to abandon the existing system in favor of a new one could really shake things up.
Yesterday:
U.S. Fights to Keep Control Of Global Internet Oversight
Several Nations at Summit Argued for Power Change; All Eggs in Icann's Basket
November 16, 2005
TUNIS, Tunisia – The U.S. fought back complaints by a host of nations at a global summit here and retained oversight of the technical underpinnings of the Internet.
With more than a billion people using the Internet, a coalition has emerged around the notion it is unfair and undemocratic for "one country to control the Internet," said Yoshio Utsumi, secretary general of the ITU. Countries like China have been pushing for creation of a U.N.-monitored body to oversee the Internet.
And Today:
U.S. Retains Its Grip On Internet Domain Names
November 17, 2005
While Icann's board includes more than a dozen international members, the U.S. retains the power to veto the board's final decision. Members of the European Union, as well as countries like China and Brazil, had been hoping to wrest oversight of the process from Icann and place it in the hands of an international body.
fact or fiction
The second article is about broad-band and it made me think of our self-image. Everyone likes to think of themselves as the best and in the US, we like to think of ourselves as the most high-tech of any nation. "Sure our high school dropout rate is 30% but we are still the world leader and innovator in technology!"
The problem with this idea is that it is not always true but since most people never leave the US, they never have anything to compare us to. Businesses can import talent and export technology and our political leaders arent creating a sense of urgency.
So are we the world technology leader? Europe has a more advanced cell-phone system than we do. Japan had HDTV for years before we did (although it isn't as good as the system we are still trying to implement). Korea has much more advanced wireless and networking that we do. And now it seems even "Old Europe" France has a superior broadband system. On some days it seems like we are leaders only in our own minds...
For U.S. Consumers, Broadband Service Is Slow and Expensive
November 16, 2005
The good news for Web-surfing American households is that the cost of entry-level, high-speed Internet service is falling, thanks to competition between telephone and cable companies. The bad news is that even at these low prices you're not getting much for your money.
What passes for entry-level broadband service -- the most heavily marketed since summer -- is downright sluggish in the U.S. compared with that in many other countries; and not just in tech-crazed locales like Korea and Japan, but also in the likes of France.
The inferior value of U.S. broadband service becomes clear when you calculate the monthly "cost per megabit" of Internet access, or how much you pay to get a megabit's worth of download capability.
With Verizon, for example, entry-level broadband users pay $14.95 for download speeds of roughly 768 kilobits per second (three-quarters of one megabit), or a cost of about $20 per megabit.
In France, households can sign up for a $36 monthly service that promises download speeds of up to 20 megabits per second. Not only is that far faster than the Net access available to a typical American home, but it's also stunningly cheap at a cost of about $1.80 per megabit, or about one-eleventh that of Verizon's entry-level service.
