On Jul 23, 2014, at 7:54 AM, Edward Ned Harvey (lopser) <[email protected]> wrote: >> A.) There is nothing wrong with what they are doing > Yes, there is something wrong with this, as it good to let businesses make > money, but they should make their money by hard work and ingenuity in the > face of competition, not by robbing banks or lock-in or extortion.
On this point, there is no middle ground for compromise. Their network, their rules. And I certainly can't fault them for not wanting to upgrade their infrastructure when the primary outcome of that is helping their competition whittle away at the profitable portions of their business-model. >> B.) If you (or others, or even a majority) are unhappy with what they are >> doing, the answer is not for you to impose your will on them in a manner that >> makes it even harder for them to see competition later, but to -- instead -- >> move towards competition most ricky tick, > > If only there were competition available to switch to. In my neighborhood, > my choices are Comcast or Verizon. Both of which are terrible. > > I would switch *so* fast, for much bigger reasons than Netflix or Youtube > video quality. In the middle of a 2yr contract, they took away half my > channels, called it a "channel realignment." If I were to cancel, I'd be hit > with early termination fees. I argued with them pointlessly for hours, and > finally caved in and agreed to upgrade my service for $5/mo more in order to > get my channels back. And then they hit me with the early termination fee > anyway for canceling my old service and upgrading to a new service with a new > 2yr contract. By "move towards competition" I mean - work with the FCC, your local PUC/PSC, and your local Franchise Authorities to end the monopolies that THEY THEMSELVES are granting the existing/incumbent carriers. Solve the competition problem and you solve the net-neutrality problem AND SO MANY other things. Force a common-carrier status and you've crazy-glued the non-competitive model into place even tighter. > Yes, there is ABSOLUTELY something wrong. This kind of behavior cannot > result in a massively profitable company taking in money hand over fist, > unless they have a monopoly. And if some company has a monopoly, they should > not behave this way. So stop granting them the monopoly. They didn't get a monopoly by shoving others out of the way a la Microsoft. They got the monopoly because YOU (via your elected officials) gave it to them. And this isn't a "long time ago" thing, where all of us can claim to have not been around for it. Every cable company renews its local franchise, with your city or twon board usually, every 5 to 7 years. Have you made your concerns known to your local town board, so that they can negotiate with the cable companies to get what you -- and assuredly most of your neighbors -- want? Did they listen? D
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators http://lopsa.org/
