3 ms·
I support Ajit's argument here. Fast lanes exist in other countries and it is saving money for them.
by VeronicaJJ123 9y ago
I support Ajit's argument here. Fast lanes exist in other countries and it is saving money for them.
- libraryatnight 9y agoi don't know if it's saving money, I can't find information on that right now, but it does seem like a horrible situation to be in if you want to start a competing service with a company that's already established and included in an ISP plan. The fact that he is trying to sell this as a repeal of regulatory overreach makes me kind of sick to my stomach. And, it's apparently an overreach because it solves a problem that didn't have a chance to come about? I feel like he's bullshitting me. Regardless, I like my internet access right now, so what problem is he solving for me or the rest of the public by doing this? If it's that these fast lanes will save us money it better be an enormous chunk of money to merit a such significant shift in the way I experience the internet.
- takeda 9y agoSaving if you mean they are even less incentivised to increase their capacity, because less capacity means more people will purchase those fast lanes? Don't you understand that the capacity issue was artificially created to push this agenda? There was blog article from level3 showing the capacity issue was coming down to enabling another port[1], perhaps purchasing extra transciever that costs just few thousand (level3 offered to even purchase one for them if they can't afford it) [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20140907021805/http://blog.level3.com/global-connectivity/verizons-accidental-mea-culpa/ https://web.archive.org/web/20140907021805/http://blog.level...