tedm at ipinc.net
Mon Oct 29 14:23:18 EDT 2007
>From: Geoff Huston [mailto:gih at apnic.net]
>Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2007 2:51 AM
>To: Ted Mittelstaedt
>Cc: ppml at arin.net
>Subject: Re: [ppml] ripe-55/presentations/bush-ipv6-transition.pdf
>Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
>> I agree - and furthermore, there IS NO SUCH THING AS AN OPEN MARKET
>> A truly open market is one in which there was NO recourse to the
>> government or courts if someone fails to uphold their end of a
>> contract - or anything else - because, after all, in an open market,
>> if someone fails to uphold their end, their reputation will cause the
>> rest of the players in the market to avoid them, in which case they
>> will go out of business.
>This assertion confuses the terms "free market" and "open market"
If your beef is with how the original post misused the term
"open market" then please take it up with someone else. I know what the
original poster was trying to mean by use of that term, as do
most people I think. I was responding to his meaning, not making
>You may find that wikipedia could help you here with a quick primer on
>basic terms related to characteristics of markets.
>I'm sure there are many related entries, but you may find
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_market helpful here.
Quote from that entry:
"...While the free-market is an idealized abstraction, it is useful..."
I fail to see what in the entry contradicts my summary - which you snipped
of course, since it was the most important part - that the
question isn't between an unregulated and a regulated market, but as
all markets are regulated, the real question is how much regulation
As I said previously, use of terms like "governmental regulated market"
opposing "open market", are mere emotional
appeals designed to confuse the issue. It's the old battle cry "The commies
are coming" simply reframed in year 2007 terms and it is as invalid today as
it was then.
More information about the ARIN-PPML