Go ![]() | New ![]() | Find ![]() | Notify ![]() | Tools ![]() | Reply ![]() | ![]() |
Info Guru![]() |
Do you trust the market to keep Comcast/etc in line or do you trust Nancy Pelosi, Fauxcahontas and Bernie Sanders to 'make things fair'? That's the question. I trust market forces way more than I trust government socialists. YMMV. “Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” - John Adams | |||
|
Help! Help! I'm being repressed! ![]() |
I think what we should be arguing and writing our congress critters about is to tell them to start working on things to bring competition into the ISP marketplace. | |||
|
Info Guru![]() |
Bingo. It's the outdated anti-trust laws that force ISP's to not compete against each other. If they ever compete against each other in a market, they can never buy or be bought by any other player in that market. Thus, they never go into a territory where there is an existing ISP. The government is the problem, not the solution. “Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” - John Adams | |||
|
Member![]() |
Those pesky Californians are at it again ![]() California’s Democrat-controlled legislature is again leading the so-called “resistance” to President Donald Trump — this time, by planning to reinstate Net Neutrality rules repealed by FCC’s Republican majority last Thursday. California State Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) announced following the FCC’s 3-2 repeal vote that he will introduce legislation early in 2018 to re-regulate Internet providers under the so-called “People Power” rules. Weiner told Bay Area public radio station KQED: We don’t think that the FCC has the power to stop states from enacting our own rules. In fact, the FCC has lost that argument in court before, so we’re going to move forward. California does have significant ways of impacting internet access. We regulate cable franchises. Cable companies and telecommunication companies rely on access to the public right of way for their public infrastructure. Weiner knows that there are huge constitutional issues regarding a state attempting to preempt federal authority regarding interstate commerce, but he joined a long list of Democrats in California and other states that view dumping Net Neutrality as the crowning achievement of President Trump’s promise to reverse the progressives’ 80-year expansion of government’s reach through unelected bureaucratic rule-making. Although progressives argue that “Net neutrality is essential to our 21st century democracy, and we need to ensure people can access websites and information freely and fairly,” as Weiner put it in an essay posted at Medium, the Net Neutrality regulatory regime’s main achievement was banning Internet providers from charging tolls on Google, Facebook, Apple and other Silicon Valley tech giants that move massive content on the Internet for free — while many of those same companies restricted conservative speech. As a declaration of how financially lucrative net neutrality rules were to Silicon Valley tech giants, they spent a record $139.5 million lobbying the Obama administration and the federal bureaucracy in the year leading up to the February 2015 approval of the Net Neutrality rules along party lines. President Trump took a victory lap for slashing coercive red tape in a national televised address just hours after the FCC vote: “One of the very first actions of my administration was to impose a two-for-one rule on new federal regulations. We ordered that for everyone new regulation, two old regulations must be eliminated.” Trump added that he was proud that his administration is ahead of its goal to dump regulatory tyranny by overturning 22 major regulations and halting 1,500 planned regulatory actions. “We have a responsibility to push back and we’re going to push back,” Weiner told KQED. In addition, Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-CA), who represents part of Silicon Valley, issued a statement indicating that she would co-write an amicus brief for planned litigation by Santa Clara County and the Attorneys General from several liberal states to halt the repeal of Net Neutrality. California progressives argue that unbridled competition will be financially detrimental to consumers. But to pass state Net Neutrality re-regulation, they will need to argue against history and economics — to convince voters that President Reagan’s 1982 de-regulation of the AT&T monopoly, for example, did not lead to a spectacular fall in consumer communication costs, and an even bigger boom in the proliferation of telecommunication services. http://www.breitbart.com/calif...-own-net-neutrality/ | |||
|
Nullus Anxietas![]() |
Prime example of why I regard "news" outlets like Breitbart with disdain equal to that I feel for the dominant "news" media...
Show me this so-called "unbridled competition."
Waitaminute! This wouldn't be the same "deregulation" that resulted from the AT&T breakup that conservatives nearly unfailingly decry, would it? ![]() N.B.: Once AT&T divested of the Local Exchange Carriers, it did have competition. True competition. From a variety of sources, such as Sprint and WorldCom, for starters. A completely different scenario than what currently exists in local broadband delivery. "America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system,,,, but too early to shoot the bastards." -- Claire Wolfe "If we let things terrify us, life will not be worth living." -- Seneca the Younger, Roman Stoic philosopher | |||
|
Essayons![]() |
Regarding the question in the OP: Also, some commentary in the first few paragraphs of the article at this LINK. Thanks, Sap | |||
|
Victim of Life's Circumstances ![]() |
In Louisville we have Spectrum with consumer speeds up to 300Mbps, AT&T U-verse high speed internet and Google fiber is in the early roll out phase serving a couple of neighborhoods. Government did help Google by forcing AT&T to permit them to string wire on their poles. The internet did fine without gov regulation. Obama and the rest of the dems are expert at putting warm and fuzzy names on stifling, restrictive regulations. ________________________ God spelled backwards is dog | |||
|
Just because you can, doesn't mean you should |
Anyone that is old enough and can remember total government regulation and only one provider, like me, doesn't like the idea of government control. Phones and phone service has improved tremendously since the monopoly was broken up. Yes it took a while to sort out but it is much better now. The internet is working from the opposite direction. Now it's lightly regulated and initially it may seem like a good idea to let the government make it more "fair" for everyone. Just ask yourself, how has greater government control, and a large bureaucracy, worked out in other areas? ___________________________ Avoid buying ChiCom/CCP products whenever possible. | |||
|
Essayons![]() |
Pertinent commentary at Zero Hedge: LINK
Thanks, Sap | |||
|
Info Guru![]() |
A year later and whaddaya know, we didn't all die after all! My carrier increased my speed from 100Mb to 150Mb for no additional charge this year. How is that possible?? https://www.washingtonexaminer...e-internet-is-faster A year after net neutrality's demise, the Internet is faster They said we would be neanderthals by now, savages scraping ourselves with pieces of broken pottery every time our cat videos wouldn’t buffer. But the Internet apocalypse hasn’t happened. It has been remarkably unremarkable without net neutrality, one year after Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai killed the Obama-era Internet rule that required service providers to treat each piece of content identically. “No big changes,” reads a Wired headline atop an article explaining that “broadband providers didn't make any drastic new moves to block or cripple the delivery of content after the FCC's order revoking its Obama-era net neutrality protections took effect.” Everything has been fine, in other words. Someone should check on the folks below, though. They didn’t just think that the Internet would go dark. They thought that corporations would conspire to create a digital fiefdom where access to information was throttled and people couldn’t communicate freely except by carrier pigeon. Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., warned that losing net neutrality would threaten representative government. ![]() GLAAD feared gays and lesbians would be targeted. ![]() Planned Parenthood weighed in for whatever reason. ![]() But people of the Internet, dry your tears! Things are better now than they have ever been. The Internet is actually faster in the United States. A new report by Ookla, a sister company to PCMag, shows that download speeds have increased 35.8 percent across the country. The fastest Internet is actually in Kansas City, Mo., where Google Fiber burns through the wires. So put down the broken shards of ceramic. Net neutrality is dead. Everyone is fine. Long live the Internet. “Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” - John Adams | |||
|
Member![]() |
I don't look at it as good or bad but certainly a miss. I am not an Alex Jones fan but everyone is worrying about Verizon or Comcast throttling Internet sites when we just witnessed this guy essentially be blackballed from it and net neutrality has nothing to do with it. | |||
|
Nullus Anxietas![]() |
I just love it when people who really don't know an industry make proclamations about How Things Are in that industry. Big Telecom Wants To Tax Netflix To Pay For Broadband Upgrades ISPs Refuse To Deploy Themselves FCC panel wants to tax Internet-using businesses and give the money to ISPs The Future of American Broadband Is a Comcast Monopoly Comcast TV & Internet Fees Go Up AGAIN Dec 20th 2018 But don't worry, be happy, for BamaJeepster's got more bandwidth, so pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. Speaking of the man behind the curtain... Ajit Pai buries 2-year-old speed test data in appendix of 762-page report (Gee, I wonder why...?) (As an aside: Despite the man behind the curtain's proclamations to the contrary: I, like most of the rest of the country, have only a single viable ISP. Good thing I like my ISP and they're doing a good job, because I've nowhere else to turn.) "America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system,,,, but too early to shoot the bastards." -- Claire Wolfe "If we let things terrify us, life will not be worth living." -- Seneca the Younger, Roman Stoic philosopher | |||
|
Member |
Just a data point... Around here, if you’re in a neighborhood with AT&T fiber (at least the current gig speed products with fiber to the NID on the house), you agree to let AT&T to inject ads into every web stream, and monitor your dns requests. Hardly a neutral position. You could vpn, but now you aren’t getting that speed you are paying for, plus paying another provider. Now you are both paying for a product, and the product itself. -- I always prefer reality when I can figure out what it is. JALLEN 10/18/18 https://sigforum.com/eve/forum...610094844#7610094844 | |||
|
Info Guru![]() |
Nothing to do with Net Neutrality - surprise, telecom companies want services that depend on broadband to help pay to expand the service. Shocking.
Nothing to do with Net Neutrality again. Same as above.
More doom and gloom nonsense from a source that was proven wrong on it's silly Net Neutrality predictions. We are all supposed to be dead now according to that source.
Wow, an annual increase - that never happens in any other industry!
Probably because it has nothing to do with Net Neutrality and the latest data in the report is from Sep of 2017 - BEFORE net neutrality was repealed? In other words, it has nothing to do with the debate on net neutrality.
Yes, I've gone from having 1 choice to 4 in the past year. I now have fiber for cheaper than I had cable. All of the doom and gloom hasn't happened. Right now we are all supposed to be paying a al carte pricing to access services on the internet...at least according to ones who were for having the government regulate access. “Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” - John Adams | |||
|
Telecom Ronin![]() |
Anything that gives .gov more power and is supported by soros is bad. Let the market naturally sort things out. | |||
|
quarter MOA visionary![]() |
ZO vid above is right on. You know if Bernie is for it then = bad. | |||
|
Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 |
![]() | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|