This was easily the most retarded policy under Trump. Makes zero sense, hurts consumers, does NOTHING to spur innovation as claimed, and opens the door for abuse by ISPs.
Commies gonna commie. You are free to choose any ISP you want.
As long as it's the one or two you are able to choose from.
So wouldn't our law makers be better off deregulating IP providers and opening up the field? Competition delivers better results than regulation
Iron law
There was nothing stifling competition before today other than it's really expensive to lay fiber. What changed today that is going to all new cable companies to enter the market?
How come when I moved to Riverside I was told who my wireless provider was instead of being able to choose? Serious question
If I don't like a company I LEAVE. I don't see the option to do so at this point
J said
They can do whatever they want. They paid the upfront costs to provide the service and can monetize it however they see fit. They are then free to use their profits to expand their reach and provide service to more areas and customers. Or not. The flip side is that they have to compete with other ISPs for customers, and are held in check by the market's demand for quality service at the lowest price possible. You, the paying customer, have the option of choosing whichever provider you feel is best or fucking off to the public library or McDonalds to get it for free.
The internet is not a public utility and should not be treated as such.
You like to think that making it a government sanctioned monopoly will improve service levels and encourage competition. That's what you like to do. Commie.
Disagree. It's become an essential part of daily life. It's the primary source of information and people rely on it for their jerbs. Please to be explaining HOW THE FUCK allowing ISP UTILITIES to speed up or slow down your access to certain sites on the net will spur innovation, help consumers and not harm free speech?
Don't bother answering those questions, because you can't. It's rhetorical.
They can do whatever they want. They paid the upfront costs to provide the service and can monetize it however they see fit. They are then free to use their profits to expand their reach and provide service to more areas and customers. Or not. The flip side is that they have to compete with other ISPs for customers, and are held in check by the market's demand for quality service at the lowest price possible. You, the paying customer, have the option of choosing whichever provider you feel is best or fucking off to the public library or McDonalds to get it for free.
Fuck. WTGWT now more than ever.
It would be different if people had a choice of more than 2 ISPs. I get 2, century Link at 12 Mbps or Comcast at 150 Mbps but $85 a month.
But nice work sucking big business dick at our expense.
Portugal? Portugal is in the heavily regulated EU and is a socialist nation. I would be willing to bet that laying fiber is even more expensive there than it is here. Seems like you get what you pay for no matter what.
The internet is not a public utility and should not be treated as such.
You like to think that making it a government sanctioned monopoly will improve service levels and encourage competition. That's what you like to do. Commie.
Disagree. It's become an essential part of daily life. It's the primary source of information and people rely on it for their jerbs. Please to be explaining HOW THE FUCK allowing ISP UTILITIES to speed up or slow down your access to certain sites on the net will spur innovation, help consumers and not harm free speech?
Don't bother answering those questions, because you can't. It's rhetorical.
They can do whatever they want. They paid the upfront costs to provide the service and can monetize it however they see fit. They are then free to use their profits to expand their reach and provide service to more areas and customers. Or not. The flip side is that they have to compete with other ISPs for customers, and are held in check by the market's demand for quality service at the lowest price possible. You, the paying customer, have the option of choosing whichever provider you feel is best or fucking off to the public library or McDonalds to get it for free.
Fuck. WTGWT now more than ever.
It would be different if people had a choice of more than 2 ISPs. I get 2, century Link at 12 Mbps or Comcast at 150 Mbps but $85 a month.
But nice work sucking big business dick at our expense.
So you agree with me that the lack of competition is the issue
The internet is not a public utility and should not be treated as such.
You like to think that making it a government sanctioned monopoly will improve service levels and encourage competition. That's what you like to do. Commie.
Disagree. It's become an essential part of daily life. It's the primary source of information and people rely on it for their jerbs. Please to be explaining HOW THE FUCK allowing ISP UTILITIES to speed up or slow down your access to certain sites on the net will spur innovation, help consumers and not harm free speech?
Don't bother answering those questions, because you can't. It's rhetorical.
They can do whatever they want. They paid the upfront costs to provide the service and can monetize it however they see fit. They are then free to use their profits to expand their reach and provide service to more areas and customers. Or not. The flip side is that they have to compete with other ISPs for customers, and are held in check by the market's demand for quality service at the lowest price possible. You, the paying customer, have the option of choosing whichever provider you feel is best or fucking off to the public library or McDonalds to get it for free.
The internet is not a public utility and should not be treated as such.
You like to think that making it a government sanctioned monopoly will improve service levels and encourage competition. That's what you like to do. Commie.
Disagree. It's become an essential part of daily life. It's the primary source of information and people rely on it for their jerbs. Please to be explaining HOW THE FUCK allowing ISP UTILITIES to speed up or slow down your access to certain sites on the net will spur innovation, help consumers and not harm free speech?
Don't bother answering those questions, because you can't. It's rhetorical.
Electric and water companies can do whatever they want. They paid the upfront costs to provide the service and can monetize it however they see fit. They are then free to use their profits to expand their reach and provide service to more areas and customers. Or not. The flip side is that they don't have to compete with other electric and water companies for customers because they are the only game in town, and are held in check by the necessary evil of regulation. You, the paying customer, do not have the option of choosing whichever provider you feel is best or fucking off to the public library or McDonalds to drink water and charge your ipad.
The internet is not a public utility and should not be treated as such.
You like to think that making it a government sanctioned monopoly will improve service levels and encourage competition. That's what you like to do. Commie.
Disagree. It's become an essential part of daily life. It's the primary source of information and people rely on it for their jerbs. Please to be explaining HOW THE FUCK allowing ISP UTILITIES to speed up or slow down your access to certain sites on the net will spur innovation, help consumers and not harm free speech?
Don't bother answering those questions, because you can't. It's rhetorical.
They can do whatever they want. They paid the upfront costs to provide the service and can monetize it however they see fit. They are then free to use their profits to expand their reach and provide service to more areas and customers. Or not. The flip side is that they have to compete with other ISPs for customers, and are held in check by the market's demand for quality service at the lowest price possible. You, the paying customer, have the option of choosing whichever provider you feel is best or fucking off to the public library or McDonalds to get it for free.
Portugal? Portugal is in the heavily regulated EU and is a socialist nation. I would be willing to bet that laying fiber is even more expensive there than it is here. Seems like you get what you pay for no matter what.
What's your point? If laying fiber is more expensive there, it only reinforces my argument that ISPs should be regarded as utilities. The competition argument falls flat. The cost of entering that market, laying fiber, etc. is way too high for people to expect completion to flourish.
This was easily the most retarded policy under Trump. Makes zero sense, hurts consumers, does NOTHING to spur innovation as claimed, and opens the door for abuse by ISPs.
Commies gonna commie. You are free to choose any ISP you want.
As long as it's the one or two you are able to choose from.
So wouldn't our law makers be better off deregulating IP providers and opening up the field? Competition delivers better results than regulation
Iron law
There was nothing stifling competition before today other than it's really expensive to lay fiber. What changed today that is going to all new cable companies to enter the market?
How come when I moved to Riverside I was told who my wireless provider was instead of being able to choose? Serious question
If I don't like a company I LEAVE. I don't see the option to do so at this point
Yeah that sucks, though most people are in similar situations. You still aren't going to magically get more ISPs to choose from now. Your ISP will get more revenue though, so good for them I guess.
Portugal? Portugal is in the heavily regulated EU and is a socialist nation. I would be willing to bet that laying fiber is even more expensive there than it is here. Seems like you get what you pay for no matter what.
What's your point? If laying fiber is more expensive there, it only reinforces my argument that ISPs should be regarded as utilities. The competition argument falls flat. The cost of entering that market, laying fiber, etc. is way too high for people to expect completion to flourish.
You are arguing against yourself and you don't even realize it. OBK fucking stupid.
All of you who are arguing against net neutrality are arguing for the right of ISPs to effectively be the arbiters and gatekeepers of information on the interwebs, and your access to it. That would give them more power than all the governments of the world. Do you really believe ISPs should have the right to engage in shit like slow and fast lanes, selectively choking off access to sites of their choosing?
Portugal? Portugal is in the heavily regulated EU and is a socialist nation. I would be willing to bet that laying fiber is even more expensive there than it is here. Seems like you get what you pay for no matter what.
All of you who are arguing against net neutrality are arguing for the right of ISPs to effectively be the arbiters and gatekeepers of information on the interwebs, and your access to it. That would give them more power than all the governments of the world. Do you really believe ISPs should have the right to engage in shit like slow and fast lanes, selectively choking off access to sites of their choosing?
Governments would NEVER censor information or limit your access to it, right comrade?
All of you who are arguing against net neutrality are arguing for the right of ISPs to effectively be the arbiters and gatekeepers of information on the interwebs, and your access to it. That would give them more power than all the governments of the world. Do you really believe ISPs should have the right to engage in shit like slow and fast lanes, selectively choking off access to sites of their choosing?
Governments would NEVER censor information or limit your access to it, right comrade?
Facebook/Twitter/Derek would NEVER censor information or limit your access to it, right comrade?
ISP's are much much more like utilities than private companies competing in a free market. Agreed that we need competition but this isn't the way that you are going to get it. I am biased in favor of free market solutions but there are very few ways to achieve an actual free market in this case. Laying new fiber in a location is prohibitive in a variety of ways and the existence of the current infrastructure often prohibits it completely. Until wireless catches up with cable you reasonably don't have a shot at real competition.
ISP's are much much more like utilities than private companies competing in a free market. Agreed that we need competition but this isn't the way that you are going to get it. I am biased in favor of free market solutions but there are very few ways to achieve an actual free market in this case. Laying new fiber in a location is prohibitive in a variety of ways and the existence of the current infrastructure often prohibits it completely. Until wireless catches up with cable you reasonably don't have a shot at real competition.
They are because the government made them that way. It was dumb when they did it with phone companies and even dumber when they repeated those mistakes.
This was easily the most retarded policy under Trump. Makes zero sense, hurts consumers, does NOTHING to spur innovation as claimed, and opens the door for abuse by ISPs.
Commies gonna commie. You are free to choose any ISP you want.
The internet is not a public utility and should not be treated as such.
You like to think that making it a government sanctioned monopoly will improve service levels and encourage competition. That's what you like to do. Commie.
Pray tell, who's competing with who for our? business?
Comments
If I don't like a company I LEAVE. I don't see the option to do so at this point
J said
They can do whatever they want. They paid the upfront costs to provide the service and can monetize it however they see fit. They are then free to use their profits to expand their reach and provide service to more areas and customers. Or not. The flip side is that they have to compete with other ISPs for customers, and are held in check by the market's demand for quality service at the lowest price possible. You, the paying customer, have the option of choosing whichever provider you feel is best or fucking off to the public library or McDonalds to get it for free.
But nice work sucking big business dick at our expense.
Good start for you