http://www.nytimes.com/...net-neutrality-rules.html

Awesome! This should result in faster kill run times

what's that?

This will be a Comcastrophe.

You my friend just won the interweb.

Are you gonna pay for the additional bandwidth archaic?

copy pasting a response (not mine):


"It's called "Functional Pricing". Invented by IBM before there were computers. It works like this: your 1930's IBM card sorter could be equipped with a printer to print out the cards you sorted. It cost (say) $100/month for the normal-speed printer and $190/month for the double-speed printer. And if you paid the upgrade fee, the IBM technician would come to your shop and move a little rubber band from the low-speed sprocket to the high-speed sprocket. They could have given you the double-speed all the time, but stuck you up for extra. This is only possible with a (near) monopoly supplier, or another market entrant would just give you double-speed for $100/month.

We should ALL have had broadband suitable for high-speed HDTV streaming by now - and the telecom companies were given incentives and tax breaks to provide it, and took them, and did nothing. We still have almost no fiber installed for Internet service, fifteen years after broadband became common. Fifteen years after telephones became common, half the continent had been wired for them. Ditto with TV cable. But we have lame broadband delivered by the OLD, already-paid-for networks; phone wires were paid off by the 50's, and cable, by the 90's.

And now they're going to ration that second-rate broadband and make us pay extra for what they could have provided in much greater abundance, cheaper, by now. Functional pricing. Only possible with monopolies. Unlike IBM and card-sorters, they had to get this past their regulators. So they captured them. That's just corrupt."

nice post martian.

Yes, our regulatory system for telecom is archaic (no offense, archaic).

We need more anti-trust activity.

Seriously... they are letting Comcast buy Time Warner Cable now?!?!?!? HOW WOULD THAT BE HELPFUL?!?!?!?

Anyone care to comments directly to Comcast?

http://corporate.comcast.com/...-warner-cable-transaction

They have a comments section on their corporate blog.

No comments.

WOW... I actually commented...

And Comcast deleted it shortly thereafter.

Here was my comment, for the record:



Guess they didn't approve.

one of the greatest threats to functioning free-market capitalism today is not "unions" or "socialism" but rather the rise of monopoly power.

This times a million

Also, I am really looking forward to when Google puts fiber in everywhere and puts Comcast out of business.

I just like to think where we'd be if Congress would not have gotten involved and blew up AT&T into the baby Bells in the 80's.

Think about it, back then, even though AT&T was a monopoly, prices for service were low, technical innovation was provided gratis, and service was good, right down to your internal house wiring.

After the congress got done with the system, prices sky-rocketed, service levels dropped, technical innovation was on your dime and you had to maintain your own internal house wiring for the system.

Things have steadily cost more and more and we are STILL PAYING THAT GODDAMNED FEDERAL WIRE SERVICE TAX that was supposed to pay for wiring to rural areas and worse, everyone is going to the mobile providers now so we don't even need the freakin' wires and we STILL PAY a TAX for it.

So, sometimes, rately, a monopoly can be beneficial, such as the case with the old Ma Bell system.

People made fun of them all the time, especially Lily Tomlin, but directory information was FREE then, it was part of the service. NOW, you gotta PAY for it seperately.

Do the math. We got screwed so the legislators could make buck off the Baby Bell system.

BellSouth, NYNEX, etc.

That's a public monopoly/government service vs a private oligopoly.
Privatization only works if it creates real competition.