5 ms·
The potholes comment really gets under my skin. Why not point out any of the thousand bad things about private companies? It we want to limit it to ISP's why
by jmcqk6 12y ago
The potholes comment really gets under my skin. Why not point out any of the thousand bad things about private companies? It we want to limit it to ISP's why not just point to the comcast service rep thing making the rounds today?
It's an elequent comment. To be honest I'm not sure that classification under title II is a good choice. Unfortunately it seems like it's the only choice we currently have to protect the internet. Lawmakers are unwilling to work together to solve the problem. Private companies aren't fixing the problems. If there was any other practical way we could do this, wouldn't we have done it by now?
There are lots of theoretical solutions. This is the only one I've seen that looks like it's actually doable.
- Zancarius 12y ago> Why not point out any of the thousand bad things about private companies? In fairness, I think the "potholes comment" applies to any lumbering, overgrown bureaucracy, regardless of whether it's private or public. Much in the same way major ISPs will drag their feet when asked to fix a problem, so too do governments when tasked to respond to requests that their regulations have mandated. Is it unfair to point fingers at one bureaucracy over another? Probably. It's the nature of the beast. Or perhaps more accurately, the nature of human interaction on large scales.
- thaumaturgy 12y agoThe potholes comment is especially hilarious to me. I live in a rural area where there are a lot of county and unincorporated roads where the residents are supposed to do the "collective private investment" thing to maintain the roads. Those roads are almost without fail the worst roads in the area. The city roads might not be great, but they're a heck of a lot better than private roads.