From: Alejandro Dubrovsky (s335984@student.uq.edu.au)
Date: Thu Apr 02 1998 - 11:15:24 MST
On Wed, 1 Apr 1998, Michael Lorrey wrote:
>
> The prime difference between a PPA and a nation state is that a) a PPA
> isnt in a monopoly position enforced by overwhelming force of arms, as a
> nation state is,
That depends on the size of the PPA. You could say that the nation state
is not in a monopoly position since there are, approximately, another 200
nations "available". If the PPA hits some critical size level, it could
be just as controlling as a nation state
> b) a PPA's client should have an ability to choose
> among various services, and only have to pay for the ones desired, and
And that ability, or right, is backed by who but your own PPA?
> c) if your PPA provides poor service, or abuses its customers, its
> competitors should be able to acquire that PPA's customers as they so
> choose.
>
They would do this if 1) they can get you out of your own PPA's control,
and 2) It is profitable for them to do so.
chau
Alejandro Dubrovsky
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:48:50 MST