I rarely use this account (this might be my first post), but the guy who says we should believe he's a lawyer because he used a fancy word like "cacophony" made me laugh.
I rarely use this account (this might be my first post), but the guy who says we should believe he's a lawyer because he used a fancy word like "cacophony" made me laugh.
Great news! Now ISPs will have to deliver the speed we're paying for, whether it's for Netflix or the Rock Garden Network. No double-dipping and no special, under the table deals allowed.
Tragic. I am an attorney who practices administrative law for a living. Anyone who thinks this will not be a tragic cacophony of unexpected consequences is, quite frankly, not even qualified to weigh in on the issue.
Great news! Now ISPs will have to deliver the speed we're paying for, whether it's for Netflix or the Rock Garden Network. No double-dipping and no special, under the table deals allowed.
Right, because this set of regulations wasn't under the table at all.
We haven't even seen how bad this is yet. Google, Verizon, Comcast and others were allowed to though, and they tweaked it. You think that's good for freedom? Think again.
Ha ha good to know you can balance many chips on your shoulder. You really do post utter tripe.
Still waiting for an actual reply.
Originally Posted by TheWhiteFalcon
We haven't even seen how bad this is yet. Google, Verizon, Comcast and others were allowed to though…
Were they? That’s funny. How stupid can people be to think that something “people” can’t see but “corporations” can is good for “people”? " src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
Here come the anti-free market big government apologists.
How do you have free markets when the only players in the market can be a handful of conglomerations? Without a level field of regulation where municipalities and private entities can compete for my money will I ever maximize my bargaining at the table.
Congolmerates I would have no trouble with, but monopolies, I do. When 75% of the broadband subscribers in this country do not have an alternate provider they can turn to, I think we have a problem.
The most exciting part of today's ruling is that municipalities can offer broadband if they wish to, without these price-gouging monopolists dragging them endlessly through the courts. Towns that afford it should issue bonds to finance the laying of fiber optic cables on major streets (like they do with streetlights) and allow in anyone who wants to access those last-mile pipes for a fee (like they do utilities).
It's time to bring broadband access to the 21st century. We've given these corporate behemoths a long enough time to do it, but they haven't --relative to the prices they charge ($230 for my Comcast + $200 for my ATT) -- delivered. Time for them get a massive kick in the butt (which I don't think it really is, btw).
Were they? That’s funny. How stupid can people be to think that something “people” can’t see but “corporations” can is good for “people”? " src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
Yep. They got to make suggestions and everything. Totally not suspicious!
Care to actually refute anything I’ve presented, then?
Could you please restate what you presented? It's a sincere request. There so many posts from you arguing about your arguments that I cannot really figure out what your points are!
(PS: You do know that it has been up for public comments for months now, and they received over 4 million comments, right? Did you bother to read it, before bloviating?)
The most exciting part of today's ruling is that municipalities can offer broadband if they wish to, without these price-gouging monopolists dragging them endlessly through the courts. Towns that afford it should issue bonds to finance the laying of fiber optic cables on major streets (like they do with streetlights) and allow in anyone who wants to access those last-mile pipes for a fee (like they do utilities).
Municipalities could, and in many cases they technically own the the cable in the ground, but they signed decades long contracts with the cable company that originally built out the infrastructure. Once those contracts expire, the city governments could decide to offer it at a reasonable price for the benefit of their citizens, however there is a big incentive to auction it off to the highest bidder and you are right back where you started.
I wish that Apple would build out their own infrastructure and make it free and exclusive for Apple devices only.
Could you please restate what you presented? It's a sincere request. There so many posts from you arguing about your arguments that I cannot really figure out what your points are!
Giant text. First page. Can’t exactly miss it unless you’re purposefully ignoring it. They certainly seem to be.
So will we need to obtain a license from the FCC to create a new website? Seems that’s the way things are going.
So will we need to obtain a license from the FCC to create a new website? Seems that’s the way things are going.
I have a servers in the US, Germany and Japan. I could just bail on the US if I found it unacceptable, although I'm not against licensing websites. I think it would be much safer if every website was required to have SSL certificates to send internet traffic, especially mail servers.
Comments
For all the caterwauling, it's one big yawn: Here are the 5-day returns for some of the big whiners:
I rarely use this account (this might be my first post), but the guy who says we should believe he's a lawyer because he used a fancy word like "cacophony" made me laugh.
Have to love AI, a constant source of amusement.
Great news! Now ISPs will have to deliver the speed we're paying for, whether it's for Netflix or the Rock Garden Network. No double-dipping and no special, under the table deals allowed.
Tragic. I am an attorney who practices administrative law for a living. Anyone who thinks this will not be a tragic cacophony of unexpected consequences is, quite frankly, not even qualified to weigh in on the issue.
The most accurate and forboding assessment yet.
LOL!
Great news! Now ISPs will have to deliver the speed we're paying for, whether it's for Netflix or the Rock Garden Network. No double-dipping and no special, under the table deals allowed.
Right, because this set of regulations wasn't under the table at all.
We haven't even seen how bad this is yet. Google, Verizon, Comcast and others were allowed to though, and they tweaked it. You think that's good for freedom? Think again.
Still waiting for an actual reply.
We haven't even seen how bad this is yet. Google, Verizon, Comcast and others were allowed to though…
Were they? That’s funny. How stupid can people be to think that something “people” can’t see but “corporations” can is good for “people”?
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
Here come the anti-free market big government apologists.
How do you have free markets when the only players in the market can be a handful of conglomerations? Without a level field of regulation where municipalities and private entities can compete for my money will I ever maximize my bargaining at the table.
Congolmerates I would have no trouble with, but monopolies, I do. When 75% of the broadband subscribers in this country do not have an alternate provider they can turn to, I think we have a problem.
The most exciting part of today's ruling is that municipalities can offer broadband if they wish to, without these price-gouging monopolists dragging them endlessly through the courts. Towns that afford it should issue bonds to finance the laying of fiber optic cables on major streets (like they do with streetlights) and allow in anyone who wants to access those last-mile pipes for a fee (like they do utilities).
It's time to bring broadband access to the 21st century. We've given these corporate behemoths a long enough time to do it, but they haven't --relative to the prices they charge ($230 for my Comcast + $200 for my ATT) -- delivered. Time for them get a massive kick in the butt (which I don't think it really is, btw).
Right, because this set of regulations wasn't under the table at all.
What was "under the table" about this regulation? Present facts, or please stop.
Still waiting for an actual reply.
Were they? That’s funny. How stupid can people be to think that something “people” can’t see but “corporations” can is good for “people”?
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
Yep. They got to make suggestions and everything. Totally not suspicious!
What was "under the table" about this regulation? Present facts, or please stop.
Were you allowed to read it before it passed? No.
Was Google, Comcast, et al allowed to? Yes.
Sound familiar?
Care to actually refute anything I’ve presented, then?
Could you please restate what you presented? It's a sincere request. There so many posts from you arguing about your arguments that I cannot really figure out what your points are!
What was "under the table" about this regulation? Present facts, or please stop.
Were you allowed to read it before it passed? No.
Was Google, Comcast, et al allowed to? Yes.
Sound familiar?
There's a Bill???? Damn I must have missed it.... STOP THE PRESSES!!!
(PS: You do know that it has been up for public comments for months now, and they received over 4 million comments, right? Did you bother to read it, before bloviating?)
Here come the astroturfing trolls and Obama haters.
Nice attempt at deflection, it doesn't matter if it were Bush, Obama, Clinton, Reagan, Kennedy, Washington or Lincoln, this is a bad thing.
Why do the people who cry for "freedom" the most openly welcome the boot heal of government regulation?
Municipalities could, and in many cases they technically own the the cable in the ground, but they signed decades long contracts with the cable company that originally built out the infrastructure. Once those contracts expire, the city governments could decide to offer it at a reasonable price for the benefit of their citizens, however there is a big incentive to auction it off to the highest bidder and you are right back where you started.
I wish that Apple would build out their own infrastructure and make it free and exclusive for Apple devices only.
Nice attempt at deflection, it doesn't matter if it were Bush, Obama, Clinton, Reagan, Kennedy, Washington or Lincoln, this is a bad thing.
Why do the people who cry for "freedom" the most openly welcome the boot heal of government regulation?
What?! Please provide some/any evidence to support this 'boot heal' nonsense.
Giant text. First page. Can’t exactly miss it unless you’re purposefully ignoring it. They certainly seem to be.
So will we need to obtain a license from the FCC to create a new website? Seems that’s the way things are going.
I have a servers in the US, Germany and Japan. I could just bail on the US if I found it unacceptable, although I'm not against licensing websites. I think it would be much safer if every website was required to have SSL certificates to send internet traffic, especially mail servers.
Giant text. First page. Can’t exactly miss it unless you’re purposefully ignoring it. They certainly seem to be.
So will we need to obtain a license from the FCC to create a new website? Seems that’s the way things are going.
Sure, just like you had to get a license for your landline telephone... NOT.
Keep up the FUD, it really adds to our opinion of you.