3 ms·

So because we don't have a full answer to your criticism, you'd rather we roast in Comcast Hell? Seriously? By the way, I do have a full solution to both part

by sounds 12y ago

So because we don't have a full answer to your criticism, you'd rather we roast in Comcast Hell? Seriously? By the way, I do have a full solution to both parts of the problem, which this margin is too narrow to contain. :) I'm in earnest here: I can't exactly divulge the trade secrets of my approach but I do think there's a good solution to it. And I'm really happy to say that Sonic.net is on the right track. If you're in their service area, try them out. You won't look back. Edit: I'll add Verizon FiOS is fine.

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
rayiner 12y ago
> So because we don't have a full answer to your criticism, you'd rather we roast in Comcast Hell? Regulatory regimes are systems. Leaving out key provisions can result in a "solution" worse than the problem. It's like leaving a support off a bridge design--you don't get partial credit. If you impose unbundling without creating a compensating incentive structure, you'll just drive investment out of the industry and end up with stagnation. Also, the choice isn't between Comcast/Verizon and Ofcom. It's between Comcast/Verizon and the City of Baltimore (or San Francisco, or <other city run by crazies here>).