6 ms·
This is brilliant. I recently wrote in to my senator about net neutrality. His reply was a breathtakingly convoluted justification of not regulating companies l
by OtterCoder 9y ago
This is brilliant. I recently wrote in to my senator about net neutrality. His reply was a breathtakingly convoluted justification of not regulating companies like Comcast because antitrust laws would take care of it. I've never felt so insulted.
- chrisseaton 9y agoYou felt insulted because he has a different opinion to you? Or did he write something insulting in his reply?
- nnash 9y agoYou can count the number of companies that own all American media on one hand. How is it that anti-trust is "taking care of it" again?
- chrisseaton 9y agoMaybe he thinks more than one company is sufficient then? But that’s still just a civil difference of opinion! It’s not insulting to be disagreed with I’m afraid.
- zanny 9y agoExcept in the context he is speaking of, extremely few Americans have more than one company supplying them with Internet access. It is definitionally a monopoly, and to say existing anti-trust legislation is sufficient is saying the monopolies as they exist now are acceptable and nothing needs to be done. It is a dismissive comment from the senator, he should feel insulted. It is like saying "help I'm bleeding" and the guy next to you saying "its not that bad, get over yourself".
- thisacctforreal 9y agoor him saying “it’s ok, wait a little longer and a hearse will come help.”
- chiefalchemist 9y agoI'm not so sure monopoly captures the root of the internet access problem. Yes, in many markets there is a single provider (e.g., Comcast). There are other providers (e.g., Verizon). But neither enters the other's markets. I'm not suggesting their is a spoken conspiracy. But when neither side benefits from direct competition, what's the word for that?
- OtterCoder 9y agoTrust, in the business sense of the word. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trust_(business) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trust_(business) In the days of Rockefeller, these things were a little more formal. Nowadays companies know better than to put such silent agreements in writing.
- s73ver_ 9y agoIt is when the "disagreement" is not only flat out wrong, but condescendingly so.
- dcre 9y agoIt's insulting when people say something you both know is stupid but they act like they're just making a civil good-faith argument. Kind of like what you're doing.
- ch4s3 9y agoWhich senator was this?
- OtterCoder 9y agoSenator Lee, who happens to be on the Antitrust Subcommittee.
- ch4s3 9y agoThat is highly disappointing to hear.
- genzoman 9y ago"breathtakingly" convoluted. Click bait alert level 100.
- sjg007 9y agoThat’s an oxymoron... not regulating a company because anti trust..