The Net Neutrality Thread

[GodFearinGunTotin]

It could go this way. Let's look at public utilities further. NIPSCO surely has a monopoly here. And yes, they charge per use. There is no room for a second set of power lines running around. What stops NIPSCO from quadrupling their rates? Or more? Really, the only price limit they would face in the market is the cost of running your own generator. If they kept it just under that price, they probably wouldn't lose many customers. So why don't they?

Because public utilities have their rates controlled by regulatory bodies, that's why.

So if Comcast wanted to go this route, they'd have to have rates controlled as well. And they'd certainly lose a big portion of their profit because broadband data is a heck of a lot cheaper to provide to people than they want you to know.



There is finite space and weight to be held by a pole. But more importantly, the local governments are well paid to give them exclusive access.




No, actually I'm not. And I think roads are really the most accurate analogy for this issue.

Here's the issue, though: These cables are not privately owned. The physical cables may be, but the real value is the property that the cables reside on. Telecoms call it the 'last mile'. Getting a wire to each individual home is the truly difficult part of telecommunications, and in our current world it is only made cheaply possible by using public property that the roads currently sit on.

That property can only hold so many poles, and those poles can only hold so much weight. The market doesn't pick who gets to use those poles. The government does.

I want to run further with the road analogy, with some corrections. Imagine that the property underneath the road belonged to the locality, but the asphalt and traffic signals were owned by a private corporation (who gets exclusive access by paying off the government). We'll call this company Roadcast. There is only room for one road, obviously. Roadcast purchases this monopoly from the locality. There are tollbooths at each exit and entrance to the road.

Roadcast is a gigantic corporation. It also owns Walmart and various other stores. There is no tollbooth to Walmart... you can go there for free! Want to go to KMart? $100 toll. Why not? Why would Roadcast want anyone to shop at KMart if they own Walmart? Or maybe there is just permanent 'road closed' construction signs blocking your way to KMart. Oh well, better head to Walmart. They own AutoZone... prefer advance auto? Forget it. $200 toll.

This is exactly what Comcast is trying to do. They sell broadband internet but they also sell cable television. Netflix is eating into their market... what's their solution? $100 toll! In this case they're trying to charge Netflix that toll, but that cost will certainly be passed on to the consumer. This will only expand. Comcast has been buying all sorts of companies. I believe they now own Universal. You can do this sort of thing when you have a monopoly.

Back to Roadcast. The CEO hates guns. Bass Pro? $400 toll! Local gun shop? Permanent construction! Don't like it? Vote with your wallet and don't use their roads? Just stay home for the rest of your life?

Again, I don't have the answers for this. I'm not going to say NN is the best or only solution. I don't much like it either. But pretending that the free market will sort this out is just silly. This is crony capitalism, not capitalism. These people chose to get in bed with the government permanently, so I see no way to keep them in check other than through the government.

The problem with all this is you do have options. You have a preferred choice but that choice is wanting to optimize its revenue so that, among other things, continue to expand service and upgrade its capabilities. Comcast may indeed do all the outlandish things you suggest but will Dish, Verizon, or the various other wi-fi type ISPs that are out there?

One answer is to keep the federal .gov from further entangling itself in this. Additionally, let's roll back existing regulations that may be protecting the comcasts of the world and inhibiting those with better ideas. I see parallels in this argument as I do with the old argument about whether I perpetuate bad government by voting for the same old two parties or do I stand strong and insist by voting for a 3rd party I'm making a statement and standing for something.

 

[steveh_131]

The problem with all this is you do have options. You have a preferred choice but that choice is wanting to optimize its revenue so that, among other things, continue to expand service and upgrade its capabilities. Comcast may indeed do all the outlandish things you suggest but will Dish, Verizon, or the various other wi-fi type ISPs that are out there?

Except for the rare instance of fiber-optic, those other ISP's are not a viable replacement for cable internet. They simply don't cut it for some purposes.

One answer is to keep the federal .gov from further entangling itself in this. Additionally, let's roll back existing regulations that may be protecting the comcasts of the world and inhibiting those with better ideas.

Regulations aren't protecting comcast. Exclusive access to a monopoly is protecting comcast. Forcing comcast to share the wires with other providers is one good solution that I've heard, similar to the way telephone lines were handled.

I see parallels in this argument as I do with the old argument about whether I perpetuate bad government by voting for the same old two parties or do I stand strong and insist by voting for a 3rd party I'm making a statement and standing for something.

What exactly are you suggesting is the equivalent of voting for a 3rd party, in this situation?

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Except for the rare instance of fiber-optic, those other ISP's are not a viable replacement for cable internet. They simply don't cut it for some purposes.



Regulations aren't protecting comcast. Exclusive access to a monopoly is protecting comcast. Forcing comcast to share the wires with other providers is one good solution that I've heard, similar to the way telephone lines were handled.

[/COLOR]

What exactly are you suggesting is the equivalent of voting for a 3rd party, in this situation?

As I've mentioned up thread, there are numerous options for accessing the internet. There are probably some I'm not aware of. Maybe if customers that are disappointed in the status quo would quit supporting it and would start supporting the other options out there, they would send a message and the status quo would get the message and work to re-attract the lost members...I mean customers.

 

[steveh_131]

As I've mentioned up thread, there are numerous options for accessing the internet. There are probably some I'm not aware of. Maybe if customers that are disappointed in the status quo would quit supporting it and would start supporting the other options out there, they would send a message and the status quo would get the message and work to re-attract the lost members...I mean customers.

I don't have any other options at my home that would meet the requirements I need for my work. But yes, if people would all sacrifice it might help. I don't disagree. But that is a separate point.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

I don't have any other options at my home that would meet the requirements I need for my work. But yes, if people would all sacrifice it might help. I don't disagree. But that is a separate point.

I don't either. I've decided I'd rather live where I do and have to do all my work at the office rather than have access to broadband internet. Life is full of tradeoffs.

 

[steveh_131]

I don't either. I've decided I'd rather live where I do and have to do all my work at the office rather than have access to broadband internet. Life is full of tradeoffs.

Fair enough. Trade-offs should be market based though. This one isn't.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

There's nothing neutral about net neutrality

Net Neutrality Is Anti-Consumer

 

[steveh_131]

There's nothing neutral about net neutrality

Net Neutrality Is Anti-Consumer

First article is interesting. Second one is an uninformative propaganda piece. They're still buying the tired lie that data caps and throttling are about network congestion. They're not.

Cable Industry Finally Admits Caps Not About Congestion - After Insisting For Years Caps Were About Congestion | DSLReports, ISP Information

 

[mrjarrell]

Well, at least we now know why Cruz and his buddies are against Net Neutrality.

Politicians overseeing Internet received over $8 million from major cable companies in 2014 - TechSpot

 

[Lebowski]

Who says there isn't room for stiff competition? I live in a real small town, this was in my mailbox today:

Looks like Lebowski needs to update his Metronet service. Wonder if I can get in on the $90/mo 200Mbps package... but if the price isn't outrageous, I wouldn't mind 1Gbps....



As someone who works in IT, I'll say that I've got a few opinions on the subject but what gripes me most is the monopoly that certain companies have over certain areas. They have zero incentive to operate exceptionally because your options include no internet, or their internet. It's nice that I've got options like I do in a small town of 12,000~

 

[JTScribe]

Who says there isn't room for stiff competition? I live in a real small town, this was in my mailbox today:

Looks like Lebowski needs to update his Metronet service. Wonder if I can get in on the $90/mo 200Mbps package... but if the price isn't outrageous, I wouldn't mind 1Gbps....



As someone who works in IT, I'll say that I've got a few opinions on the subject but what gripes me most is the monopoly that certain companies have over certain areas. They have zero incentive to operate exceptionally because your options include no internet, or their internet. It's nice that I've got options like I do in a small town of 12,000~

Nice, where do you live? I'm only getting ~60/12 Mbps.

 

[Lebowski]

Nice, where do you live? I'm only getting ~60/12 Mbps.

Look at the office address on the pamphlet. Within walking distance of that.

My only complaint is that I don't really need/want the TV or phone bundle, but the cost for the internet by itself isn't as reasonable unfortunately. In fact, the deals they have with just internet/tv are no where as attractive as the deals combining all three.

 

[AA&E]

I saw Senator Boehner on facebook talking about how horrible an idea Net Neutrality is, how it was the government getting involved to tell you what you can and can not do with the internet. I am so tired of being lied to by political hacks that think we are too stupid to see through their bull****. Guess we can file Boehner into the camp of "getting political contributions from ISP's"

it's one think to support a cause for various reasons. It's completely another to lie to the people you are supposed to be representing in effort to mislead them into supporting your position. What a dirty corrupt bastard.

(registered republican)

 

[JTScribe]

Look at the office address on the pamphlet. Within walking distance of that.

My only complaint is that I don't really need/want the TV or phone bundle, but the cost for the internet by itself isn't as reasonable unfortunately. In fact, the deals they have with just internet/tv are no where as attractive as the deals combining all three.

Yeah, I own my own modem and would have to rent one from the cable company to do their phone, so every time I call they are bugging the crap out of me to do the Triple Play. Don't have a home phone and don't need one. We have three cell phones and a work VOIP phone, I think we're set, LOL.

 

[KLB]

Who says there isn't room for stiff competition? I live in a real small town, this was in my mailbox today:

Looks like Lebowski needs to update his Metronet service. Wonder if I can get in on the $90/mo 200Mbps package... but if the price isn't outrageous, I wouldn't mind 1Gbps....



As someone who works in IT, I'll say that I've got a few opinions on the subject but what gripes me most is the monopoly that certain companies have over certain areas. They have zero incentive to operate exceptionally because your options include no internet, or their internet. It's nice that I've got options like I do in a small town of 12,000~

I doubt you would notice any difference between 200Mps and 1Gps.

 

[HeadlessRoland]

I see no way to keep them in check other than through the government.

Statists gonna State, eh, Steve? Et tu, Stevie?

 

[poptab]

In a way it is. Many school systems have gone electronic for their students and an internet connection is a must for them. In my community all the kids from grade 6-12 work off of iPads and have to have access to the internet to perform their lessons. While they have access at school, that doesn't help them on e-learning days or at home. The local school system offers maps of free service provided via Wi-Fi at certain establishments in town, (library, Starbucks, etc..), but it doesn't beat having access at home. In the new world we live in access IS a necessity, for both individuals as well as businesses. I don't use a TV to get news and stay informed. I use the internet, as do many people, now.

I meant by law

 

[poptab]

I doubt you would notice any difference between 200Mps and 1Gps.

Challenge accepted.

Now I just need a 1gps connection to test

 

[HeadlessRoland]

Challenge accepted.

Now I just need a 1gps connection to test

Unless you have a top-line 802.11AC router, you're not even going to be able to achieve a full gigabit per second of throughput, so what's the point? Same with 200MbPS - anyone who's running that much traffic most likely is not a residential customer. I'd have to come up with things to do and multiple terabyte hard drives to even come close to requiring a 200MbPS connection, as would virtually anyone.

 

[KLB]

Unless you have a top-line 802.11AC router, you're not even going to be able to achieve a full gigabit per second of throughput, so what's the point? Same with 200MbPS - anyone who's running that much traffic most likely is not a residential customer. I'd have to come up with things to do and multiple terabyte hard drives to even come close to requiring a 200MbPS connection, as would virtually anyone.

Virtually impossible. We have our whole corporation, around 4000 users, running over a Gig connection and we usually run between 100 and 200 Mps of combined utilization.