Voters say “yes” to city-run broadband in Colorado • Hacker News Board

Re: Voters say “yes” to city-run broadband in Colorado

#41

Post by criddell » Wed, Nov 08, 2017, 7:59 PM UTC

jjawssd wrote: post #38

criddell wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the right thing for Comcast to do Are you saying that as a Comcast shareholder? If so, bravo. I wish more of them thought the same way.

A government created by the people for the people must limit the influence of corporations on the fabric of society and itself. As for-profit corporations necessarily do whatever possible to increase shareholder value the only limiting factor remains the threat of violence by social mandate. In other words The Government. Without this limiting factor we will witness an increasing scale of abuses and tragedies of the…

Don't forget corporations are people too! /s

Re: Voters say “yes” to city-run broadband in Colorado

#42

Post by dchuk » Wed, Nov 08, 2017, 7:59 PM UTC

I’m failing to think of a single reason why it would ever be legally acceptable for a government to ban municipal broadband. I understand the whole corporate shill stuff, I’m speaking literally from the arguments FOR the ban...how is it justified at all?

Re: Voters say “yes” to city-run broadband in Colorado

#43

Post by s73ver_ » Wed, Nov 08, 2017, 8:03 PM UTC

peterjmag wrote: post #28

bllguo wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you misinterpret? Obviously it's not just you. No consumer would be happier if Comcast didn't try to provide a better product. The point is that judging by their past actions, Comcast won't do that.

They did in Chattanooga, but not before trying to sue the city four times: https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/ezpk77/chattanoog... A couple shorter articles on the same topic: https://www.theverge.com/2015/5/1/8530403/chattanooga-comcas... https://consumerist.com/2017/04/11/comcast-introduces-gigabi...

So only after they had exhausted all other options.

Re: Voters say “yes” to city-run broadband in Colorado

#44

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Nov 08, 2017, 8:04 PM UTC

exhilaration wrote: post #7

Whenever this happens - and it happens a lot - Comcast & Co just goes up a level to the state legislature and has them outlaw municipal broadband: https://www.publicintegrity.org/2014/08/28/15404/how-big-tel... Can't they just do the same thing in Colorado?

[deleted]

Re: Voters say “yes” to city-run broadband in Colorado

#45

Post by rayiner » Wed, Nov 08, 2017, 8:06 PM UTC

chungy wrote: post #9

sizzzzlerz wrote: post #6

Keep your powder dry, Coloradians. COMCAST is like some non-giving up cable guy who simply won't let citizens determine their own fate when there is oodles of money to be made from them instead. Prepare for them to come back through the rear door, bribing the legislature and congress to enact laws that restrict the practice just approved.

Maybe it's just me, but the right thing for Comcast to do is try to provide a better product. Competition is healthy, legislation is illness.

You can’t “compete” with a municipal service. How many competing options do you have for your water or sewer or trash pickup? It’s a reasonable argument that broadband should be provided municipally. But cloaking it in the guise of “competition” is disingenuous.

Re: Voters say “yes” to city-run broadband in Colorado

#46

Post by tooltalk » Wed, Nov 08, 2017, 8:06 PM UTC

Knowing so little about the situation in Colorado, why can't they just allow more competition in the city, instead of running it themselves?

Re: Voters say “yes” to city-run broadband in Colorado

#47

Post by agumonkey » Wed, Nov 08, 2017, 8:08 PM UTC

peterjmag wrote: post #18

exhilaration wrote: post #7

Whenever this happens - and it happens a lot - Comcast & Co just goes up a level to the state legislature and has them outlaw municipal broadband: https://www.publicintegrity.org/2014/08/28/15404/how-big-tel... Can't they just do the same thing in Colorado?

Theoretically, yes. In fact, Senate Bill 152, passed in 2005, already outlaws municipal broadband. From the article: Colorado has a state law requiring municipalities to hold referendums before they can provide cable, telecom, or broadband service. Yesterday, voters in Eagle County and Boulder County authorized their local governments to build broadband networks, "bringing the total number of Colorado counties that h…

free market much ...

Re: Voters say “yes” to city-run broadband in Colorado

#48

Post by bkeroack » Wed, Nov 08, 2017, 8:11 PM UTC

What are the odds that the city will run an ISP better than, say, the DMV?

Re: Voters say “yes” to city-run broadband in Colorado

#49

Post by superkuh » Wed, Nov 08, 2017, 8:13 PM UTC

s73ver_ wrote: post #43

peterjmag wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They did in Chattanooga, but not before trying to sue the city four times: https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/ezpk77/chattanoog... A couple shorter articles on the same topic: https://www.theverge.com/2015/5/1/8530403/chattanooga-comcas... https://consumerist.com/2017/04/11/comcast-introduces-gigabi...

So only after they had exhausted all other options.

It's the american way.

Re: Voters say “yes” to city-run broadband in Colorado

#50

Post by TallGuyShort » Wed, Nov 08, 2017, 8:14 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #45

chungy wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe it's just me, but the right thing for Comcast to do is try to provide a better product. Competition is healthy, legislation is illness.

You can’t “compete” with a municipal service. How many competing options do you have for your water or sewer or trash pickup? It’s a reasonable argument that broadband should be provided municipally. But cloaking it in the guise of “competition” is disingenuous.

There's competition in another sense. I'm east of Fort Collins where there's a pretty significant anti-government streak: but if Comcast manages to suck more than most government services they may have a problem.

They don't have to be the best or even only free-market option: they have to avoid pissing off their customer base enough that people vote for a municipal option. Not sure they're doing very well at that...