how-to block ads
|
Dagda1175
join:2001-06-17
Goleta, CA
 ·Cox HSI
| FCC Hands off!
The internet isnt a utility. you're owed nothing. if you want something you pay for it. they use that money to build better services. its called a free market. competition is good for all of us, and they should not be forced to share anything with anyone else. | |
Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26
North Andover, MA
 ·Verizon FIOS
| So "competition is good for us all", so the telco's should be allowed to remove all competition that they were mandated to provide in exchange for the use of public ROW's (and possibly funding)?
There is nothing free about the communications market. | |
ross
join:2000-08-16
 ·Digizip
1 edit | reply to Dagda1175
said by Dagda1175  :The internet isnt a utility. you're owed nothing. if you want something you pay for it. they use that money to build better services. its called a free market. competition is good for all of us, and they should not be forced to share anything with anyone else. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA"The internet isnt a utility"HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH"they use that money to build better services"HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA"its called a free market"HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA"they should not be forced to share anything with anyone else"HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
That's a good one! You "Free Market" monopolists/Telco shills kill me! | |
cwire
join:2007-06-07
Bedford, KY | you commie bastards kill me!!! | |
morbo
Complete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000
clubs: | commie? good one grandpa. | |
Dagda1175
join:2001-06-17
Goleta, CA | reply to ross
Of course you don't understand. it sounds like you actually enjoy being spoon fed government flavored kool-ade. | |
DSL Oberst
join:2001-11-29 | reply to ross
The internet isnt a utility
Wait. Explain this one to me; why is the internet a utility to you? Are you saying that it should have the same importance as electricity or providing water/sewage to your house? | |
fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20 | reply to ross
The internet is a utility huh? Please.. show us all one shred of evidence that says it is... until then, shut it, troll. | |
ross
join:2000-08-16
·Digizip
1 edit | said by fiberguy :The internet is a utility huh? Please.. show us all one shred of evidence that says it is... until then, shut it, troll. You don't think it is a utility, turn yours off for a month, and see whether you feel like it is a utility, or not. Ask your employer to turn theirs off also, see if they think it's a utility, or not.
Sick and tired of the Telco blowhards complaining about so-called "below cost" *cough*bullshit*cough*bullshit*cough* wholesale rates for line-sharing when they proposed and set the rates themselves!
Sick and tired of Telcos claiming they are going to build out a state of the art broadband solution any decade now.
Sick and tired of Telco shills ignoring the evidence, as shown by the French and Japanese experience, what true line sharing brings to competition, and the beneficial results it creates for consumers in the way of new services and lower costs.
Sick and tired of mindless crap about how a certain Telco really didn't suck billions of tax dollars/deferments from various state treasuries to provide "Fiber To The (insert favorite destination here)" without providing a single foot of fiber, period.
Sick and tired of hearing the Telcos haven't been sucking up USF fees while providing almost nothing to the supposed end-user benificiaries who were the targets of the program.
Still waiting on the "du-wop-oly" to provide anything but a song and dance act for their customers as it finds ever more esoteric ways of screwing a buck out of them without improving services.
If there were real line-sharing, I wouldn't be unable to get my ILEC to provide a new cable run from the C.O. to the routing cabinet on my block because my ISP would have contractual rights that would force the ILEC to replace the existing cable, which is at least 70 years old. Of course, if the ILEC gave a damn about me, and others in my service area, they would replace the cable without prodding. I guess the only contractual obligation they have with me is to provide a bill every month.
Furthermore, since the FCC has seen fit to prohibit sharing of fiber-optic networks, perhaps the Telcos should voluntarily abandon their unwanted, oh-so-expensive to maintain obsolete copper infrastructure to the public domain. | |
fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| You still haven't provided one shred of evidence to show that the internet is a "utility"..
While you are sitting here calling others shills, why don't you look at where your arguments are and ask yourself why you have a vested interest in the areas you complain. Why do you care about the wholesale rates?
In case you haven't noticed, a 'state of the art' broadband network has been built.. and it quickly is becoming underpowered. Since the internet really didn't get going until about 1999, what else do you expect for 7 years time?
Why do you look at the so-called evidence, or as some of us call it, the greener grass on the other side of the fence, of other countries with different economies and different geographical make-ups, and then arm chair quarterback and pass judgment how we should be just like them? You want this great French experience? Take EVERYTHING that comes with it. You want the Japanese experience? Why don't you like stacked one on top of each other.. and how much government money (ie: money taken from your paycheck) are you willing to have taken to be used for this great internet line.. Americans claim they want cheaper internet - this is what you get. You don't get state of the art internet for $14.95 a month. You don't even get it for $42.00 a month. You get it at more of a price point of about $100+ per month.
Why do you also forget and over look the fact that while you state that telco didn't run any fiber when there is plenty of fiber out there. Before you call me a moron, why don't you get the passion out of your posts, and start using something factual based.
You touch on the du-OPoly.. add a third, what's next? The tri-opoly? Insert number four and people will cry that it's a quad-opoly.. you're not going to stop using that term until you get it the way YOU want it. The term Tri and quad-opoly has already been used a few times on this site.
I could spend all night entertaining myself on this post alone, but I will stop here. I've never seen someone get it so wrong ever as you have.
--
"Complaining is the least path of resistance for the self-serving, the lazy, and I’m told it’s a woman’s prerogative..." | |
ross
join:2000-08-16
·Digizip
| said by fiberguy :You still haven't provided one shred of evidence to show that the internet is a "utility".. Well, you failed to accept the challenge to turn your broadband off, or ask your employer to turn theirs off. How far do you think a proposal to do away with the internet and broadband would go over in todays highly interdependent economy. Show me a list of corporations that don't consider broadband and the internet as utilities and critical to the marketing of their products and services.
said by fiberguy :While you are sitting here calling others shills, why don't you look at where your arguments are and ask yourself why you have a vested interest in the areas you complain. Why do you care about the wholesale rates? I only care when Telco shills insist upon keeping up the fiction of "below-cost" pricing for unbundled loops being forced upon the Telcos, when they themselves set the wholesale rates for unbundled loops at a level where they were sure they would be profitable. They only became "unprofitable" when the CLECs and larger ISPs began to eat the Telcos market share and siphon customers away from the Telcos with cheaper and better service. The "below-cost" argument is a lie, and those who continue to flog it as the gospel truth are liars.
said by fiberguy :In case you haven't noticed, a 'state of the art' broadband network has been built.. and it quickly is becoming underpowered. Since the internet really didn't get going until about 1999, what else do you expect for 7 years time? The internet only began to take off after the Telecom Act of 1996, and Telcos agreed to unbundle the last mile in exchange for access to lucrative long distance service they had been previously restricted from. Their implementation and technical assistance to their wholesale customers was laggard to put it mindly. The Telcos did there level best to put every reseller of broadband out of business by hook or by crook, and by and large, they succeeded.
In the period since 2000, there has been ample time for the internet and broadband access to it to be upgraded to a state of the art fiber system. The failure to upgrade the network lies with the reconsolidated Bell companies who have milked the aging copper infrastructure to an absurd degree, and forced potential competitors out of business, all with the aid of the FCC in defiance of the Telecom Act of 1996
said by fiberguy :Why do you look at the so-called evidence, or as some of us call it, the greener grass on the other side of the fence, of other countries with different economies and different geographical make-ups, and then arm chair quarterback and pass judgment how we should be just like them? You want this great French experience? Take EVERYTHING that comes with it. You want the Japanese experience? Why don't you like stacked one on top of each other.. I have to look to other countries to find out what the promise of the Telecom Act of 1996 could have brought to the USA because it never was implemented in the USA. I don't need to transform our entire society to acknowledge what so obviously works for France and Japan, and could have worked for us as well if the provisions of the Telecom Act of 1996 had been enforced.
said by fiberguy :...and how much government money (ie: money taken from your paycheck) are you willing to have taken to be used for this great internet line.. Americans claim they want cheaper internet - this is what you get. You don't get state of the art internet for $14.95 a month. You don't even get it for $42.00 a month. You get it at more of a price point of about $100+ per month. Seems to me that about half my phone bill goes to taxes and "fees" that are earmarked for subsidies to broadband deployment; that is to say they are not required to be used for a specific purpose. Those taxes and "fees" certainly don't account for my telephone service which is paid for directly. I agree that you don't get state of the art broadband for $14.99 per month. That is a loss leader "intro" price targeted at reseller/competitors to the major Telcos to raid the customer base of those competitors and drive them out of business. However, state of the art broadband has been successfully attained in the example countries cited. And, it had more than a little to do with the "utility" value/nature of the internet and broadband access, as well as the success of the unbundled loop/line-sharing imposed by telecom regulatory agencies in the subject countries. Unlike in the USA, where attempts to create competition and upgrade the infrastructure have dismally failed due to meddling and outright interference with the process by Telcos and their political minions, to the detriment of business, the people, and the economy. The future impact of the failure of US telecom to attain a state of the art fiber infrastructure will be felt by us all by a lowering of our ability to compete, and resultant lowering of our standard of living.
While $42.00 per month 45Mbps broadband is not available in the USA, it is available for about that price in both France and Japan in metropolitan areas. This could be so in the USA, but only if the Telcos get the hell out of the business. They don't share, or compete, well, and they sure as hell don't want any semblance of a free market to arise. I currently pay $40.00/month for 3Mbps/768Kbps through a Covad reseller. It is the same copper that AT&T owns, but I pay less to my ISP than I would have to pay to AT&T for similar service. And it would definitely be classed as only similar because the AT&T service would be more restricted in use, as well as less speedy. That same $40.00 would get me close to 100Mbps symmetrical service in Japan, or France. Of course, if FIOS ever becomes available in my service area (currently AT&T only), I'll be able to get state of the art "American style". Of course, that won't happen until AT&T and Verizon merge, and suck up Qwest as well. My, my, I see a pattern developing...
said by fiberguy :Before you call me a moron, why don't you get the passion out of your posts, and start using something factual based. Well, I thought I'd stick to the kind of hyperbole you are most familiar with as is obvious from your uninformed post.
said by fiberguy :You touch on the du-OPoly.. add a third, what's next? The tri-opoly? Insert number four and people will cry that it's a quad-opoly.. you're not going to stop using that term until you get it the way YOU want it. The term Tri and quad-opoly has already been used a few times on this site. I am stunned by your simple-mindedness, but see that I made a spelling error which may have contributed to your confusion. I actually referred to the Telco duopoly, consisting of AT&T and Verizon, punningly as the "du-wop-oly". My apologies, it should have read "doo-wop-oly", hence the pun re "song and dance". That is as far as I'm able to take you, so perhaps you could now explain your sputtering non-sensical blather.
said by fiberguy :I could spend all night entertaining myself on this post alone, but I will stop here... I have no doubt you are an experienced "self-entertainer", but please, don't deprive yourself on my account. I'm sure you are better at "that" than you are at presenting a logical argument to justify the mediocrity of our current state of broadband foisted upon us by the Telcos. | |
mgbaker
join:2000-05-14
Charlotte, NC
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to ross
Perhaps, you need to see a doctor since you are so sick and tired. Then, get a glass of wine, take a valium, take a hot bath and pull that corn cob out your arse. The last thing thing you might want to try- get off your arse, get off the computer, and go get a life. I'm always amused at you pudden-heads who take all this so seriously. Pathetic you are. Really. | |
justin
Australian
join:1999-05-28
Brooklyn, NY
Host:
IPv6
Business Connectiv..
Home/Office setup ..
Console/Handheld g..
Console Tech
| reply to fiberguy
said by fiberguy :You still haven't provided one shred of evidence to show that the internet is a "utility".. Actually I agree with Ross. The internet is probably the first new utility since the phone system. I'm not sure how many people thinking it is a utility makes it one "officially" but if, say, 30% of people think it is more important than the telephone then it is definitely a utility to those people (and I know people who would seriously place it ahead of running water - after all, they can buy bottled water just around the corner and how can they check whats up with the water utility if the broadband utility is down?). So if it isn't treated like that by the telco then congrats! you just pissed off 30% of the population of the country.
In 10 years I expect almost everyone will regard it as a utility, equal with the others.
By the way, for many people reliable cellphone service is probably "utility" status as well, also above basic telephone service. | |
ross
join:2000-08-16
·Digizip
| reply to mgbaker
said by mgbaker :Perhaps, you need to see a doctor since you are so sick and tired. Then, get a glass of wine, take a valium, take a hot bath and pull that corn cob out your arse. The last thing thing you might want to try- get off your arse, get off the computer, and go get a life. I'm always amused at you pudden-heads who take all this so seriously. Pathetic you are. Really. "Sick and tired" is a euphemism for "disgusted with", and is not associated with actual physical or mental status when employed as such. The rest of your advice appears to be classic projection; while your personal practices and local customs may be de rigueur in your "special" little corner of the backwoods, they are hardly applicable to the rest of us. | |
fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
1 edit | reply to ross
bla bla... more hot air huh? | |
fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| reply to justin
Ok... since no one gets the point.. let me explain it.
AT THIS TIME, THE INTERNET IS NOT CLASSIFIED A UTILITY.
People can claim it to be what ever they want.. hell, call it a cookie jar for all I care.. but officially, in all terms and definitions, it is NOT a utility.
Could it be ultimately classified as one? maybe.. but RIGHT NOW, it is NOT a utility.
No matter how you spin it, Ross is not right. He could double up on his "HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA"'s in this post and that won't change the current definition. I don't need to answer challenges or any of that crap.. He said that I failed to answer his challenge when I in fact asked him to prove his argument first.. he chose to do so with an irrelevant alternate challenge. Pretty clever huh?
Bottom line, I'm talking about definitions, he's talking about 'what it ought to be'... something that people around here like to do often which confuses the conversation. Talking in "what ought to be" when people are talking about facts never works.
Even with your post, I would agree with you if you said "the internet is probably the NEXT service that should be classified a utility".. but right now, it's not a utility.
To better clarify the matter, why isn't the automobile a utility, public ground transportation, airlines, freeways, etc. There are many things out there that could be claimed a utility based on needs and use, however, there are still a LARGE amount of people in this country that still don't have an internet line in their home, and many of those by choice. Those people still prove that the internet is NOT a requirement for the world to exist. Does it make life easy and a lot more entertaining? Yes.. but a government required necessity? no.
--
"Complaining is the least path of resistance for the self-serving, the lazy, and I’m told it’s a woman’s prerogative..." | |
justin
Australian
join:1999-05-28
Brooklyn, NY | you guys are talking at cross purposes.
But sooner or later (when there is real competition) the reply "read the fine print of your contract, nothing is guaranteed" isn't going to be good enough. | |
ohgosh
@cox.net
| reply to fiberguy
"HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA"
So that's the defense of the dimwitted few: that broadband is not "classified" as utility? Sez who? You? A dictionary? The 1913 Encyclopedia?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA
Really fellas if your authority is to pretend there is some sort of official utility-defining list that restricts utilities to JUST the things your momma called utilities you really do deserve to be laughed right out of the discussion.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA
Here's are real definition, no pretense at an authoritive list.The thing is defined by what it does. IT'S UTILITY, (Duh)
"A public utility is a company that maintains the infrastructure for a public service. Public utilities often involve natural monopolies, and as a result are often government monopolies, or (if privately owned) treated as specially regulated sectors."
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_utility Jeez...this really shouldn't be necessary | |
ross
join:2000-08-16
·Digizip
1 edit | reply to fiberguy
said by fiberguy :Ok... since no one gets the point.. let me explain it...( ...Blah, blah, blah...)...To better clarify the matter, why isn't the automobile a utility, public ground transportation, airlines, freeways, etc. There are many things out there that could be claimed a utility based on needs and use, however, there are still a LARGE amount of people in this country that still don't have an internet line in their home, and many of those by choice. Those people still prove that the internet is NOT a requirement for the world to exist. Does it make life easy and a lot more entertaining? Yes.. but a government required necessity? no. What/where the hell does your mythical "government required necessity" notion spring from? The government doesn't MANDATE that you must accept, or use, any utility services (other than sewage disposal service of some kind; because, face it, we're all a little full of shit, even you). And, contrary to your assertion, I believe the internet functions as a common carrier for information, social discourse, as an economic catalyst, and is by definition a public utility. You may not feel that way, but if not, I expect a call from you in about thirty days letting me know how you're doing without your canceled broadband service.
"From the Free Dictionary/Thesaurus: public utility
public utility
n.
1. A private business organization, subject to governmental regulation, that provides an essential commodity or service, such as water, electricity, transportation, or communication, to the public."
Broadband is another just another communication service rendered, however shoddily, to the public by Telcos. And by definition is a public utility:
"From the Free Thesaurus:
Noun 1. telco - a public utility that provides telephone service
phone company, phone service, telephone company, telephone service...utility - a company that performs a public service; subject to government regulation."
Like telephone service, most users, including you, consider broadband a utility. If you didn't, you would be willing to shut yours down as an example of how non-utilitarian you do consider it. Most people who have Broadband consider it a "must have" utility, I know I do. I believe most businesses also do. It is also heavily regulated by the government (even though their muse is often the very industry whose anti-consumer excesses they are duty bound to rein in).
Nearly every service/facility you have cited is regarded and treated as a necessity, is a utility and is regulated much like more commonly thought of utilities such as electric, water and sewer service are. They are de facto utilities. Freeways, and even surface streets, are regulated as to form, substance and usage, and are maintained by governmental entities. Same for public transit, and to a large degree airlines (heavily regulated, quasi-subsidized and essential to the flow of goods and services in our economy). Government provisioning of service is NOT required to qualify a service as a utility; strict regulation of the form, quality, and deliverance of service is all that is required, with or without the perception that a particular service is a "necessity".
As to those without access to broadband, that is a function of the failure of Telco provided/managed infrastructure, the elimination of competitive service providers/resellers, and is the subject of this entire conversation. Until there is a competitive market mechanism, no progress is likely on that front.
As to those who have access but have chosen not to subscribe to broadband, their numbers will dwindle due to unavoidable economic, political and social pressure/necessity, but there will always be a small contingent of the population that never adopts the mainstream benefits of the larger society. That minority is NOT the target audience of either the medium, or the message.
And finally, once more with feeling:
"Public utility-
A public utility is a company that maintains the infrastructure for a public service (often also providing a service using that infrastructure). Public utilities often involve natural monopolies, and as a result are often government monopolies, or if privately owned, treated as specially regulated sectors.
Public utilities can be privately owned or publicly owned. Publicly owned utilities include cooperative and municipal utilities. Municipal utilities may actually include territories outside of city limits or may not even serve the entire city. Cooperative utilities are owned by the customers they serve. They are usually found in rural areas. Private utilities, also called investor owned utilities, are owned by investors. Unlike public companies, private utilities may be listed on the stock exchange. Private, in this context, means not owned by the public or the government.
In poorer developing countries, public utilities are often limited to wealthier parts of major cities, as used to be the case in developed countries in the nineteenth century.
Examples of utilities are:
* Electric Utility, which in some instances can be Electric power transmission or electricity distribution
* Drinking water purification and distribution
* Sewage treatment and disposal
* Other waste disposal
* Natural gas distribution
* District heat generation and distribution
* Public transport
* Telecomunications, such as cable television and telephone lines
* Roads, including tollways
Developments in technology have eroded some of the natural monopoly aspects of traditional public utilities. For instance, electricity generation, electricity retailing, telecommunication and postal services have become competitive in some countries and the trend towards liberalization, deregulation and privatization of public utilities is growing. However, the network infrastructure used to distribute most utility products and services has remained largely natural monopolostic."
I needn't remind you that the internet infrastructure itself is a government creation, set up as a utility, whose maintenance and improvement has been somewhat privatized, but remains heavily regulated by the government. | |
fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| reply to ohgosh
Yea... Wiki is a GREAT source of authoritative answers.. the site that anyone can alter.
I guess we live in a land where, by all means, we can just call things what we want. Until the GOVERNMENT, which is we the people, decide that the Internet is a utility, then it remains anything but. oh ...and or DUHHH!
I guess that dial up internet should be called a 'utility' too, right?
Research your definitions a little better next time and tell Bush you've been left behind. It just makes me mad to listen to people make things up as they go just to suit their own needs.. Just like obese people have a 'disease'... I guess if it makes them feel better about their inability to take care of themselves, eat right, and exercise.. I guess that's the American way..
.. but still, the internet has not been classified as a utility.. and neither has cable television. Don't blame me because you don't understand the basics of our nation and our laws.. that's your problem.
--
"Complaining is the least path of resistance for the self-serving, the lazy, and I’m told it’s a woman’s prerogative..." | |
|
