aztek Posted December 18, 2017 #151 Share Posted December 18, 2017 examples of those restrictions have been posted in this thread multiple times. good summary in post 69 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+OverSword Posted December 18, 2017 Author #152 Share Posted December 18, 2017 21 minutes ago, Tiggs said: Okay. Perhaps you'd be kind enough to walk us through the restrictions that Net Neutrality legislation has put in place, that you believe is stopping new ISP's jumping into the market, right now. Yeah, I can't quote that but what you can do is search for Wi-Fi on your phone and see how many options you have to subscribe to (hint: it's just one.). And now that it's been repealed take a look in a couple or six months and see how many more choices and plans you have to choose from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiggs Posted December 18, 2017 #153 Share Posted December 18, 2017 Just now, OverSword said: Yeah, I can't quote that but what you can do is search for Wi-Fi on your phone and see how many options you have to subscribe to (hint: it's just one.). And now that it's been repealed take a look in a couple or six months and see how many more choices and plans you have to choose from. So... why didn't all of these ISP's pop up into existence before Net Neutrality came into force? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+OverSword Posted December 18, 2017 Author #154 Share Posted December 18, 2017 10 minutes ago, Tiggs said: So... why didn't all of these ISP's pop up into existence before Net Neutrality came into force? Probably because they were mainly run by your cable companies. You know the one's with the government granted franchises that eliminates competition? If I'm wrong I'll admit it in July, okay. But I'm not. It's going to end up being highly competitive like cellular plans, you'll see. It's too huge of an industry with too many opportunities to be innovative for the type of shenanigans you're worried about to be a viable business model. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent0range Posted December 19, 2017 #155 Share Posted December 19, 2017 6 hours ago, OverSword said: Probably because they were mainly run by your cable companies. You know the one's with the government granted franchises that eliminates competition? If I'm wrong I'll admit it in July, okay. But I'm not. It's going to end up being highly competitive like cellular plans, you'll see. It's too huge of an industry with too many opportunities to be innovative for the type of shenanigans you're worried about to be a viable business model. Highly competitive like cellular plans? You mean a big 3 (4 if you include Sprint) and some crap prepaid plans with bottom of the line phones and no customer service? And how innovative can an ISP be? They provide a data speed. Nothing more. Please, tell me how an ISP can be innovative. Any small company trying to get into something like gigabit service would not be able to come up with the funds to create the infrastructure if they wished to do so, without sacrificing the ability to turn a profit in years. As opposed to cell towers, it would not benefit a large ISP to allow a smaller, competing carrier to piggyback off of their existing infrastructure. Do you think large ISP's supported this decision unanimously so they can applaud the amount of competition they have in your 6 month window? That's ludicrous. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+OverSword Posted December 19, 2017 Author #156 Share Posted December 19, 2017 12 hours ago, Agent0range said: Highly competitive like cellular plans? You mean a big 3 (4 if you include Sprint) and some crap prepaid plans with bottom of the line phones and no customer service? And how many choices do you get with cable? 2? 3? No, you get 1. Guess why? Government regulation. Quote And how innovative can an ISP be? They provide a data speed. Nothing more. Please, tell me how an ISP can be innovative. Any small company trying to get into something like gigabit service would not be able to come up with the funds to create the infrastructure if they wished to do so, without sacrificing the ability to turn a profit in years. As opposed to cell towers, it would not benefit a large ISP to allow a smaller, competing carrier to piggyback off of their existing infrastructure. Do you think large ISP's supported this decision unanimously so they can applaud the amount of competition they have in your 6 month window? That's ludicrous. Don't be daft about the infrastructure caveman, the future is wireless so just who's infrastructure do you think they will need to piggyback off of, comcast? The innovation and competition will come from cost structures and, you guessed it speed. Which yes, you will have to pay for but it won't be cost prohibitive. But no big deal, you will keep crying until you realize you have nothing to cry about, at which point you will pretend this argument never occurred, but will nonetheless, I'm sure bemoan the next deregulation that will benefit you long term. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent0range Posted December 20, 2017 #157 Share Posted December 20, 2017 8 hours ago, OverSword said: And how many choices do you get with cable? 2? 3? No, you get 1. Guess why? Government regulation. Don't be daft about the infrastructure caveman, the future is wireless so just who's infrastructure do you think they will need to piggyback off of, comcast? The innovation and competition will come from cost structures and, you guessed it speed. Which yes, you will have to pay for but it won't be cost prohibitive. But no big deal, you will keep crying until you realize you have nothing to cry about, at which point you will pretend this argument never occurred, but will nonetheless, I'm sure bemoan the next deregulation that will benefit you long term. You keep saying deregulation, but, as I stated, the regulation stated literally, NO REGULATION. Telling an internet company they need to offer the speeds they advertise to anything you click is not a regulation. Allowing them to throttle speeds to as they see fit benefits not a single person, and does nothing for competition. Please, tell me how an internet company not throttling certain traffic stifles competition. This is seriously one of the most idiotic things people can argue against, ever. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+OverSword Posted December 20, 2017 Author #158 Share Posted December 20, 2017 20 minutes ago, Agent0range said: You keep saying deregulation, but, as I stated, the regulation stated literally, NO REGULATION. Telling an internet company they need to offer the speeds they advertise to anything you click is not a regulation. Allowing them to throttle speeds to as they see fit benefits not a single person, and does nothing for competition. Please, tell me how an internet company not throttling certain traffic stifles competition. This is seriously one of the most idiotic things people can argue against, ever. Good for you I'm sure your internet experience will be a living hell from now on and if you are able to log on you can rub it in my face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now