The internet should be a public utility • Hacker News Board

Re: The internet should be a public utility

#261

Post by int_19h » Mon, Mar 30, 2020, 11:18 PM UTC

plussed_reader wrote: post #163

tarde wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

on his first year he passed the "internet fast lane" regulation, against net neutrality, and made lots of profits for his cable and wireless business. only to four months later start a huge campaign with obama pro net neutrality for the classification of ISPs as utilities under Title II of the Communications Act of 1934 (with profitable exceptions). Opening the floodgates on direct white house influence on the FCC an…

What choice is there when congress can't/won't legislate? The regulation is (still) badly needed. We see the shortcomings of the current delivery system laid bare but if a company won't invest to keep a competitive advantage, again what choice is there?

> What choice is there when congress can't/won't legislate?

Work on electing different people to Congress, and meanwhile try to implement it on state level?

I mean, the whole point of having Congress is so that the executive can't just do whatever it wants.

Re: The internet should be a public utility

#262

Post by evv » Tue, Mar 31, 2020, 2:41 AM UTC

otterley wrote: post #146

evv wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True. But the root cause of the problem is the influence of the insurance/pharma industries on our legislative system. Pretty sure Obama was smart enough to see that. Did he do anything about it?

Like what, change the Constitution to alter the First Amendment? That's not something within the President's powers.

The president has a loud microphone, but I didn't hear a peep on this subject.. he could have called out the blatantly corrupt legislators.

Re: The internet should be a public utility

#263

Post by BadMrFrosty » Wed, Apr 01, 2020, 12:23 AM UTC

Imagine wanting the government to be your ISP. You think private companies mishandle your privacy? Wait until the government has total access to what you do online without warrants. Try putting that genie back in the bottle. Remember, these are the same people whose competence is manifested in pretending the water in Flint wasn’t toxic, intentionally infecting blacks with Syphilis and not treating them, and giving LSD to school children.

Re: The internet should be a public utility

#264

Post by otterley » Wed, Apr 01, 2020, 7:37 PM UTC

evv wrote: post #262

otterley wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like what, change the Constitution to alter the First Amendment? That's not something within the President's powers.

The president has a loud microphone, but I didn't hear a peep on this subject.. he could have called out the blatantly corrupt legislators.

Everyone loves their Congressperson; nobody loves Congress. And it is not inherently corrupt to leave your door open to listen to feedback.

Re: The internet should be a public utility

#265

Post by hiram112 » Wed, Apr 01, 2020, 10:36 PM UTC

temp20160423 wrote: post #225

hiram112 wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's approximately $46 USD, which is actually in line with most cable companies when you are a new customer. Of course, they get you by turning that $45 for 100Mb down with the modem rental for $10 / month, the 'fees' and taxes that are another $10 / month. Then, after your 'introductory' prices expire, you end up at $70 / month for the same 100Mb. But listen to this - a deal you can't refuse when your intro prices…

You can get the original promo price if you threaten to cancel. There's a song and dance with CSR but once they transfer you to the retentions dept, they are authorized to give you the original price again for a year. Actually, Comcast did give me a different deal once where the price was slightly higher than my original introductory offer but speeds were also better.

That trick had worked for me about 10 years ago. The last time I was buying my own plan, Verizon was not interested in playing that game. The 'TV bundle' was the only thing they would offer, which is why I ended up at $70 anyway. And that was in a city with another Cable internet provider and a (very slow) DSL option.

Most consumers don't even have another option, and the cable companies know you aren't going to just get rid of internet to spite them.