Net neutrality has nothing to do with theft. In fact it is anti-theft. I PAY Verizon every month. I do not want them to throttle the content I request and ALREADY pay for.
Does the average restaurant customer inspect the restaurant's kitchen to ensure that raw meats aren't being stored with fresh vegetables?
To cite a popular TV show as evidence, have you ever seen "Hell's Kitchen" with Gordon Ramsey? Despite heavy restaurant regulation a lot of the places featured on that show had numerous food and safety violations. Again, that's with current regulations.
Customers today are quite capable of posting bad reviews online, telling their friends about bad experiences, protesting, suing and myriad other ways of voicing their displeasure or demonstrating harm done to them.
Regulations are not a cure-all and in fact, there are so many laws and regulations they are arguably impossible to enforce!
To cite a popular TV show as evidence, have you ever seen "Hell's Kitchen" with Gordon Ramsey? Despite heavy restaurant regulation a lot of the places featured on that show had numerous food and safety violations. Again, that's with current regulations.
Customers today are quite capable of posting bad reviews online, telling their friends about bad experiences, protesting, suing and myriad other ways of voicing their displeasure or demonstrating harm done to them.
Regulations are not a cure-all.
I think you're referring to Kitchen Nightmares. The problems there result from inadequate enforcement of regulations. Regulations are needed in areas like those because financial incentives do not always align with the public's well-being, and also because there is an information asymmetry -- since restaurant's don't post their cutting board practices and cleaning schedules for public review, customers can't always detect bad practices behind the scenes. A purely profit maximizing actor might aim to cut as many corners as possible without the customer noticing. Just because unsanitary practices might not sicken the average healthy customer does not mean a restaurant should be able to get away with them. One instance of foodborne illness is one too many.
AT&T was broken up by the Government it did not dissolve on it's own.
<span style="line-height:1.4em;">The American people have been subsidizing these companies for years. They made certain promises for these huge subsidies that they have not kept. A lot of people here keep screaming about a free market. There is no such thing, at least not in the purest sense of the concept. Tax dollars go to build a new McDonalds in your neighborhood, Sports stadiums, oil companies. If you believe in a truly FREE market all of this corporate welfare would go away. They would have to operate on their own bottom line. Tax loopholes would be closed. Capitalism is not a form of government. We already know the damage corporate interests left unchecked can do to this nation. All we have to do is look at history. This idea that somehow an entity whose sole objective is to make money will do the right thing without being regulated is naive. Some regulations are outdated or unnecessary, get rid of those but business totally unregulated is nonsense. We had this already in our country & about 4 guys ran just about everything. People worked ridiculous hours with no care for their safety or well being.</span>
I do not trust any shady liberal politicians, and the internet will be better off if they keep their dirty hands off of it. Government does not always act on the best intentions for its' people.
The next thing you know, they'll be trying to enact political censorship rules on the internet and they'll be willing to cede control of the internet over to the monkeys in the UN. If you give them an inch, they'll take a foot. Therefore it is better to give them nothing.
Government should stay out of regulating the internet. I do not believe or trust what this government says or claims. Look at the scam called Obamacare. Why should anybody believe what they say about the internet?
The internet is working just fine and there is no need for any politicians and government agencies to get involved. The free market will sort itself out. My internet speeds are blazing fast, and the internet has never been better. I see no reasons to implement any government regulations over the internet at the present time.
I am against socialism, especially when it comes to the internet.
So, all these "ifs" "maybes" "mights" and "could", is a reason to have the government step in with regulations to save us all from the evil corporations who sell us internet access??
Let the free market decide what happens...
The "free market" won't decide because quite frankly there is no such thing.
Access to a market has gatekeepers who already own the market supported by misleading media barons who brainwash the gullible into maintaining their power.
Government isn't for the people it's for the lobbyists with the deepest pockets.
Time for Tim Cook to gather up some of that idle cash and buy himself a neat little ISP. Apple can do it on its own or in coalition with Google and Microsoft plus the online storage vendors. They might not need a full build-out, just enough to put the fear of god in Comcast and dissuade it from acting like a greedy bastard.
People should realize that "free markets" do not necessarily result into competitive markets. They could just as easily give rise to monopolized markets. In fact competing firms will make more combined profit if they collude or merge into a monopoly.
I’ve found that, in many cases, less control–not more–leads to greater success.
That sounds a lot like the point of view of Republicans - the point of view that opened the door to the country's financial meltdown several years ago. It's also the point of view that created a cable industry oligopoly resulting in Americans paying much more for much slower internet than its neighbors in Europe and Asia.
History has shown that regulating businesses less is more often than not a recipe for disaster from the point of view of consumers.
What are the relative number of internet users in the USA and Europe? What is the relative amount of data moved over the internet in the USA and Europe? Would those numbers have any effect on the connect cost or speeds available?
Someone on this forum compared the Internet to roads, which works except for a big, big difference: the Federal Government did NOT pay to put the infrastructure in place for the Internet. Yes, we all paid for ArpaNet to be developed, but the commercialization of that development was funded by, wait now, PRIVATE BUSINESS, i.e., AT&T, ComCast, and a host of other players all seeking to get a piece of the pie. And that includes the enormous number of cell towers that populate almost everywhere anyone lives and if there is not cell service at some point, you still have Satellite-based services - all developed and paid for by private business because there is a profit to be made in providing a needed service.
And before anyone yells "but the Fed's put the satellites in orbit", (a) that was before private launch companies plus (b), do you really think NASA sent private satellites into orbit for FREE?
How would you feel if the Fed. Gov. suddenly decided it had to be in control of newspaper content and distribution? Would you not scream CENSORSHIP, and you would be 100% correct as it is a direct violation of the 1st Amendment of the US Constitution.
All the Internet is, essentially, the 21st Century version of the paper-based newspaper.
If you choose to join Apple's iOS ecosystem, then your only choice for apps is the AppStore.
Similarly, if you choose to live in an area where Comcast has a monopoly then your only choice for broadband is Comcast.
Apple sells TV through iTunes. Comcast sells TV through cable. Why would Comcast allow Apple to sell movies using their infrastructure? Apple doesn't allow any competing apps in the AppStore.
Answer: Government Regulation.
Comcast knows full well they would have their license revoked if they tried to block competitors Internet based movies. So they don't block it, they just throttle it to make it less enjoyable and therefore less competitive.
<p>What are the relative number of internet users in the USA and Europe? What is the relative amount of data moved over the internet in the USA and Europe? Would those numbers have any effect on the connect cost or speeds available?</p>
North America 300 million internet users
Europe 566 million internet users
Usa Average speed 33.1Mps ranked 26
17 European countries are ranked higher, Montenegro is the lowest ranked at 7.85 Mbps with Romania ranked highest at 62.7
In Europe you are more likely to have greater regulation and oversight from governments and more government (both national and EU) investment into getting higher speeds.
Thanks, Singularity. Do you have any info on quantity of data transported? I assume that your speed numbers are average during realtime measurements and thus would be affected by quantity of traffic. I know that my 40Mbps rate is not anywhere that during peak usage times.
This issue is no different than the delivery of electricity. Imagine if you lived in Las Vegas and there was a cap on your total electricity usage because the casinos paid the power company a fee and your power went out every day for about an hour, or better yet, the voltage was cut in half (yikes).
The internet is a utility now like electricity. It requires expensive and sophisticated infrastructure, just like electricity. In needs to be available 24/7, just like electricity.
That sounds a lot like the point of view of Republicans - the point of view that opened the door to the country's financial meltdown several years ago.
That’s not what I’m reading about it, but hey.
History has shown that regulating businesses less is more often than not a recipe for disaster from the point of view of consumers.
So list your more oftens. We’ve already seen the amazing things that can be done with the nots.
If you choose to join Apple's iOS ecosystem, then your only choice for apps is the AppStore.
Similarly, if you choose to live in an area where Comcast has a monopoly then your only choice for broadband is Comcast.
Apple sells TV through iTunes. Comcast sells TV through cable. Why would Comcast allow Apple to sell movies using their infrastructure? Apple doesn't allow any competing apps in the AppStore.
Answer: Government Regulation.
Comcast knows full well they would have their license revoked if they tried to block competitors Internet based movies. So they don't block it, they just throttle it to make it less enjoyable and therefore less competitive.
While I ABSOLUTELY HATE AT&T, I hate the idea of some low IQ or even a high IQ drone dictating the rules for the internet. You know darn well that once the camel get's it nose under the tent, the entire stinky animal will be in. Case in point "Health Care". BTW guys have you availed yourselves for the 'free' hysterectomies yet? Oh speaking of the lack of love for AT&T. They've sold my UNLISTED land line # to gawd knows who. Their internet speed is a flaky 2.6 just like on the list but I've seen it burst to OVER 50Kbs.
Comments
Net neutrality has nothing to do with theft. In fact it is anti-theft. I PAY Verizon every month. I do not want them to throttle the content I request and ALREADY pay for.
Does the average restaurant customer inspect the restaurant's kitchen to ensure that raw meats aren't being stored with fresh vegetables?
To cite a popular TV show as evidence, have you ever seen "Hell's Kitchen" with Gordon Ramsey? Despite heavy restaurant regulation a lot of the places featured on that show had numerous food and safety violations. Again, that's with current regulations.
Customers today are quite capable of posting bad reviews online, telling their friends about bad experiences, protesting, suing and myriad other ways of voicing their displeasure or demonstrating harm done to them.
Regulations are not a cure-all and in fact, there are so many laws and regulations they are arguably impossible to enforce!
To cite a popular TV show as evidence, have you ever seen "Hell's Kitchen" with Gordon Ramsey? Despite heavy restaurant regulation a lot of the places featured on that show had numerous food and safety violations. Again, that's with current regulations.
Customers today are quite capable of posting bad reviews online, telling their friends about bad experiences, protesting, suing and myriad other ways of voicing their displeasure or demonstrating harm done to them.
Regulations are not a cure-all.
I think you're referring to Kitchen Nightmares. The problems there result from inadequate enforcement of regulations. Regulations are needed in areas like those because financial incentives do not always align with the public's well-being, and also because there is an information asymmetry -- since restaurant's don't post their cutting board practices and cleaning schedules for public review, customers can't always detect bad practices behind the scenes. A purely profit maximizing actor might aim to cut as many corners as possible without the customer noticing. Just because unsanitary practices might not sicken the average healthy customer does not mean a restaurant should be able to get away with them. One instance of foodborne illness is one too many.
I think you're referring to Kitchen Nightmares.
Probably. I haven't seen the show in a while.
AT&T was a government-protected monopoly. This is a historical fact.
http://www.corp.att.com/history/history3.html
I do not trust any shady liberal politicians, and the internet will be better off if they keep their dirty hands off of it. Government does not always act on the best intentions for its' people.
The next thing you know, they'll be trying to enact political censorship rules on the internet and they'll be willing to cede control of the internet over to the monkeys in the UN. If you give them an inch, they'll take a foot. Therefore it is better to give them nothing.
Government should stay out of regulating the internet. I do not believe or trust what this government says or claims. Look at the scam called Obamacare. Why should anybody believe what they say about the internet?
The internet is working just fine and there is no need for any politicians and government agencies to get involved. The free market will sort itself out. My internet speeds are blazing fast, and the internet has never been better. I see no reasons to implement any government regulations over the internet at the present time.
I am against socialism, especially when it comes to the internet.
...which "they" spend on buying stuff, and that my friend, keeps the economy ticking over.
It's time to take the power from corporations who pay the biggest bribes (lobbying) and return it to the people.
E.g. How will the Koch brother's latest windfall affect the average American?
The "free market" won't decide because quite frankly there is no such thing.
Access to a market has gatekeepers who already own the market supported by misleading media barons who brainwash the gullible into maintaining their power.
Government isn't for the people it's for the lobbyists with the deepest pockets.
I’ve found that, in many cases, less control–not more–leads to greater success.
That sounds a lot like the point of view of Republicans - the point of view that opened the door to the country's financial meltdown several years ago. It's also the point of view that created a cable industry oligopoly resulting in Americans paying much more for much slower internet than its neighbors in Europe and Asia.
History has shown that regulating businesses less is more often than not a recipe for disaster from the point of view of consumers.
What are the relative number of internet users in the USA and Europe? What is the relative amount of data moved over the internet in the USA and Europe? Would those numbers have any effect on the connect cost or speeds available?
And before anyone yells "but the Fed's put the satellites in orbit", (a) that was before private launch companies plus (b), do you really think NASA sent private satellites into orbit for FREE?
How would you feel if the Fed. Gov. suddenly decided it had to be in control of newspaper content and distribution? Would you not scream CENSORSHIP, and you would be 100% correct as it is a direct violation of the 1st Amendment of the US Constitution.
All the Internet is, essentially, the 21st Century version of the paper-based newspaper.
If you choose to join Apple's iOS ecosystem, then your only choice for apps is the AppStore.
Similarly, if you choose to live in an area where Comcast has a monopoly then your only choice for broadband is Comcast.
Apple sells TV through iTunes. Comcast sells TV through cable. Why would Comcast allow Apple to sell movies using their infrastructure? Apple doesn't allow any competing apps in the AppStore.
Answer: Government Regulation.
Comcast knows full well they would have their license revoked if they tried to block competitors Internet based movies. So they don't block it, they just throttle it to make it less enjoyable and therefore less competitive.
Europe 566 million internet users
Usa Average speed 33.1Mps ranked 26
17 European countries are ranked higher, Montenegro is the lowest ranked at 7.85 Mbps with Romania ranked highest at 62.7
In Europe you are more likely to have greater regulation and oversight from governments and more government (both national and EU) investment into getting higher speeds.
Thanks, Singularity. Do you have any info on quantity of data transported? I assume that your speed numbers are average during realtime measurements and thus would be affected by quantity of traffic. I know that my 40Mbps rate is not anywhere that during peak usage times.
The internet is a utility now like electricity. It requires expensive and sophisticated infrastructure, just like electricity. In needs to be available 24/7, just like electricity.
That’s not what I’m reading about it, but hey.
History has shown that regulating businesses less is more often than not a recipe for disaster from the point of view of consumers.
So list your more oftens. We’ve already seen the amazing things that can be done with the nots.
Of course, Apple isn't a local monopoly.