2 ms·
> and is in no way transparent They are pretty fucking transparent. And they are still a public regulatory body, appointed by people appointed by the public.
by orthecreedence 10y ago
> and is in no way transparent
They are pretty fucking transparent. And they are still a public regulatory body, appointed by people appointed by the public.
> There is no discernible reason that competing ISPs would choose to limit free speech of their own accord.
Unless that ISP wants to create a streaming video service. So they block access to Netflix so you can "enjoy" their video service as well. If you want the internet to be run the way cable service is, then great, good for you. But the rest of us enjoy the freedom of being able to access any resource connected to the network for one price.
> So switch ISPs
(You'd inevitably bring it up)...most ISPs are a monopoly so there goes that idea.
- wyager 10y ago>appointed by people appointed by the public. So they're not elected; they're hired by the someone who is hired by the people in congress with an 11% approval rating. Great. >most ISPs are a monopoly When this occurs, it is a result of shitty municipal government line leasing policies.