http://www.latimes.com/business/hilt...#axzz2qPxRs4Ey

I heard about this on the 5pm news... this is not good, as we know what
the big companies do when they have a chance. They screw us over so they
can make more money.

Imagine being blocked by your ISP because they provide a competing
service..
--
Jeff

On 1/14/2014 5:22 PM, woodchucker wrote:
http://www.latimes.com/business/hilt...#axzz2qPxRs4Ey


I heard about this on the 5pm news... this is not good, as we know what
the big companies do when they have a chance. They screw us over so they
can make more money.

Imagine being blocked by your ISP because they provide a competing
service..


Welcome to our government with it's hands in the pockets of large
corporations.

On Tuesday, January 14, 2014 5:28:33 PM UTC-6, Leon wrote:
On 1/14/2014 5:22 PM, woodchucker wrote:

http://www.latimes.com/business/hilt...#axzz2qPxRs4Ey





I heard about this on the 5pm news... this is not good, as we know what

the big companies do when they have a chance. They screw us over so they

can make more money.



Imagine being blocked by your ISP because they provide a competing

service..





Welcome to our government with it's hands in the pockets of large

corporations.

It's more like big corps having their hands wrapped around the nuts of the government -- and squeezing.

Larry

woodchucker wrote:
http://www.latimes.com/business/hilt...#axzz2qPxRs4Ey


I heard about this on the 5pm news... this is not good, as we know
what the big companies do when they have a chance. They screw us over
so they can make more money.

Imagine being blocked by your ISP because they provide a competing
service..

Thanks for the heads-up! Imagine "election season" the ISPs have a
political agenda... It would seem that there's lots to "worry about"...

Bill

On 1/14/2014 6:22 PM, woodchucker wrote:
http://www.latimes.com/business/hilt...#axzz2qPxRs4Ey


I heard about this on the 5pm news... this is not good, as we know what
the big companies do when they have a chance. They screw us over so they
can make more money.

Imagine being blocked by your ISP because they provide a competing
service..

While on the surface this is not good, but competition is the word.
Today people are not tied to one internet provider. As with newspapers
if the user does not like the politics and policies of the provider they
go with someone else.

Compare the incomes of Fox News to NBC and some of the other government
networks. NBC has recently restructured because of financial losses.

Look at the Liberal newspapers. They are losing readers, and are
financially cutting back because of the lack of income.

We recently dropped the Raleigh News and Observer because of their
editorial policies. Both of my daughters no longer subscribe. They
are starting to feel the pinch, and some weeks they are calling everyday
for us to resubscribe.

Thank GOD the government has not taken complete control of our
businesses and industry, and we still have some degree of Capitalism
working in our society.

Gramps' shop wrote:
On Tuesday, January 14, 2014 5:28:33 PM UTC-6, Leon wrote:
On 1/14/2014 5:22 PM, woodchucker wrote:

http://www.latimes.com/business/hilt...#axzz2qPxRs4Ey





I heard about this on the 5pm news... this is not good, as we know
what

the big companies do when they have a chance. They screw us over so
they

can make more money.



Imagine being blocked by your ISP because they provide a competing

service..





Welcome to our government with it's hands in the pockets of large

corporations.

It's more like big corps having their hands wrapped around the nuts
of the government -- and squeezing.


No... it's more like the courts making simply stupid decisions. You can't
blame corpororations for what they try to do - you have to blame the courts
for how they decide.

--

-Mike-

Keith Nuttle wrote:


While on the surface this is not good, but competition is the word.
Today people are not tied to one internet provider.

This is an absurd and absolutely incorrerrctly wrong statement. Perhaps
people living in certain areas of the country have choices of ISP's but
there is a very large segment of this country that has no choice in that
service - you take what is offered or you do without. Don't believe me?
Step outside of your world and see what a large part part of America really
faces.

As with
newspapers if the user does not like the politics and policies of the
provider they go with someone else.

That is an absolutely stupid statement that reflects only one thing - your
complete lack of awararenes of what a large percentage of America deals
with. So - in rural America - what are those options that the user should
explore? Before answering that question - do yourself the favor of really
looking into those "options" because you will find surprising results.


Thank GOD the government has not taken complete control of our
businesses and industry, and we still have some degree of Capitalism
working in our society.

On that point - we are in violent agreement!

--

-Mike-

On 1/14/2014 8:59 PM, Keith Nuttle wrote:
On 1/14/2014 6:22 PM, woodchucker wrote:
http://www.latimes.com/business/hilt...#axzz2qPxRs4Ey



I heard about this on the 5pm news... this is not good, as we know what
the big companies do when they have a chance. They screw us over so they
can make more money.

Imagine being blocked by your ISP because they provide a competing
service..

While on the surface this is not good, but competition is the word.
Today people are not tied to one internet provider. As with newspapers
if the user does not like the politics and policies of the provider they
go with someone else.

Compare the incomes of Fox News to NBC and some of the other government
networks. NBC has recently restructured because of financial losses.

Look at the Liberal newspapers. They are losing readers, and are
financially cutting back because of the lack of income.

We recently dropped the Raleigh News and Observer because of their
editorial policies. Both of my daughters no longer subscribe. They
are starting to feel the pinch, and some weeks they are calling everyday
for us to resubscribe.

Thank GOD the government has not taken complete control of our
businesses and industry, and we still have some degree of Capitalism
working in our society.
Really, I have two choices..
Century Link DSL
And Service Electric Cable, which is only one way, so I still need a
dial up for Century Link...

I had that cable one way once, it was awful, down half the time.
When someone is in the boonies like I am there are really no options.
It's too expensive. I'm out in farm country and it's just that way.

For people in populous areas will be offered competition, we in the
outlying areas won't be, as there has been no desire by anyone to offer
it now.

Why do you think it will create competition? Years ago there were so
many ISP's. They for the most part have been killed off by the big guys,
and their ability to provide high speed internet much easier and cheaper
than other companies buying the services from them.
--
Jeff

Mike Marlow wrote:
Gramps' shop wrote:
On Tuesday, January 14, 2014 5:28:33 PM UTC-6, Leon wrote:
On 1/14/2014 5:22 PM, woodchucker wrote:

http://www.latimes.com/business/hilt...#axzz2qPxRs4Ey
I heard about this on the 5pm news... this is not good, as we know
what
the big companies do when they have a chance. They screw us over so
they
can make more money.
Imagine being blocked by your ISP because they provide a competing
service..




Welcome to our government with it's hands in the pockets of large

corporations.
It's more like big corps having their hands wrapped around the nuts
of the government -- and squeezing.

No... it's more like the courts making simply stupid decisions. You can't
blame corpororations for what they try to do - you have to blame the courts
for how they decide.


The supreme court does NOT write laws. That is not what they do (look
it up).

On 1/14/2014 11:19 PM, Bill wrote:
Mike Marlow wrote:
Gramps' shop wrote:
On Tuesday, January 14, 2014 5:28:33 PM UTC-6, Leon wrote:
On 1/14/2014 5:22 PM, woodchucker wrote:

http://www.latimes.com/business/hilt...#axzz2qPxRs4Ey

I heard about this on the 5pm news... this is not good, as we know
what
the big companies do when they have a chance. They screw us over so
they
can make more money.
Imagine being blocked by your ISP because they provide a competing
service..




Welcome to our government with it's hands in the pockets of large

corporations.
It's more like big corps having their hands wrapped around the nuts
of the government -- and squeezing.

No... it's more like the courts making simply stupid decisions. You
can't
blame corpororations for what they try to do - you have to blame the
courts
for how they decide.


The supreme court does NOT write laws. That is not what they do (look
it up).

That's correct, but there has been plenty of legislating from the bench.
so while you think they don't write the laws, in some cases they do.
Imminent domain comes to mind.


--
Jeff

woodchucker wrote:
On 1/14/2014 11:19 PM, Bill wrote:
Mike Marlow wrote:
Gramps' shop wrote:
On Tuesday, January 14, 2014 5:28:33 PM UTC-6, Leon wrote:
On 1/14/2014 5:22 PM, woodchucker wrote:

http://www.latimes.com/business/hilt...#axzz2qPxRs4Ey


I heard about this on the 5pm news... this is not good, as we know
what
the big companies do when they have a chance. They screw us over so
they
can make more money.
Imagine being blocked by your ISP because they provide a competing
service..




Welcome to our government with it's hands in the pockets of large

corporations.
It's more like big corps having their hands wrapped around the nuts
of the government -- and squeezing.

No... it's more like the courts making simply stupid decisions. You
can't
blame corpororations for what they try to do - you have to blame the
courts
for how they decide.


The supreme court does NOT write laws. That is not what they do (look
it up).

That's correct, but there has been plenty of legislating from the bench.

I believe you. But I think in theory, there is not supposed to be.



so while you think they don't write the laws, in some cases they do.
Imminent domain comes to mind.

On Tue, 14 Jan 2014 22:23:20 -0500, "Mike Marlow"
wrote:

No... it's more like the courts making simply stupid decisions. You can't
blame corpororations for what they try to do - you have to blame the courts
for how they decide.

THe FCC rules are part of the problem, which are written by congress,
which get them from the lobbyists .......................

Mike Marlow wrote:
Keith Nuttle wrote:


While on the surface this is not good, but competition is the word.
Today people are not tied to one internet provider.

This is an absurd and absolutely incorrerrctly wrong statement. Perhaps
people living in certain areas of the country have choices of
ISP's but there is a very large segment of this country that has no
choice in that service - you take what is offered or you do without. Don't
believe me? Step outside of your world and see what a large
part part of America really faces.

As with
newspapers if the user does not like the politics and policies of the
provider they go with someone else.

That is an absolutely stupid statement that reflects only one thing -
your complete lack of awararenes of what a large percentage of
America deals with. So - in rural America - what are those options
that the user should explore? Before answering that question - do
yourself the favor of really looking into those "options" because you
will find surprising results.

Thank GOD the government has not taken complete control of our
businesses and industry, and we still have some degree of Capitalism
working in our society.

On that point - we are in violent agreement!

Speaking of absurd things to say - I appologize Keith, for the harshness of
my reply to you. Wouldn't you know that I had just gone through a very
frustrating (maddening) day dealing with my ISP over dismal DSL performance
in our area, only to be told there wasn't any relief projected for the
entire year. We live in an area where there are not many alternatives to
DSL so we're almost completely stuck with what we get. As it turns out,
Time Warner did a survey and decided that they could indeed run more cable
and get service to us and our neighbors. Had it not been for that, our only
alternatives were satellite or cellular - both expensive and limited. Now
we only have to wait for Time Warner to get the cable pulled - and they tell
us that may take up to 4 months...

Sorry I let my frustrations come through in my reply to you.

--

-Mike-

In article ,
woodchucker wrote:
...snipped...
Why do you think it will create competition? Years ago there were so
many ISP's. They for the most part have been killed off by the big guys,
and their ability to provide high speed internet much easier and cheaper
than other companies buying the services from them.

In the late 90s early 21st century there were indeed hundreds, maybe
thousandso fo small, independent ISPs. Many of these were even offering
DSL using the major telecoms lines. The majors did not like this and
Verizon, ATT, all the big players lobbied federal and state legilatures
for tax breaks and other favorable laws and regulations with the promise
that by 2000 or so (my recollection of the timeline may be off a few years
either way) some very high percentage of the US population would have
high speed internet available at their home. The small ISPs withered and
went out of business or refocused their product lines, as the new laws
made it unprofitable for them, but very profitable for the majors.

The promised HS internet was not delivered on schedule, many areas today
still don't have it available. It took the threat posed by the
TV cable industry to finally force the majors to start deploying FIOS
and other next-gen HS internet solutions. Now the big telecoms charge
big bucks for the HS service even though American consumers essentially
paid them to build the infrastructure for it 10 years ago. The money
was paid but the product was never delivered. A small investment in
campaign contributions and lobbying by the telecoms has been repaid to
them by orders of magnitude.


--
There are no stupid questions, but there are lots of stupid answers.

Larry W. - Baltimore Maryland - lwasserm(a)sdf. lonestar. org

On Tue, 14 Jan 2014 23:19:52 -0500, Bill
wrote:

Mike Marlow wrote:
Gramps' shop wrote:
On Tuesday, January 14, 2014 5:28:33 PM UTC-6, Leon wrote:
On 1/14/2014 5:22 PM, woodchucker wrote:

http://www.latimes.com/business/hilt...#axzz2qPxRs4Ey
I heard about this on the 5pm news... this is not good, as we know
what
the big companies do when they have a chance. They screw us over so
they
can make more money.
Imagine being blocked by your ISP because they provide a competing
service..




Welcome to our government with it's hands in the pockets of large

corporations.
It's more like big corps having their hands wrapped around the nuts
of the government -- and squeezing.

No... it's more like the courts making simply stupid decisions. You can't
blame corpororations for what they try to do - you have to blame the courts
for how they decide.


The supreme court does NOT write laws. That is not what they do (look
it up).

That's not what they are *supposed* to do.

In theory, reality matches theory. In reality, it often doesn't.

On Wed, 15 Jan 2014 07:06:30 -0600, Markem
wrote:

On Tue, 14 Jan 2014 22:23:20 -0500, "Mike Marlow"
wrote:

No... it's more like the courts making simply stupid decisions. You can't
blame corpororations for what they try to do - you have to blame the courts
for how they decide.

THe FCC rules are part of the problem, which are written by congress,
which get them from the lobbyists .......................

That street is two way. In fact, the road just as often goes the
other way. Congress just as often extorts money from the lobbyists.

On Tue, 14 Jan 2014 20:59:23 -0500, Keith Nuttle
wrote:

On 1/14/2014 6:22 PM, woodchucker wrote:
http://www.latimes.com/business/hilt...#axzz2qPxRs4Ey


I heard about this on the 5pm news... this is not good, as we know what
the big companies do when they have a chance. They screw us over so they
can make more money.

Imagine being blocked by your ISP because they provide a competing
service..

While on the surface this is not good, but competition is the word.
Today people are not tied to one internet provider. As with newspapers
if the user does not like the politics and policies of the provider they
go with someone else.

Not really true. I have one choice, plus satellite (which isn't a
choice).

Compare the incomes of Fox News to NBC and some of the other government
networks. NBC has recently restructured because of financial losses.

TV is an entirely different thing.

Look at the Liberal newspapers. They are losing readers, and are
financially cutting back because of the lack of income.

We recently dropped the Raleigh News and Observer because of their
editorial policies. Both of my daughters no longer subscribe. They
are starting to feel the pinch, and some weeks they are calling everyday
for us to resubscribe.

Thank GOD the government has not taken complete control of our
businesses and industry, and we still have some degree of Capitalism
working in our society.

Very little left. The government has regulated what it hasn't taxed
to death.

On Sun, 19 Jan 2014 17:21:43 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 15 Jan 2014 07:06:30 -0600, Markem
wrote:

On Tue, 14 Jan 2014 22:23:20 -0500, "Mike Marlow"
wrote:

No... it's more like the courts making simply stupid decisions. You can't
blame corpororations for what they try to do - you have to blame the courts
for how they decide.

THe FCC rules are part of the problem, which are written by congress,
which get them from the lobbyists .......................

That street is two way. In fact, the road just as often goes the
other way. Congress just as often extorts money from the lobbyists.

It is the American Way.

On Sun, 19 Jan 2014 19:04:21 -0600, Markem
wrote:

On Sun, 19 Jan 2014 17:21:43 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 15 Jan 2014 07:06:30 -0600, Markem
wrote:

On Tue, 14 Jan 2014 22:23:20 -0500, "Mike Marlow"
wrote:

No... it's more like the courts making simply stupid decisions. You can't
blame corpororations for what they try to do - you have to blame the courts
for how they decide.

THe FCC rules are part of the problem, which are written by congress,
which get them from the lobbyists .......................

That street is two way. In fact, the road just as often goes the
other way. Congress just as often extorts money from the lobbyists.

It is the American Way.

Unfortunately, one can't just point the finger at lobbyists. At least
there is no question who they're working for.