4 ms·

> people will leave Comcast in droves At least those with a choice, which I'm guessing isn't the majority of people. Comcast pays my building to ensure that no

by pivo 9y ago

> people will leave Comcast in droves At least those with a choice, which I'm guessing isn't the majority of people. Comcast pays my building to ensure that no other ISPs are allowed in the building. That's very common, at least where I am.

agumonkey 9y ago
Is this a special case in law or just known bribery or .. even plain normal ? ps: the NN FCC thing got me curious, how much the web would be different if we had to pay. Even a small fee for things like google.
- prophesi 9y ago
  It's pretty normal. My town has its own ISP. But they're not allowed to provide service outside certain zones, because Comcast already provides service there. http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/local/story/2016/mar/15/house-committee-kills-compromise-epb-broadband-expansion-underserved-areas-hamilton-bradley-counties/355438/ http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/local/story/2016/mar/15/h...
  - metastew 9y ago
    How is that free market or even capitalism?
    - zentiggr 9y ago
      Who said we have a free market? It is capitalism, because ISPs are using their financial leverage to their best interests.
    - khedoros1 9y ago
      It's certainly not a free market. Cities commonly provide exclusive franchise to specific companies. I've got Cox internet and access to Cox cable. AT&T provides phone service, but not any kind of internet access. My access options are Cox, mobile, or satellite. Mobile and satellite obviously have much smaller max transfers per month; they wouldn't cover my requirements for household internet.
    - agumonkey 9y ago
      it's consolidated free market. #rimshot
    - cmurf 9y ago
      Capitalism simply means the government doesn't own the infrastructure and provide the service to use that infra. It is not free market in terms of it being a competitive market. It is a free market if you think "free" means unregulated (or less regulated). But it's a shift of the goal post to consider free markets as unregulated ones. It was for a long time well understood that good regulation ensures competitive markets. Or when there can be no competition, to have highly regulated monopolies to in effect legislate the outcome that most people who are politically active want.
  - andrei_says_ 9y ago
    So... the government is protecting the corporations’ territory agains the people?
- RulingWalnut 9y ago
  I live in NYC, the city is basically sliced and diced by the internet providers. Every apartment I've had I haven't had a choice.
  - vultour 9y ago
    So why isn't anything done about this? This seems like a bigger issue than net neutrality to me.
    - xellisx 9y ago
      This has been an issue since MaBell.
- cmurf 9y ago
  It's not a special case in law, it's allowed because the U.S. does not have particularly strong competition law (anti-trust) compared to the EU or pretty much anywhere.
  - agumonkey 9y ago
    US split up Bell (and maybe Microsoft ? can't recall) that's something

by pivo 9y ago

agumonkey 9y ago

Is this a special case in law or just known bribery or .. even plain normal ? ps: the NN FCC thing got me curious, how much the web would be different if we had to pay. Even a small fee for things like google.

prophesi 9y ago
It's pretty normal. My town has its own ISP. But they're not allowed to provide service outside certain zones, because Comcast already provides service there. http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/local/story/2016/mar/15/house-committee-kills-compromise-epb-broadband-expansion-underserved-areas-hamilton-bradley-counties/355438/ http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/local/story/2016/mar/15/h...
- metastew 9y ago
  How is that free market or even capitalism?
  - zentiggr 9y ago
    Who said we have a free market? It is capitalism, because ISPs are using their financial leverage to their best interests.
  - khedoros1 9y ago
    It's certainly not a free market. Cities commonly provide exclusive franchise to specific companies. I've got Cox internet and access to Cox cable. AT&T provides phone service, but not any kind of internet access. My access options are Cox, mobile, or satellite. Mobile and satellite obviously have much smaller max transfers per month; they wouldn't cover my requirements for household internet.
  - agumonkey 9y ago
    it's consolidated free market. #rimshot
  - cmurf 9y ago
    Capitalism simply means the government doesn't own the infrastructure and provide the service to use that infra. It is not free market in terms of it being a competitive market. It is a free market if you think "free" means unregulated (or less regulated). But it's a shift of the goal post to consider free markets as unregulated ones. It was for a long time well understood that good regulation ensures competitive markets. Or when there can be no competition, to have highly regulated monopolies to in effect legislate the outcome that most people who are politically active want.
- andrei_says_ 9y ago
  So... the government is protecting the corporations’ territory agains the people?
RulingWalnut 9y ago
I live in NYC, the city is basically sliced and diced by the internet providers. Every apartment I've had I haven't had a choice.
- vultour 9y ago
  So why isn't anything done about this? This seems like a bigger issue than net neutrality to me.
  - xellisx 9y ago
    This has been an issue since MaBell.
cmurf 9y ago
It's not a special case in law, it's allowed because the U.S. does not have particularly strong competition law (anti-trust) compared to the EU or pretty much anywhere.
- agumonkey 9y ago
  US split up Bell (and maybe Microsoft ? can't recall) that's something