nfinite bandwidth. And I am happy to imagine the scarcity-centric economist proven wrong." There is no compelling reason to believe that bandwidth will necessarily increase faster than demand, especially in light of the number of bandwidth-intensive appli- cations waiting in the wings and the fact that the number of potential connections goes up exponentially with the number of computers added to the system. Relying on capacity expansion to solve the problems related to congestion is made all the more problematic by the fact that forecasting demand is inherently uncertain and capacity cannot be expanded instantaneously. Even when capacity expansion is feasible in the long run, any underestimation of projected demand will necessarily create short-run scarcity that cannot be addressed through increased bandwidth. The inherent uncertainty about future changes in demand renders it essentially impossible for network owners to rely on the expansion of capacity as the sole solution to the problems of network management. In addition, adding bandwidth and using network management techniques that reduce the transparency of the network represent alternative ways to solve the problems of congestion. Unless one assumes that the cost of capacity will necessarily decline faster than the growth in the demand for capacity, the relative attractiveness of each alternative cannot be determined a priori. Last, the nonstandardization and exclusivity inherent in network diversity are often designed to improve security or increase functionality, wholly apart from the desire to reduce congestion. When that is the case, the pos- sibility of adding bandwidth is not responsive to the problem. It would thus seem to be a mistake to precommit to one approach over the other. Second, Lessig also suggests that network neutrality might be justified by the growing level of concentration in network ownership. Indeed, Lessig is quite skepti- cal about the prospects that intermodal competition from alternative platforms such Networks in Telecommunicat