<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: More From Ed Whiteacre on the Two Tiered Internet</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/02/01/more-from-ed-whiteacre-on-the-two-tiered-internet/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/02/01/more-from-ed-whiteacre-on-the-two-tiered-internet/</link>
	<description>any technology distinguishable from magic is not sufficiently advanced</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 12 Apr 2012 14:32:35 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: robhyndman.com</title>
		<link>http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/02/01/more-from-ed-whiteacre-on-the-two-tiered-internet/comment-page-1/#comment-1039</link>
		<dc:creator>robhyndman.com</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2006 13:09:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/02/01/more-from-ed-whiteacre-on-the-two-tier-internet/#comment-1039</guid>
		<description>[...] 2. Om parses v2.0 of Ed Whiteacre&#8217;s pitch and notices an almost Borg-like adaptability to his arguments. SBC / AT&amp;T&#8217;s communications people are obviously watching the MSM (and the blogosphere??) carefully and have picked upon the criticism of the &#8220;pay me twice&#8221; aspect of the telecom industry&#8217;s pitch. The latest iteration runs like this: I think the content providers should be paying for the use of the network â€“ obviously not the piece from the customer to the network, which has already been paid for by the customer in Internet access fees â€“ but for accessing the so-called Internet cloud. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] 2. Om parses v2.0 of Ed Whiteacre&#8217;s pitch and notices an almost Borg-like adaptability to his arguments. SBC / AT&#38;T&#8217;s communications people are obviously watching the MSM (and the blogosphere??) carefully and have picked upon the criticism of the &#8220;pay me twice&#8221; aspect of the telecom industry&#8217;s pitch. The latest iteration runs like this: I think the content providers should be paying for the use of the network â€“ obviously not the piece from the customer to the network, which has already been paid for by the customer in Internet access fees â€“ but for accessing the so-called Internet cloud. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

