dslreports logo
 story category
FCC Considering Another Neutrality Hearing?
This time in Stanford after the controversy at Harvard...
Valleywag is claiming (without citing any sources) that the FCC is considering a second hearing on network neutrality, after a controversy erupted this week over the hearing they held on Monday at Harvard. At that hearing Comcast used stand-ins who prevented other interested parties from
Click for full size
attending -- though Comcast claims they were using the individuals as seat holders for Comcast employees. The next meeting could be held at Stanford, according to the anonymous mystery source. Says Valleywag:
quote:
The FCC will take no official action against Comcast over the held seats, but relocating the hearing to Stanford is punishment enough. Net-neutrality crusader Larry Lessig teaches there, and the Valley's Comcast-hating engineers may actually be provoked enough by the seatwarming episode to pry themselves away from their keyboards. And best of all: Stanford would get to one-up Harvard by showing it knows how to run a meeting.
view:
topics flat nest 

ptrowski
Got Helix?
Premium Member
join:2005-03-14
Woodstock, CT

1 recommendation

ptrowski

Premium Member

Good...

Let's see if Comcast can pull the same BS tactics there. I wonder if Rick will be there with his highlighter!
Expand your moderator at work
Rick5
Premium Member
join:2001-02-06

2 edits

1 recommendation

Rick5 to ptrowski

Premium Member

to ptrowski

Re: Good...

removed trolling

As for the FCC holding another hearing..I think they should.
Comcast bringing in placeholders wasn't really needed anyway. They have enough real fans to fill the seats.

removed trolling

ptrowski
Got Helix?
Premium Member
join:2005-03-14
Woodstock, CT

1 edit

1 recommendation

ptrowski

Premium Member

Re: Good...

I don't promote Uverse. It's not even remotely available in my town and won't be in the near forseeable future. My other option is a small cable company called Metrocast.

If something better than my current connection comes around, I would move to that just like I moved from my cable company to DSL for my internet provider. IF the price is right and the service is good, I go to that provider. Will I research their subscriber numbers, growth plans, and cafeteria plans? Hell no. I want a connection, not a long term business strategy.
Rick5
Premium Member
join:2001-02-06

2 edits

Rick5

Premium Member

Re: Good...

(trolling removed)

...time is running out for them...and the clock is ticking away.

Everything i've predicted about uverse is coming true and it's turning out to be a massive failure.

Focusing on Comcast and these points you try to make so often is what is falling on deaf ears.
Comcasts "traffic shaping".
Putting "placeholders" at meetings.

"Comcast's caps".

(trolling removed)

And it's why as it stands now..Comcast and the other cable co's stand poised to finish off AT&T.

And finally, for the record once more..that's not the way I'd like to see it happen.
My posts have always been about the need for competition..and the urgent need for AT&T to immediately change their ways. My posts have been about the consumer...
not about benefiting any particular company.

But, I'm also about calling it like I see it. And there is simply nothing with AT&T's strategy that I see as positive.

And that's sad.

Truly sad.

en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA

en102

Member

Re: Good...

I suspect that any changes to the 'status quo' will bring another round of price increases.
Expand your moderator at work

cableties
Premium Member
join:2005-01-27

cableties

Premium Member

Gotta love gizmodo...

Check out their captions! Funny!

»gizmodo.com/361704/fcc-m ··· s-fiasco

FFH5
Premium Member
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ

FFH5

Premium Member

Hard news here ??

Maybe; unattributed; sourceless; etc. This is certainly something to get excited over - NOT.

packetscan
Premium Member
join:2004-10-19
Bridgeport, CT

packetscan

Premium Member

Re: Hard news here ??

Maybe you don't mind large companies Railroading the little guy.. We on the other hand DO Care.
openbox9
Premium Member
join:2004-01-26
71144

openbox9

Premium Member

Re: Hard news here ??

The point was that unless the FCC says that they're going to hold another forum, then this "news" is merely a rumour.

firephoto
Truth and reality matters
Premium Member
join:2003-03-18
Brewster, WA

1 recommendation

firephoto

Premium Member

Re: Hard news here ??

The point is that unless it toes the same line as he does then he has to point out that it's irrelevant.

funchords
Hello
MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA

1 edit

funchords to FFH5

MVM

to FFH5
said by FFH5:

Maybe; unattributed; sourceless; etc. This is certainly something to get excited over - NOT.
There is some foundation to this rumor;

1- some groups have asked the FCC for more time to file

2- Markley's bill would compel 8 additional FCC meetings around the country on Network Neutrality

3- One of the FCC commissioners said at the February 25th meeting that they should have the 8 additional meetings even without Markley's bill

My only objection would be if any of these suggestions would keep the FCC from stopping the Comcast interference now. The FCC can, at least temporarily, stop the interference as it investigates further. I have no problem with that.

But to further delay while allowing the interference to continue is unacceptable.
neufuse
join:2006-12-06
James Creek, PA

neufuse

Member

Seat holders...

eventually get replaced with someone else! These people never left!

ptrowski
Got Helix?
Premium Member
join:2005-03-14
Woodstock, CT

ptrowski

Premium Member

Re: Seat holders...

said by neufuse:

eventually get replaced with someone else! These people never left!
They were holding the seats.....for themselves.

Grumpy4
Premium Member
join:2001-07-28
NW CT

Grumpy4

Premium Member

fcc

FCC ... FCC...

Oh yeah - they're the geniuses who set it up so that my Verizon cell phone won't work at 100 feet away from an AT&T tower.

How brilliant they are at deciding our fate

RadioDoc

join:2000-05-11
La Grange, IL

RadioDoc

Re: fcc

That might be more your phone's fault than the FCC's.

Grumpy4
Premium Member
join:2001-07-28
NW CT

4 edits

Grumpy4

Premium Member

Perhaps you're right. My phone is a brand new Motorola Razr, and according to the state's database of radio towers, there are two towns locally that have AT&T signal only towers. Neither tower will light up my Verizon phone so much as a single bar, no matter where I put the phone's band seeking software. If there is a way to change this, I'd sure like to know. It's a long ride to & from work without service every day.

Call me crazy, but wouldn't it be better for everyone if every cell phone worked on every cell tower? Wouldn't this be good for all parties concerned - both the consumers and the providers? More minutes is good for the providers, and a wider service area is good for the end users. I don't believe this is how it all works in this day and age. I could be wrong.

Maybe I'm just ignorant of the bigger picture here, but way back when, it's my understanding that the FCC split up the bands in the name of competition, but now we seem to have provider incompatibilities within active service areas, at least here in the sticks it's this way.

Maybe there are now cell phones that work on every cell tower. In all sincerity, I'd like to know who offers such a single phone and service plan. I'll sign on today. City folks with an abundance of signal strength probably think I'm off the wall, but it's not unusual here in the woods of western CT to travel 50 or 60 miles with no cell signal.
Austinloop
join:2001-08-19
Austin, TX

Austinloop

Member

Re: fcc

I believe that AT&T uses GSM and that Verizon uses another protocol, just not sure which. That may explain why your phone doesn't work on the AT&T towers.

ftthz
If love can kill hate can also save
join:2005-10-17

ftthz

Member

Re: fcc

verizon uses cdma

factchecker
@cox.net

factchecker to Austinloop

Anon

to Austinloop
said by Austinloop:

I believe that AT&T uses GSM and that Verizon uses another protocol, just not sure which.
ATT = GSM (mostly)

Verizon/Sprint = CDMA

RadioDoc

join:2000-05-11
La Grange, IL

RadioDoc to Grumpy4

to Grumpy4
The bands were established at different times (AMPS vs SMR vs PCS etc.) but those differences have been blurred to the point of irrelevance. If you are very close to a tower and happen to be in an antenna beam it could desensitize the receiver enough to cause reception problems to other signals in another band. You won't see the strong signal indicated on your phone but it will drive the RF AGC down to the point where you won't pick up anything else either.

However, for that to happen the phone would have to have lousy out of band overload specs and you would have to be in a very strong unwanted signal for most of your travels.

If this just started with the new phone, I would suggest you return it. While I don't have Verizon I do travel into the sticks, and my LG CU500v doesn't have trouble finding a signal unless I am really far from a town or paved road...

Grumpy4
Premium Member
join:2001-07-28
NW CT

1 edit

Grumpy4

Premium Member

Re: fcc

`
Grumpy4

Grumpy4 to RadioDoc

Premium Member

to RadioDoc

I do believe that Verizon phones will not work on the AT&T tower infrastructure, at any range.
short09
join:2006-07-21

short09

Member

who wants net neutrality

i dont think anybody wants this crap besides the fcc

dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium Member
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ

dvd536

Premium Member

ID required

ID should be required as should a copy of your cable bill to ensure those seats go to those that deserve them. not some junkie thats going to buy crack with the $20 they got for going there.