3 ms·
>Clauses like this have been particularly hard on Small ISPs, and were one of the main reasons for the FCC’s re-evaluation of net neutrality. Here's the proble
by Clubber 9y ago
>Clauses like this have been particularly hard on Small ISPs, and were one of the main reasons for the FCC’s re-evaluation of net neutrality.
Here's the problem with that argument. Allowing small ISPs to compete might have be prudent 20 years ago, but it certainly isn't now. Small ISPs no longer exist. At this stage of the industry, the net neutrality regulation seems much more appropriate.
- parasitius 9y ago..the whole point is is that they don’t exist due to over regulation existing way above beyond and before net neutrality. You’ve killed them already. Try comparing some of the known freer markets in internet such as those seen in Poland, Romania. The nonexistence of smaller ISPs at present isn’t a valid justification to continue the status quo that suffocated them in the first place.
- mkempe 9y agoThere are many small, excellent ISPs; for instance Sonic [1] and Wave [2]. I hope people can and will now focus on the deeper problems behind awful Internet access in the USA, compared to most of the developed world -- local franchise monopolies, plus legislation against community-owned broadband (municipal, coop, etc. see what happened in Longmont CO). Once these problems are gone we won't need to worry about any issues supposedly solved by "net neutrality" regulation. SpaceX will soon offer satellite-based access. Maybe Google will restart its fiber program, too. [1] https://www.sonic.com https://www.sonic.com [2] https://residential.wavebroadband.com https://residential.wavebroadband.com
- alexeldeib 9y agoHappy Wave customer checking in! I have the gigabit plan and regularly see my actual throughput close to that.
- Clubber 9y agoOh, look at that. Neither one of those companies service my area, as I suspect most areas. Again, the point being, there are no small ISPs anymore.