4 ms·

> Competition surely can help, but currently there is no competition in a lot of places. Places with a lot of people? People who have been harmed by what NN is

by webXL 9y ago

> Competition surely can help, but currently there is no competition in a lot of places. Places with a lot of people? People who have been harmed by what NN is intending to fix? > Monopolists also created a lot of blockers that prevent increasing competition. Facilitated by government. If government was responsible in the first place, why not just undo what they did?

shmerl 9y ago
> Places with a lot of people? It doesn't depend on numbers. Depends mostly whether there is some other ISPs besides the coax provider (which are the most widespread).
- webXL 9y ago
  So we should have a one-size-fits-all law? You're not that unimaginative, are you?
  - msla 9y ago
    What specifically is wrong with one-size-fits-all?
  - shmerl 9y ago
    Anti-trust laws are pretty much universal and we already have them. A lot of NN related abuse could be prevented if our legal system would have actually applied them, but it often doesn't.
    - webXL 9y ago
      So a universal NN law is what we need to supersede the "universal" anti-trust laws? I fail to see the logic.
      - shmerl 9y ago
        What else can you do, if the system refuses to use anti-trust properly?
khedoros1 9y ago
> Places with a lot of people? People who have been harmed by what NN is intending to fix? Yes and yes. I've lived all over southern California, but never anywhere that had two broadband providers available at the same address. Parts in cities; I'm not talking about little desert communities, or something. I have however been inconvenienced by various ISPs' content-based packet filtering policies. > Facilitated by government. If government was responsible in the first place, why not just undo what they did? Part of it is that you're talking about every individual local government, with lobbying from the incumbent ISPs. A lot of those governments have contracts with those incumbents, giving them franchise rights in the city. They can't just declare those contracts void. Beyond the local level, a lot of states have laws that make setting up a new ISP difficult or impossible (especially municipally-operated internet access).
s73ver_ 9y ago
I live in Orange County, CA. I have access to literally one provider.
- webXL 9y ago
  What city? Provider of what?
  - s73ver_ 9y ago
    I've lived in 3, and in all of them, there was exactly one cable/internet provider.
    - webXL 9y ago
      When was that? Seems to be not much of a problem anymore if this is correct: https://broadbandnow.com/California/Orange https://broadbandnow.com/California/Orange
      - s73ver_ 9y ago
        It's now. And that site is extremely misleading, because while all those companies are in the county, they don't serve the same areas. And as long as 1 person in the census block has access to the service, it's counted as serving the entire block.

by webXL 9y ago

shmerl 9y ago

> Places with a lot of people? It doesn't depend on numbers. Depends mostly whether there is some other ISPs besides the coax provider (which are the most widespread).

webXL 9y ago
So we should have a one-size-fits-all law? You're not that unimaginative, are you?
- msla 9y ago
  What specifically is wrong with one-size-fits-all?
- shmerl 9y ago
  Anti-trust laws are pretty much universal and we already have them. A lot of NN related abuse could be prevented if our legal system would have actually applied them, but it often doesn't.
  - webXL 9y ago
    So a universal NN law is what we need to supersede the "universal" anti-trust laws? I fail to see the logic.
    - shmerl 9y ago
      What else can you do, if the system refuses to use anti-trust properly?

khedoros1 9y ago

> Places with a lot of people? People who have been harmed by what NN is intending to fix? Yes and yes. I've lived all over southern California, but never anywhere that had two broadband providers available at the same address. Parts in cities; I'm not talking about little desert communities, or something. I have however been inconvenienced by various ISPs' content-based packet filtering policies. > Facilitated by government. If government was responsible in the first place, why not just undo what they did? Part of it is that you're talking about every individual local government, with lobbying from the incumbent ISPs. A lot of those governments have contracts with those incumbents, giving them franchise rights in the city. They can't just declare those contracts void. Beyond the local level, a lot of states have laws that make setting up a new ISP difficult or impossible (especially municipally-operated internet access).

s73ver_ 9y ago

I live in Orange County, CA. I have access to literally one provider.

webXL 9y ago
What city? Provider of what?
- s73ver_ 9y ago
  I've lived in 3, and in all of them, there was exactly one cable/internet provider.
  - webXL 9y ago
    When was that? Seems to be not much of a problem anymore if this is correct: https://broadbandnow.com/California/Orange https://broadbandnow.com/California/Orange
    - s73ver_ 9y ago
      It's now. And that site is extremely misleading, because while all those companies are in the county, they don't serve the same areas. And as long as 1 person in the census block has access to the service, it's counted as serving the entire block.