Revenue is what drives progress, but greediness can stop it.

"The real issue is recognizing connectivity as a general concept.
When I first wrote my connectivity essay I treated it as a technical problem -- networking as a means of connecting end points.
It's about more than just transferring bits, it's about communicating. The network itself just transports the bits without interpretation but the devices and services on the network need to have a shared "understanding" in order to communicate.

Simply providing connectivity adds new value without necessarily adding additional costs. It can even reduce the costs by sharing the transport and encouraging innovation."

But if at the two ends of the process there are two different devices, connectivity doesn't exist.

You can reach this goal (both ends communicating) when all users use a some kind of monopolistic OS (Microsoft for example) or Devices using monopolistic proprietary protocols ( Skype for example) or alternatively using standard OS or protocols that can be universally understood.

Sometimes the greediness can stop progress.
I often wonder what kind of environment would we have if Microsoft had competitors all over the World.

Most probably we would be several steps further and certainly life would be harder for hackers and spammers.