4 ms·

what would be so bad about that? doesn't that mean that we would have to "regulate" every successful business, because they could use their additional profit to

what would be so bad about that? doesn't that mean that we would have to "regulate" every successful business, because they could use their additional profit to gain "unfair market advantages"?

exogen 12y ago
I actually can't tell if you're joking or not, because, well... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_antitrust_law http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_antitrust_law
- novalis78 12y ago
  I was not joking. Some additional consideration of how monopoly and deregulation plays into this discussion: http://youtu.be/5Z_nBhfpmk4?t=47m25s http://youtu.be/5Z_nBhfpmk4?t=47m25s
  - exogen 12y ago
    Hmm, I watched from your starting timestamp for a good 10 minutes or so, and the point being made seemed to be that the government should have gone for ISP regulation sooner (or at least done something to prevent ISP monopolization sooner). Is that what you were getting at?
tzs 12y ago
Suppose my ISP has oversold their bandwidth (which they all, of necessity, do). I'm trying to watch Amazon. My neighbor is trying to watch Netflix. My ISP doesn't have the bandwidth to give us both a good video experience, and so has to choose which of us will get inferior service. Let's say I only watch video occasionally. My neighbor watches all the time. I consume maybe 5 GB a month. He consumes 1000 GB. Me and my neighbor have the same tier of service, and are paying the ISP exactly the same amount. You really don't have a problem if Netflix were allowed to pay my ISP to make sure that my neighbor's video watching gets priority, so he gets a great video performance, and mine sucks?
- novalis78 12y ago
  Thank you for the example. However, I thought that's quintessentially part of competition in a free market. Who would prevent netflix from offering a better service, make a deal with another ISP, allow other companies to offer products that fit your consumption and streaming habits better?

what would be so bad about that? doesn't that mean that we would have to "regulate" every successful business, because they could use their additional profit to gain "unfair market advantages"?

exogen 12y ago

I actually can't tell if you're joking or not, because, well... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_antitrust_law http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_antitrust_law

novalis78 12y ago
I was not joking. Some additional consideration of how monopoly and deregulation plays into this discussion: http://youtu.be/5Z_nBhfpmk4?t=47m25s http://youtu.be/5Z_nBhfpmk4?t=47m25s
- exogen 12y ago
  Hmm, I watched from your starting timestamp for a good 10 minutes or so, and the point being made seemed to be that the government should have gone for ISP regulation sooner (or at least done something to prevent ISP monopolization sooner). Is that what you were getting at?

tzs 12y ago

Suppose my ISP has oversold their bandwidth (which they all, of necessity, do). I'm trying to watch Amazon. My neighbor is trying to watch Netflix. My ISP doesn't have the bandwidth to give us both a good video experience, and so has to choose which of us will get inferior service. Let's say I only watch video occasionally. My neighbor watches all the time. I consume maybe 5 GB a month. He consumes 1000 GB. Me and my neighbor have the same tier of service, and are paying the ISP exactly the same amount. You really don't have a problem if Netflix were allowed to pay my ISP to make sure that my neighbor's video watching gets priority, so he gets a great video performance, and mine sucks?

novalis78 12y ago
Thank you for the example. However, I thought that's quintessentially part of competition in a free market. Who would prevent netflix from offering a better service, make a deal with another ISP, allow other companies to offer products that fit your consumption and streaming habits better?