Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

The end of the world is here

1…5681011…14

Comments

  • Pitchfork51
    Pitchfork51 Member Posts: 27,676
    oregonblitzkrieg said:

    Pitchfork51 said:

    Fuck cox and fuck comcast.

    Fuck off and fuck you. You're against net neutrality, you're going to get what you deserve. No mo high speed HD interweb porno for Bitchfork.
    Hey cunt. I don't have any clue what net neutrality is
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • RaceBannon
    RaceBannon Member, Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 115,408 Founders Club
    RedRocket said:

    RaceBannon said:

    UWhuskytskeet said:

    If this was actually about introducing more competition, the ISPs wouldn't be lobbying in favor of it. HTH


    Again I'm not saying that's what this is I am saying competition is the answer to every complaint in this thread

    Getting rid of NN is a step not the finish

    When companies see they can make money they invest.
    As is this wont promote competition. It just will expand the existing oligopoly. The electric utility industry is already decades ahead of the internet in trying to create competitive market structures. The US has competitive electricity markets but the crux is that the transmission and distribution system are operated by a non-profit third party entity called and ISO or RTO. If you really wanted competion between ISPs a similar structure would have so be set up otherwise barriers to entry are too high.
    So let's get it done
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • RedRocket
    RedRocket Member Posts: 1,527
    RaceBannon said:

    RedRocket said:

    RaceBannon said:

    UWhuskytskeet said:

    If this was actually about introducing more competition, the ISPs wouldn't be lobbying in favor of it. HTH


    Again I'm not saying that's what this is I am saying competition is the answer to every complaint in this thread

    Getting rid of NN is a step not the finish

    When companies see they can make money they invest.
    As is this wont promote competition. It just will expand the existing oligopoly. The electric utility industry is already decades ahead of the internet in trying to create competitive market structures. The US has competitive electricity markets but the crux is that the transmission and distribution system are operated by a non-profit third party entity called and ISO or RTO. If you really wanted competion between ISPs a similar structure would have so be set up otherwise barriers to entry are too high.
    So let's get it done
    I'm interested in the local loop unbundeling approach which is what is used in the UK but you have to force ISP to relinquish control over some of their infrastructure. It was already attempted at one point in the US in the 90s and failed but whatever maybe it would work better this time around.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • dflea
    dflea Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 7,287 Swaye's Wigwam
    RaceBannon said:

    Does wireless require a fiber network? Again a serious question. I don't know everything I just act like it

    I still want to know why I don't have wireless competition. I said good bye to Comcast in 1999 when I got DirecTV

    Bored motto.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • dflea
    dflea Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 7,287 Swaye's Wigwam
    RedRocket said:

    RaceBannon said:

    UWhuskytskeet said:

    If this was actually about introducing more competition, the ISPs wouldn't be lobbying in favor of it. HTH


    Again I'm not saying that's what this is I am saying competition is the answer to every complaint in this thread

    Getting rid of NN is a step not the finish

    When companies see they can make money they invest.
    As is this wont promote competition. It just will expand the existing oligopoly. The electric utility industry is already decades ahead of the internet in trying to create competitive market structures. The US has competitive electricity markets but the crux is that the transmission and distribution system are operated by a non-profit third party entity called and ISO or RTO. If you really wanted competion between ISPs a similar structure would have so be set up otherwise barriers to entry are too high.
    Nerd.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • GrundleStiltzkin
    GrundleStiltzkin Member Posts: 61,516 Standard Supporter
    RedRocket said:

    RaceBannon said:

    RedRocket said:

    RaceBannon said:

    UWhuskytskeet said:

    If this was actually about introducing more competition, the ISPs wouldn't be lobbying in favor of it. HTH


    Again I'm not saying that's what this is I am saying competition is the answer to every complaint in this thread

    Getting rid of NN is a step not the finish

    When companies see they can make money they invest.
    As is this wont promote competition. It just will expand the existing oligopoly. The electric utility industry is already decades ahead of the internet in trying to create competitive market structures. The US has competitive electricity markets but the crux is that the transmission and distribution system are operated by a non-profit third party entity called and ISO or RTO. If you really wanted competion between ISPs a similar structure would have so be set up otherwise barriers to entry are too high.
    So let's get it done
    I'm interested in the local loop unbundeling approach which is what is used in the UK but you have to force ISP to relinquish control over some of their infrastructure. It was already attempted at one point in the US in the 90s and failed but whatever maybe it would work better this time around.
    Sounds like a “taking”
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Kaepsknee
    Kaepsknee Member Posts: 14,919
    PurpleJ said:

    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.

    It really is though, at least it should be. Landline telephones are a utility and one can easily argue that the internet is just as vital and has a much wider scope than telephone service. It’s just another brick in the one corporation wall we are heading towards.

    This thing isn’t what capitalism is supposed to be.


    And I don’t like it.

    Not one bit.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Kaepsknee
    Kaepsknee Member Posts: 14,919
    RaceBannon said:

    And I didn't say the change today has anything to do with competition I said we need competition

    Don’t mistake this for siding with Hondon’t, but how is this path towards giant mega corporations encouraging competition
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Kaepsknee
    Kaepsknee Member Posts: 14,919
    UW_Doog_Bot said:

    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.

    That’s the rub right there with this. The improvement of wireless delivery is where things are going. It doesn’t make sense to bury Billions of Dollars worth of fiber to bungfuck Egypt, when in the next few years you will be able to receive high speed internet wirelessly.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter