7 ms·

Keep your powder dry, Coloradians. COMCAST is like some non-giving up cable guy who simply won't let citizens determine their own fate when there is oodles of m

Keep your powder dry, Coloradians. COMCAST is like some non-giving up cable guy who simply won't let citizens determine their own fate when there is oodles of money to be made from them instead. Prepare for them to come back through the rear door, bribing the legislature and congress to enact laws that restrict the practice just approved.

chungy 9y ago
Maybe it's just me, but the right thing for Comcast to do is try to provide a better product. Competition is healthy, legislation is illness.
- bllguo 9y ago
  Did you misinterpret? Obviously it's not just you. No consumer would be happier if Comcast didn't try to provide a better product. The point is that judging by their past actions, Comcast won't do that.
  - dhimes 9y ago
    No, he's agreeing with everybody that Comcast acts shitty when they do this.
    - hoorayimhelping 9y ago
      I think the comment you're replying to understands that. I interpreted it as them calling out the fake bravery of saying "maybe it's just me" before sharing a very common and widely-held opinion.
  - peterjmag 9y ago
    They did in Chattanooga, but not before trying to sue the city four times: https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/ezpk77/chattanooga-gigabit-fiber-network https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/ezpk77/chattanoog... A couple shorter articles on the same topic: https://www.theverge.com/2015/5/1/8530403/chattanooga-comcast-fcc-high-speed-internet-gigabit https://www.theverge.com/2015/5/1/8530403/chattanooga-comcas... https://consumerist.com/2017/04/11/comcast-introduces-gigabit-fiber-to-city-thats-already-had-it-for-7-years/ https://consumerist.com/2017/04/11/comcast-introduces-gigabi...
    - s73ver_ 9y ago
      So only after they had exhausted all other options.
      - superkuh 9y ago
        It's the american way.
- ssambros 9y ago
  Apparently corporations take the path of least resistance - it's cheaper to 'influence' the big state instead of competing in an open market. Now the question is: will increasing the power of the state make such behavior less or more lucrative?
  - jjawssd 9y ago
    > will increasing the power of the state make such behavior less or more lucrative? More lucrative because the state has a monopoly on the legal use of force. Legislation is cheap compared to real innovation. Furthermore, legislation is backed by the legal system which prevents the cash flow to Comcast from decreasing in this case. The legal system is fueled by tax money not Comcast's money. Comcast is benefiting from an instrument created and paid for by the citizenry to create an unfair balance of power in their own favor because the legislators which supposedly represent the people created the laws which are unjust to the people and are no longer representing the people but are instead representing their own pocketbook which is being stuffed by Comcast. As this trend continues we may experience an influx of non traditional political opponents similar to what we saw in the national elections one year ago.
    - hexane360 9y ago
      If Comcast can hijack our democracy and wield the state's power against public interest, then what's to stop it from hijacking our democracy to increase the state's power in the first place? How does creating a city-owned utility in any way change Comcast's lobbying position? Monopolies can and do form and persist without government intervention. The textbook example of this is utilities. Finally, if creating a city-owned utility is beneficial to Comcast, why are they vehemently against it?
      - cderwin 9y ago
        Arguably nothing. Look at Comcast's ad campaigns on twitter to promote its own version of net neutrality. Fortunately for now, it seems that there are more powerful institutions in directing the public dialogue.
- criddell 9y ago
  > the right thing for Comcast to do Are you saying that as a Comcast shareholder? If so, bravo. I wish more of them thought the same way.
  - jjawssd 9y ago
    A government created by the people for the people must limit the influence of corporations on the fabric of society and itself. As for-profit corporations necessarily do whatever possible to increase shareholder value the only limiting factor remains the threat of violence by social mandate. In other words The Government. Without this limiting factor we will witness an increasing scale of abuses and tragedies of the commons in the pursuit of ever-higher shareholder value.
    - criddell 9y ago
      Don't forget corporations are people too! /s
- rayiner 9y ago
  You can’t “compete” with a municipal service. How many competing options do you have for your water or sewer or trash pickup? It’s a reasonable argument that broadband should be provided municipally. But cloaking it in the guise of “competition” is disingenuous.
  - TallGuyShort 9y ago
    There's competition in another sense. I'm east of Fort Collins where there's a pretty significant anti-government streak: but if Comcast manages to suck more than most government services they may have a problem. They don't have to be the best or even only free-market option: they have to avoid pissing off their customer base enough that people vote for a municipal option. Not sure they're doing very well at that...
    - efm 9y ago
      You can get gigabit east of Fort Collins: http://web.wigginstel.com/service-area/ http://web.wigginstel.com/service-area/ http://www.nunntel.com/ http://www.nunntel.com/ Not in Fort Collins, though.
      - TallGuyShort 9y ago
        Thanks - didn't know about that! Doesn't cover my area, though :)
  - nsporillo 9y ago
    In the town of West Henrietta, there actually is competition for trash pickup as it is not provided by the town or county.
    - fjjeiu3338 9y ago
      There is "competition" in my metro area too. They compete for city contracts. No one company handles the entire metro space. Somehow that all went wrong with ISPs/cable/telco service Suspect it has something to do with how these businesses came up in a period where we were bought in deep to corporate overlords having control, whereas garbage is pretty old and less sexy/lucrative to monopolize generally
- cderwin 9y ago
  It seems to me that it is unrealistic to expect a company -- even one as big as Comcast -- to compete with the government, with the power of eminent domain and subsidizing costs with local taxes.
2bitencryption 9y ago
> non-giving up cable guy gotta admire a great Simpsons reference when I see one

chungy 9y ago

Maybe it's just me, but the right thing for Comcast to do is try to provide a better product. Competition is healthy, legislation is illness.

bllguo 9y ago
Did you misinterpret? Obviously it's not just you. No consumer would be happier if Comcast didn't try to provide a better product. The point is that judging by their past actions, Comcast won't do that.
- dhimes 9y ago
  No, he's agreeing with everybody that Comcast acts shitty when they do this.
  - hoorayimhelping 9y ago
    I think the comment you're replying to understands that. I interpreted it as them calling out the fake bravery of saying "maybe it's just me" before sharing a very common and widely-held opinion.
- peterjmag 9y ago
  They did in Chattanooga, but not before trying to sue the city four times: https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/ezpk77/chattanooga-gigabit-fiber-network https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/ezpk77/chattanoog... A couple shorter articles on the same topic: https://www.theverge.com/2015/5/1/8530403/chattanooga-comcast-fcc-high-speed-internet-gigabit https://www.theverge.com/2015/5/1/8530403/chattanooga-comcas... https://consumerist.com/2017/04/11/comcast-introduces-gigabit-fiber-to-city-thats-already-had-it-for-7-years/ https://consumerist.com/2017/04/11/comcast-introduces-gigabi...
  - s73ver_ 9y ago
    So only after they had exhausted all other options.
    - superkuh 9y ago
      It's the american way.
ssambros 9y ago
Apparently corporations take the path of least resistance - it's cheaper to 'influence' the big state instead of competing in an open market. Now the question is: will increasing the power of the state make such behavior less or more lucrative?
- jjawssd 9y ago
  > will increasing the power of the state make such behavior less or more lucrative? More lucrative because the state has a monopoly on the legal use of force. Legislation is cheap compared to real innovation. Furthermore, legislation is backed by the legal system which prevents the cash flow to Comcast from decreasing in this case. The legal system is fueled by tax money not Comcast's money. Comcast is benefiting from an instrument created and paid for by the citizenry to create an unfair balance of power in their own favor because the legislators which supposedly represent the people created the laws which are unjust to the people and are no longer representing the people but are instead representing their own pocketbook which is being stuffed by Comcast. As this trend continues we may experience an influx of non traditional political opponents similar to what we saw in the national elections one year ago.
  - hexane360 9y ago
    If Comcast can hijack our democracy and wield the state's power against public interest, then what's to stop it from hijacking our democracy to increase the state's power in the first place? How does creating a city-owned utility in any way change Comcast's lobbying position? Monopolies can and do form and persist without government intervention. The textbook example of this is utilities. Finally, if creating a city-owned utility is beneficial to Comcast, why are they vehemently against it?
    - cderwin 9y ago
      Arguably nothing. Look at Comcast's ad campaigns on twitter to promote its own version of net neutrality. Fortunately for now, it seems that there are more powerful institutions in directing the public dialogue.
criddell 9y ago
> the right thing for Comcast to do Are you saying that as a Comcast shareholder? If so, bravo. I wish more of them thought the same way.
- jjawssd 9y ago
  A government created by the people for the people must limit the influence of corporations on the fabric of society and itself. As for-profit corporations necessarily do whatever possible to increase shareholder value the only limiting factor remains the threat of violence by social mandate. In other words The Government. Without this limiting factor we will witness an increasing scale of abuses and tragedies of the commons in the pursuit of ever-higher shareholder value.
  - criddell 9y ago
    Don't forget corporations are people too! /s
rayiner 9y ago
You can’t “compete” with a municipal service. How many competing options do you have for your water or sewer or trash pickup? It’s a reasonable argument that broadband should be provided municipally. But cloaking it in the guise of “competition” is disingenuous.
- TallGuyShort 9y ago
  There's competition in another sense. I'm east of Fort Collins where there's a pretty significant anti-government streak: but if Comcast manages to suck more than most government services they may have a problem. They don't have to be the best or even only free-market option: they have to avoid pissing off their customer base enough that people vote for a municipal option. Not sure they're doing very well at that...
  - efm 9y ago
    You can get gigabit east of Fort Collins: http://web.wigginstel.com/service-area/ http://web.wigginstel.com/service-area/ http://www.nunntel.com/ http://www.nunntel.com/ Not in Fort Collins, though.
    - TallGuyShort 9y ago
      Thanks - didn't know about that! Doesn't cover my area, though :)
- nsporillo 9y ago
  In the town of West Henrietta, there actually is competition for trash pickup as it is not provided by the town or county.
  - fjjeiu3338 9y ago
    There is "competition" in my metro area too. They compete for city contracts. No one company handles the entire metro space. Somehow that all went wrong with ISPs/cable/telco service Suspect it has something to do with how these businesses came up in a period where we were bought in deep to corporate overlords having control, whereas garbage is pretty old and less sexy/lucrative to monopolize generally
cderwin 9y ago
It seems to me that it is unrealistic to expect a company -- even one as big as Comcast -- to compete with the government, with the power of eminent domain and subsidizing costs with local taxes.

2bitencryption 9y ago

> non-giving up cable guy gotta admire a great Simpsons reference when I see one