  Shack
join:2002-01-17
Bloomington, IN | Sigh Does anyone expect them to do anything? | |
|
 |  King PDon't blame me. I voted for Ron PaulPremium
join:2004-11-17
Franklin, TN
 ·Comcast
 ·Vonage
| Yes Seriously, the FCC is going to stay as uninvolved as possible. If it gets to a point where the Bells start whining about losing money, then the FCC will step in and make sure that we, the consumers, are screwed again.
Remember, these jerks were given millions of dollars from us, so that all of us could have fiber to the home by 2006. I want my freakin' money back...and thank you Telcom act of 1996 for making sure that I gave a lot of money to these fools, and yet they still haven't delivered what they promised.
--
Forget 'em, Support the Indies.»www.ind-music.com | |
|
| IanR
join:2001-03-22
Madison, NJ | Re: Sigh The FCC appears to ignore and thereby encourage these thoughts of tiers. WHich is malevolent neglect IMHO. However, when "push comes to shove" they have stopped inmstances of bad port blocking. So the precident of their stepping up finally exists. This guy would be better served by amking a blanket statement that tiers are not their prefered route. | |
|
|  Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4 | said by Shack: Does anyone expect them to do anything? Not unless it is necessary, and not until it is necessary. All the telco Sturm und Drang is just lobbying leading up to the congressional committees actions on rewriting the 1996 Telecomm Act. And the FCC is not going to do anything pending actions by the Congress on rewriting the laws.
--
--
Join Red Room Forum
My Web Page
Conrail Photo Album | |
|
| | rileyjam514There You Go Again...
join:2005-06-26
Kearny, NJ | Re: Sigh There isn't anything the FCC could do with pending congressional action on telecom legislation as broad as the rewrite.
--
"It is my destiny to give back to the universe infinitely more than I have taken from it." -- Anonymous | |
|
| | .... Who is this idiot? Total moron....FCC it's high time your agency starts doing something instead of being redundent
--
All Things Art »kkart.deviantart.com | |
|
|  aaronfitzPremium
join:2004-03-06
Cedar Rapids, IA | Re: .... The FCC caves every time the telcos toss out a threat that they'll slow their broadband deployment if they don't get what they want. While this saddens and angers me at the same time, it really doesn't surprise me.
--
This signature space is for sale. I need to gather as much money as I can to cover tuition  | |
|
| |  Cerabus12Dial-up 4 Life
join:2005-08-09
Brooker, FL | Re: .... I say we do away with the FCC and Telcos in general and just have one company provide broadband and that is it no more cable companies doing it just one compay and that is all they do or let the government set that up and just get rid of all teclos | |
|
| | | | | Re: .... Oh, yea, let the government take care of it - and screw it up like they do just about everything else!! NOT! | |
|
| | | |  ieolusSupport The Clecs
join:2001-06-19
Duluth, GA | Re: .... Funny, you seem to have electricity as you are connected to the Internet...
The government (whether Federal, State, or Local) does quite well providing universal services to the citizens. It is pure right-wing bullshit to say what you said.
--
"Speak for yourself "Chadmaster" - lesopp | |
|
| | | | | wtansillNcc1701
join:2000-10-10
Falls Church, VA | Re: .... said by ieolus:Funny, you seem to have electricity as you are connected to the Internet... The government (whether Federal, State, or Local) does quite well providing universal services to the citizens. It is pure right-wing bullshit to say what you said. Damn -- and here all this time I thought that the utility providing my electricity was Dominion Virginia Power. At least that's the entity to which my checks have been written. And yet all along it was the "gubmint"...
--
That which does not kill me merely prolongs the agony. | |
|
| | | | | |  calvoiper
join:2003-03-31
Belvedere Tiburon, CA | Re: .... ...and ieolus totally ignores the fact that the government efforts to provide "universal service" in telecom have become nothing more than slush funds supporting companies running telecom exchanges which, years ago, were deemed "rural", ignoring whether or not today they are rich resort areas or densely populated suburbs.
"Universal service" has become as corrupt as other government subsidy programs including crop and tobacco support payments--now going to enterprises often formed around the concept of milking the government payment stream.
calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies! | |
|
| | | | |  AlpinePremium
join:2000-01-11
Atlanta, GA | said by ieolus:The government (whether Federal, State, or Local) does quite well providing universal services to the citizens. It is pure right-wing bullshit to say what you said. Hehe... It's hilarious to me to see all of these fools complaining about the FCC, a government entity, and then in the next breath calling for the government to run a nation-wide network for Internet. Does it not strike you how ridiculous that sounds?
The same socialists cry and whine about the lack of "competition" and then beg the govnerment to take care of everything. So we go from at least some competition (the extent of which is debatable) to a single-entity as pathetically inefficient as the government running the 'net. "Shut down the corporations!" they say.
Maybe I'm alone in not wanting the govnerment to control internet, phone, video, etc. Where did all of the bitching about privacy go?
You can't have it both ways...
Adam | |
|
| | | | As if their deployment could be any slower than it already is...
I find it ironic that Verizon's slogan is "we never stop working against for you". I didn't know they started working for me. | |
|
| | | | If the deployment of broad band was any slower it would be stopped.  | |
|
lgkahnPremium
join:2005-02-15
Londonderry, NH | wimp when are they going to hire someone instead of nominating an idiotic politician that can't wipe his/her own ass without asking someone and making sure it is ok. | |
|
 rudnickePremium
join:2004-10-23
Rantoul, IL
kudos:1
1 edit | Wow Kevin Martin is a complete moron. | |
|
| | | Re: Wow No, he knows exactly what he's doing. Bowing to corporate pressure to fuck over the American people yet again.
--
144 145 145 172 040 156 165 164 163 | |
|
| | | | Re: Wow As long as the FCC can possibly make money from this and they will, because once the bells implement the 2nd tier and start charging a tarrif you know the Fcc will have thier hand out as well as all the corrupt politicians. The way it works is that the Fcc and the Government will not touch the Major carriers and most of the wireless groups because they are raking in the money for them with these pitty taxes. | |
|
 viperpa33sWhy Me?Premium
join:2002-12-20
Bradenton, FL | It seems This is why the United States is ranked 16th in broadband deployment cause the FCC don't know what they are doing. It seems the FCC don't have there own policies or set of guidelines in place for broadband or the internet as a whole.
The FCC will sit on there butts for a couple of years before or if they actually do anything. In the meantime 2 tier internet will be so hard to get rid of that the FCC will just say, Oh Well. | |
|
Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
| our only hope it pains me to say this, but the only hope for broadband in this country rests with Congress.
The FCC is in full deregulation mode and apparently only listens to the incumbent industry, so I don't expect them to do squat except make things worse.
The recent hearing (Tuesday?) on broadband neutrality was somewhat encouraging as a slight majority of Senators seemed to understand what was at stake. | |
|
| | FCC=neutered. I'm afraid sir, you lack not only vision, but balls. The FCC is the tool of media corporations. Good luck, and good night.;) | |
|
| | It is there networks, you know. Folks, while we can all sit here in front of the keyboard complaining about what 'might' come of the network owner threats, we must all recognize that it is their network, and 'their' being shareholders.
If you wanted something other than 'best effort' service from one of these providers, go pay for it. If you do not like the abuse that these network owners are threatening, then don't use them.
Like the FCC, most consumers will just complain and do nothing more. Few change services. My suggestion is to drop your provider and help your local municipality start a muni broadband project. Go get'em, tiger!  | |
|
| | | Re: It is there networks, you know. said by GhostDoggy:Folks, while we can all sit here in front of the keyboard complaining about what 'might' come of the network owner threats, we must all recognize that it is their network, and 'their' being shareholders. If you wanted something other than 'best effort' service from one of these providers, go pay for it. If you do not like the abuse that these network owners are threatening, then don't use them. Like the FCC, most consumers will just complain and do nothing more. Few change services. My suggestion is to drop your provider and help your local municipality start a muni broadband project. Go get'em, tiger! That is a clear misunderstanding of the issue at hand here. Content providers (that you've heard of) are already shilling out bucks for their own pipes to the 'net. You as the end user are also shilling out money for your pipe to the 'net.
Their argument is that they, as a network operator, should be compensated MORE for traffic going across their network. They are already being compensated-just not enough for their greedy minds. So, in a typical old fashion Ma Bell way, they've dreamt up a new way to stick it to the consumers (the idea of phone rentals, bloody expensive LD, charges for extensions...these are "in our lifetime" anachronisms that nobody would tolerate now)...
BUT, unlike the old days, the content providers (Google comes to mind) obviously don't want this to happen as it would require them to either start charging or charge more for their content to recoup the "priority" access to networks they already have pipes connected to. In other words, it's bullshit. | |
|
| | lvas
join:2001-05-17
Glen Carbon, IL | Re: It is there networks, you know. it is exactly on point - SBC/Version own the last mile. while you state they are compensated plenty - it obviously doesn’t matter what you think - its not your company - nor are you the one spending approx 20 billion dollars to provide FIOS and HSIA. They are the ones spending the 20 billion and they are the ones that must find the revenue stream to justify spending that money. Or guess what - they won't build it. its simple business 101 - you have to make more money than you spend on something. and not only do you have to make more you have to make X % more than what you would make by simply keeping the 20 billion in the bank and making 7% interest on it. | |
|
| | | bmn? ? ?Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus | Re: It is there networks, you know. said by lvas:nor are you the one spending approx 20 billion dollars to provide FIOS and HSIA. Actually, that money came from customers...
They are the ones spending the 20 billion and they are the ones that must find the revenue stream to justify spending that money. Or guess what - they won't build it. And they should be able to without extorting money from content providers... They have been foaming at the mouth about offering IPTV and VoIP for the last couple of years. That's where the Bells revenue is going to come from next. Not playing monster on the internet holding up packets for weekly protection dues.
--
Too logical to be a conservative... Too practical to be a liberal... Too realistic to be a Libertarian. | |
|
| | | | | said by lvas:it is exactly on point - SBC/Version own the last mile. while you state they are compensated plenty - it obviously doesn’t matter what you think - its not your company - nor are you the one spending approx 20 billion dollars to provide FIOS and HSIA. They are the ones spending the 20 billion and they are the ones that must find the revenue stream to justify spending that money. Or guess what - they won't build it. its simple business 101 - you have to make more money than you spend on something. and not only do you have to make more you have to make X % more than what you would make by simply keeping the 20 billion in the bank and making 7% interest on it. Well, you know what? Don't freakin' built it! What the hell do I care? I'm a happy customer without them. So is everyone else, apparently-who else is frothing for this scrimshaw except the Bells? Nobody!
And that's really the point here-they are trying to build a case for a outdated business model (e.g. the good ol Bell days) that they are already getting nicely compensated for.
They don't want to build? Fine. If they build it and no one comes...who loses? | |
|
| | | | lvas
join:2001-05-17
Glen Carbon, IL | Re: It is there networks, you know. really - no one is frothing at the mouth for better speeds? Its only all over in dslreports that american is behind everyone else and that supposdly we all want 20meg down & 5meg up, etc. etc. well you won't get the speeds unless the 20 billion is spent to improve the network. I didnt mention Voip and IPTV at all. FIOS and HSIA is your dsl connection. yes of course once you have the speeds the Bells want to sell you IPTV and/or Voip - but you don't have to buy them to get the dsl connection (and the better speeds). | |
|
| | | | | | | Re: It is there networks, you know. So, by your logic, the content providers want more speed as well? They are already paying for more speed, or at least their hosting company is. The pipes to the home that you mention are only half of this equation.
Plus, between cable, wireless, satellite, and any other nonBell pipe choices, it is now possible to be ILEC free. So...they can have their cake, but I'm not having any. Neither is the big content providers who (again) are already paying for premium access. | |
|
| | | | | | | | Re: It is there networks, you know. No, actually I am dead on target target. Phone companies own their network and sell access to their network as they see fit and according to how the FCC allows them to operate. This understanding isn't a defense of the telephone companies on my part, but rather an argument that consumers are a lazy bunch and often whine about something than actually doing something about it--as I suggested, start a muni-broadband company.
Company executives at the phone companies have to answer to the FCC and their shareholders, not the bloody consumers. Best Effort is what consumers bought into, and this doesn't include an SLA. I do not like what they are doing anymore than anyone else, but I see their legitimate right to how they wish to traffic-shape their network traffic.
As a result, I say Google should tell them to f-off, and I would guess the telephone companies in return will employ traffic-shaping. But in the end the consumers that are not lazy will find alternatives and as a result the traffic-shaping, shareholder-answering executives will have to decide what's next.
Stop playing the lazy consumer and send a letter to your ISP threatening to leave. I'm betting, though, too little and more lazy than not will be the case. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | Re: It is there networks, you know. You seem to think that the internet starts and stops on the Bells network. Hogwash.
If customers, the lazy pricks you so easily dismiss, start getting the content they wish to see/view/use being blocked due to this extortion tactic, I'm betting they'll switch TO ANOTHER PROVIDER to bypass the Bells altogether. Yahoo/Google are pretty damn popular, so I'm guessing that Joe Sixpack User isn't going to tolerate their provider blocking or slowing access to those sites.
Free Market disciples should love this shit. The market will decide when the customers go around the bell messopoly all together. | |
|
| | how it happens Ed Whitacre to Kevin Martin: "Bark, Kevin - bark like a doggy for me!"
Kevin Martin: "Woof! Woof! Woof!"
Ed Whitacre: "good boy, now bend over for my friend Ivan!"
Ivan Seidenberg: "that's it, boy! Say you're my little bitch!"
Kevin Martin: "I'm your little bitch! I'll do whatever you want!"
Ed Whitacre: "He knows where his bread is buttered, Ivan - don't you Kevin?"
Kevin Martin: "Yes! Yes, I want a job after the FCC! Am I doing OK, sir?"
Ivan and Ed, in unison: "We'll see, boy, we'll see!"
And so it goes..... | |
|
| | Yahoo is sucking this up They love the fact the the telcos are going after Google and Yahoo's other rivals on this one since Yahoo has co-branded packages with all three telcos | |
|
lgkahnPremium
join:2005-02-15
Londonderry, NH | dd much easier said than done.. in many areas there is only 1 broadband provider... ie verizon etc. so although you may not like what they are doing.. you don't have a choice | |
|
| | New Telecom Act... http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9588_22-6036677.html
You do realize that we, the consumer, are ganna get screwed again when this is released. Probably more so than the '96 Act. My guess: more money spent, more empty promises, less services (or quality there of). | |
|
| |  A BIG Thank You
Great Job. Keep up the good work and spread the Truth. | |
|
|
|
