3 ms·
Keep in mind that these regulations have advantages as well as disadvantages. Municipalities can easily prevent broadband providers from installing networks. So
by waps 12y ago
Keep in mind that these regulations have advantages as well as disadvantages. Municipalities can easily prevent broadband providers from installing networks. So if they compete with broadband providers, they can easily abuse their position.
This can lead to worse internet availability.
E.g. these are municipalities, right, so porn filters and other forms of censorship for example are pretty much guaranteed if you let them install their own networks.
- Chronic29 12y agoSome types of porn are illegal. So what's the problem with censorship?
- wmf 12y agothese are municipalities, right, so porn filters and other forms of censorship for example are pretty much guaranteed There are now enough real muni networks that we should have examples of this inevitable censorship by now.
- otterley 12y agoBut this has never happened in any municipally provided internet service to date (in fact, even municipally-funded libraries are loathe to install filters). Nor has the government-sponsored Post Office ever refused to carry indecent mails (think adult magazines and videos). And unlike corporations, government agencies are bound by the Constitution; any attempt by a municipal Internet service to filter based on content would face a First Amendment lawsuit overnight.
- pdabbadabba 12y ago> Nor has the government-sponsored Post Office ever refused to carry indecent mails (think adult magazines and videos). I agree with your overall point -- I am aware of no attempt by municipal broadband providers to censor the internet they provide, and the First Amendment would seriously limit their ability to do so. This, however, is not right: >Nor has the government-sponsored Post Office ever refused to carry indecent mails (think adult magazines and videos). It has done this on very many occasions and, in fact, these efforts are precisely how we got much of the First Amendment obscenity doctrine we have today. Some examples: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Comstock http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Comstock http://openjurist.org/276/f2d/433/grove-press-inc-v-k-christenberry http://openjurist.org/276/f2d/433/grove-press-inc-v-k-christ... ("'Lady Chatterley's Lover'...has been detained as unmailable by the New York Postmaster and, after a hearing before the Judicial Officer of the Post Office Department and reference to the Postmaster General for final departmental decision, was held by the latter to be 'obscene and non-mailable pursuant to 18 U.S.Code 1461.'") http://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/1990/spring/esquire-v-walker-1.html http://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/1990/spring/es... Another good comparison might be broadcast (and, to a lesser degree, cable) television where, indeed, the government monopoly has generated pervasive content censorship. But this has been made possible by a peculiar First Amendment rule that really only applies to broadcast TV. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Lion_Broadcasting_Co._v._Federal_Communications_Commission http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Lion_Broadcasting_Co._v._Fe... I, for one, would rather take my chances with municipal broadband than be stuck with the truly awful TWC service that I am currently stuck with in NC.
- danielweber 12y agoI'm also in NC (western part) and Time Warner is one of the two Internet services I have at my house. I have felt no problems with either (possibly because I have two and am ready to drop either if they start to suck). Is there something I should be looking for that I haven't?
- warfangle 12y agoCan you get 100mbps service for less than $100/mo? If not, you're getting fleeced.