Bit
Premium
join:2009-02-19
00000
 ·VOIPo
 ·Cox HSI
| Same poop, different smell
There is no such thing as 'change' in Washington. We are a government of the corporations and for the corporations and that will never change so long as corporations and other special interests are allowed to bribe contribute to Congress and the Administration who pulls the FCC's strings.
--
POKE 65495,1 |
|
sonicmerlin
join:2009-05-24
Cleveland, OH
1 edit | Um...
There *is* change, which is why they're rushing to get this deal passed before Genachowski is appointed as head of the FCC.
This really demonstrates the true nature of the Republican party. Everything the FCC has ever done ever since being dominated by Republicans has been to help companies make as much money as possible while providing as little service to consumers as possible.
When Genachowski is put in charge, things will definitely change.
It just shocks me that Republicans are allowed over and over again, decade after decade, to have such anti-consumer and anti-non rich person influence over American life.
If you would read A People's History of the United States you would realize the people up top, especially Republicans, have never had the average American's best interests at heart. They've always been concerned with the capitalistic elite. It sickens me to watch stupid people fall for their lies year after year. |
|
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02 | I believe the dysfunction here is truly bi-partisan in nature. Copps (a Democrat) is currently in charge, with he, Adelstein (a Democrat) and McDowell (Republican) also poised to sign off on these conditions.... |
|
hoyleysox
join:2003-11-07
Long Beach, CA | Naked DSL was a joke
AT&T let my friend order naked DSL, but they could not get it to work. After a month and three technician visits, they finally figured out that she had been plugged into Uverse equipment in the CO. She cancelled her naked DSL order. |
|
sonicmerlin
join:2009-05-24
Cleveland, OH
| reply to Karl Bode
Re: Um...
Copps can't do anything until Genachowski, his new boss, has the authority.
And really it's less about whether an individual considers himself Democratic or Republican, and more about the organization as a whole, and which party dominates its appointees. |
|
espaeth
Digital Plumber
Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN | reply to hoyleysox
Re: Naked DSL was a joke
I have Embarq naked DSL as my secondary connection to Comcast Business services here -- since they upgraded the capacity to the remote terminal so there isn't a constant 10% packet loss every night I really have no complaints. |
|
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02
Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
1 edit | reply to sonicmerlin
Re: Um...
Copps can't do anything until Genachowski, his new boss, has the authority. Nope. Copps and the current three member panel can (and according to people in DC and the WSJ) are about to sign off on the merger before Genachowski even gets approved. |
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
·Comcast
 ·Qwest.net
·magicjack.com
 ·BeeCreek Communica..
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
| Quick Notes
Yes, the broadband penetration deal is weak assuming Embarq has the same broadband penetration figures as CenturyTel (a valid assumption since the companies are somewhat similar).
However CenTel is selling 512/256 "extended reach" DSL right now so theoretically they could upgrade people to 768/256 and still not roll out DSL to anyone else...and it would be an upgrade. I'd like 768 over 512 for the same price 
Though not having a "you must sell this DSL at this price point" term in there is rather lousy. Extended reach DSL appears to be $40 per month for CenturyTel and Embarq, a far cry from $20 768k like you can get in town.
At least these terms are very specific as to what they mean, so there are no weasel clauses for CenLink to get out of.
Personally though there should have been an upload speed requirement in there. 384k for 768k, 512k for 1.5M, 768k for 3M. Sat internet can do 300k up right now, so it's only logical, right?
Now if the FCC had had real balls, they would have required 100% 1.5/512 penetration within 3 years with 150ms or less latency to fcc.gov 99.9% of the time. The medium for this service could be CenLink's choice (DSL, fiber, wireless, two tin cans and a wet string) as long as the speed criteria would be met. Then in five years the 100% would need to be upgraded to 3/768. Pricing ould have to be $50 per month or less. Now I know that sounds high for people used to $20 DSL, but when you're comparing 1.5/256 sat internet for $80 to 1.5/512 for $50 or 3/300 for $200 or so vs. 3/768 for $50 (sat internet) guess who wins?
To look at the bright side of things, at least Embarq and CenTel haven't capped data transfers thusfar and probably won't anytime soon. |
|
JSRoman
Premium
join:2005-03-10
Callahan, FL
| reply to sonicmerlin
Re: Um...
said by sonicmerlin  :When Genachowski is put in charge, things will definitely change. It You keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better.
--
»www.seabee.navy.mil |
|
me1212
join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO | reply to iansltx
Re: Quick Notes
It is nice that they have no cap. And Embarq is the local telco here so I do hope my house is one of the house that get DSL from the must have service in 3 years. |
|
me1212
join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO
·VOIPo
| How much coverage to they have now?
It says they have to "•Deliver DSL of at least 768kbps to 90% of broadband customers within three years.
•Deliver DSL of at least 1.5Mbps to 87% of customers in that same time frame.
•Deliver DSL of at least 3Mbps to 75% of customers one year from close, increasing that to 80% of customers within three years"
How much coverage to they have right now? A
And "Deliver DSL of at least 3Mbps to 75% of customers one year from close" I hope they enforce that. Hopefully I am one of them that gets it, 1.5 would work but I would rather have 3m. |
|
sonicmerlin
join:2009-05-24
Cleveland, OH
| reply to JSRoman
Re: Um...
The FCC did a decent job under a Democratic President and Congress, and a so-so job under a Democratic President and Republican Congress. Now that we're back under Democratic control of both branches I'm looking forward to some serious anti-trust litigation. |
|
Bit
Premium
join:2009-02-19
00000 | reply to sonicmerlin
Um, some partisans are simply in denial that "their guys" are just as corrupt as the "other guys".
--
POKE 65495,1 |
|
SLD
Premium
join:2002-04-17
·Comcast
| reply to sonicmerlin
said by sonicmerlin :If you would read A People's History of the United States you would realize the people up top, especially Republicans, have never had the average American's best interests at heart. They've always been concerned with the capitalistic elite. It sickens me to watch stupid people fall for their lies year after year. What sickens me is that so many people voted for Obama thinking they were getting "change". Only about 2% were smart enough to vote for the only candidate that was willing to provide voters the protections they deserve (or do they?). |
|
Vast Wasteland
@sbcglobal.net
| reply to sonicmerlin
said by sonicmerlin :The FCC did a decent job under a Democratic President and Congress I guess you slept through the outrageous farce which is the Telecommunications Act of 1996. A Democratic Congress wrote it, a Democratic President signed it and a Democratic FCC implemented it. |
|
Vast Wasteland
@sbcglobal.net
| reply to iansltx
Re: Quick Notes
said by iansltx :Now if the FCC had had real balls, they would have required 100% 1.5/512 penetration within 3 years with 150ms or less latency to fcc.gov 99.9% of the time. The FCC would have to fix their internal systems so that fcc.gov was accessible at least 99.9% of the time, first.
My dealings with Embarq have been pleasant enough, especially compared to my dealings with Comcast in the same markets. Let's hope the new and improved combined company follows through on customer service and doesn't drown in combined chaos. |
|
Vast Wasteland
@sbcglobal.net
| reply to Karl Bode
Re: Um...
said by Karl Bode :I believe the dysfunction here is truly bi-partisan in nature. What dysfunction? The FCC was designed from the get-go to protect these companies from each other and create something of a market, which is pretty much what they've been doing for the last 75 years. Consumer protection is something that, if it happens in the pursuit of that goal, is just a pleasant accident. At no time has the FCC ever actually been a consumer-driven agency. |
|
nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
·Comcast
| reply to Karl Bode
said by Karl Bode :I believe the dysfunction here is truly bi-partisan in nature. .... unfortunately, such is the case with many things these days - the wars, torture, illegal data collection, copyright ...
and don't forget, this government isn't working for the public right now, it's working for big business - that's bi-partisan too. |
|
funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Washington, DC
·Verizon Online DSL
·Skype
| said by nasadude :said by Karl Bode :I believe the dysfunction here is truly bi-partisan in nature. .... unfortunately, such is the case with many things these days - the wars, torture, illegal data collection, copyright ... and don't forget, this government isn't working for the public right now, it's working for big business - that's bi-partisan too. ...but it's a status quo we can believe in!
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- District of Columbia -- KJ7RL |
|
sonicmerlin
join:2009-05-24
Cleveland, OH | reply to Vast Wasteland
The Telecommunications Act was actually very effective at first. Competition began to flourish in the mid to late 90's. It wasn't until the FCC, (Republican) Congress, and the courts gutted it later on, that it became a farce. |
|
