 gaforcesUnited We Stand, Divided We Fall
join:2002-04-07
Santa Cruz, CA | Lobby Is all this BS intended to circumvent the already loophole filled agreements they made to purchase the spectrum in the auction?
--
Let them eat FIBER! |
|
| No, it's just layered on top of those meaningless Carterfone rules to ensure a good fauxsumer show. |
|
gaforcesUnited We Stand, Divided We Fall
join:2002-04-07
Santa Cruz, CA | I dunno if I agree with that. They are spending a lot of money for just show?
Good business strategy to get all the ducks lined up in a row before the LTE networks come online for easy killing and plucking.
--
Let them eat FIBER! |
|
Host:
Time Warner Intern..
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
3 edits | They are spending a lot of money for just show? The goal is to lay down a regulatory framework that prevents the FCC from expanding its authority through Title 2 reclassification, under which the FCC would have some actual authority to regulate ISPs. Verizon hopes to either get an entirely voluntary, self-regulatory system in place, or to get one of their well-lobbied Democrat or Republican friends in Congress to draft a law based on their proposal before more progressive laws with tough protections can be tabled. Both of those would be entirely for show, with Verizon proclaiming they support consumer protections, but having written said rules, knowing precisely how to get around them. |
|
|
|
 morboComplete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000 | Verizon's Arrogance and Greed Verizon's arrogance and greed is simply amazing. Perhaps more amazing is the fact that VZ managed to glom onto Google and get them to switch their net neutrality tune while gaining some credibility and goodwill from a Google partnership.
Google's goodwill has no where to go but down. Bad move. |
|
Mr Matt
join:2008-01-29
Eustis, FL
kudos:1 Reviews:
 ·CenturyLink
 ·Comcast
·Embarq Now Centu..
| United States is now a Third World Country.  Goorizon is to big to regulate. Goorizon will payoff lawmakers as necessary to buy legislation favorable to them. American Lawmakers have only the interest of the wealthiest Three Percent of American Citizens in mind they do not have any respect for ordinary American Citizens. |
|
| Have you ever been in a 3rd world country? |
|
| Proposal would let the camel's nose into the tent. The big problem with the "Goorizon" proposal is that it would allow the government to regulate the Net. Once that camel's nose is in the tent, that would be it -- game over! The FCC would attempt to acquire the power to enforce "decency" on the Net. And because any traffic prioritization would be deemed to be "presumptively" wrong, quality of service would go into the toilet and rates would go up.
The Internet has prospered for 27 years with no regulation, and it needs none. We should reject not only this proposal but all proposals to regulate the Net. |
|
| Brett,
Are the special access lines you use to carry your WISP traffic back to the Internet backbone part of the "Internet"? If so, then I am curious why you think the net has never been regulated. You yourself have advocated all over the place for even more stringent special access regulations, since they are an input to your business.
Also, if what you really mean is last-mile ISPs like yourself, you are wrong there too. All sorts of webs of regulations have applied since the birth of the Internet, from the Computer Inquiries to ISP-bound traffic access charges, to the 1998 Advanced Service Order. We are only recently in an era of un-regulation. |
|
| reply to SuperWISP
Proving once again, "only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." |
|
Reviews:
 ·AT&T U-Verse
·Mediacom
 ·T-Mobile US
| Verizon a consumer's predator? "Here's a real fact: Verizon wants what any massive, government-pampered duopolist wants: more strings-free taxpayer money, a lazy regulatory body with no consumer protection authority whatsoever, government protection from competition, and the ability to engage in any business practices they like, no matter how unethical or anti-competitive."
Sounds like the top executives would fail a business ethics course if they went back to college. |
|
| Business ethics? Isn't that an antithetical? |
|
 coldmoonPremium
join:2002-02-04
Broadway, NC
·Windstream
| reply to chgo_man99
said by chgo_man99:"Here's a real fact: Verizon wants what any massive, government-pampered duopolist wants: more strings-free taxpayer money, a lazy regulatory body with no consumer protection authority whatsoever, government protection from competition, and the ability to engage in any business practices they like, no matter how unethical or anti-competitive." Sounds like the top executives would fail a business ethics course if they went back to college. The only people that the execs are accountable to are the shareholders who (presumably) have profit as their top priority. I don't think they would care what grade the execs got in their ethics classes or even if they ever took such courses...
JMHO
Mike
--
Returnil - 21st Century body armor for your PC |
|
| reply to Karl Bode
Re: Lobby Good job Karl.
I wonder if big V pays their lobbyist with their $1.99 phantom fee...
»Verizon's $1.99 Phantom Fee Returns
--
.:|:. This link for rent...! |
|
| reply to Angrychair
Re: Verizon a consumer's predator? These courses do exist. At least in private schools. |
|
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·Mediacom
·T-Mobile US
2 edits | reply to coldmoon
I think schools really mean well by teaching those courses.
The more people in power who have some ethics, the less need for a regulation in government level.
These courses became very widespread since fall of Enron.
But unfortunately, the reality seems to be very different with government agencies overlooking consumer protections and going to bed with corporations for their money.
They should still teach those courses though. They should be in public schools as well. |
|
| reply to SuperWISP
Re: Proposal would let the camel's nose into the tent. said by SuperWISP:The big problem with the "Goorizon" proposal is that it would allow the government to regulate the Net. Once that camel's nose is in the tent, that would be it -- game over! The FCC would attempt to acquire the power to enforce "decency" on the Net. And because any traffic prioritization would be deemed to be "presumptively" wrong, quality of service would go into the toilet and rates would go up. The Internet has prospered for 27 years with no regulation, and it needs none. We should reject not only this proposal but all proposals to regulate the Net. Better "decency" rules than let thieves run wild. |
|
| reply to coldmoon
Re: Verizon a consumer's predator? said by coldmoon:said by chgo_man99:"Here's a real fact: Verizon wants what any massive, government-pampered duopolist wants: more strings-free taxpayer money, a lazy regulatory body with no consumer protection authority whatsoever, government protection from competition, and the ability to engage in any business practices they like, no matter how unethical or anti-competitive." Sounds like the top executives would fail a business ethics course if they went back to college. The only people that the execs are accountable to are the shareholders who (presumably) have profit as their top priority. I don't think they would care what grade the execs got in their ethics classes or even if they ever took such courses... JMHO Mike The only people execs should be accountable to are the ones that SHOULD ENFORCE THE LAW. |
|
 N3OGHYo Soy Col. "Bat" GuanoPremium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
kudos:1 | reply to gaforces
Re: Lobby The idea of "a lot" of money is relative.
If I thought I could make/save millions, a couple grand would be squat...
--
Petty people are disproportionally corrupted by petty power |
|
openbox9Premium
join:2004-01-26
japan
kudos:2 | reply to NOCTech75
Re: United States is now a Third World Country. That question is often asked of people that make the claim that the US is a 3rd world country. I haven't seen many affirmative responses. |
|
