Surprise, surprise. Here comes Big Cable to slay another rule that helps small ISPs compete

30 comments

  1. mrthescientist

    |Author

    I can’t wait for the satellite internet revolution. Give everyone the chance to have the same cheap internet plan, with minimal infrastructure costs (biggest problem here in rural America)

  2. shotgunstever

    |Author

    I live in a Canadian city of 1.5 million, and pay $90/month for just average bandwidth internet. Here is a warning to U.S. consumers: being limited to 3 Big Cable providers does not make a competitive (or fair!) market

  3. jonnyclueless

    |Author

    This is the real threat we face while most people are caught up on net neutrality.

    I mean their argument is literally that prices will go down if they can have a monopoly.

  4. Wiley935

    |Author

    The whole net neutrality thing wouldn’t even be an issue if there were more ISPs. Those who didn’t comply to net neutrality would run out of business. The fact that net neutrality is even an issue just shows how hard it is for new ISPs to show up.

  5. kunaan

    |Author

    I hate these new Comcast comparison commercials.. “we give this, the other guys do not” but the aforementioned “other guys” is just ATT, and they clearly label it as such..

  6. Bobmaloogalooga

    |Author

    Small ISPs do not compete now. Period. I have owned and run three different small ISPs from the very beginning (pre-WWW, dial-up, and DSL days) and the only reasons small ISPs exist are because of the government regulation that broke up Bell/AT&T forced there to be a “local carrier” which basically cannot be touched. That was great in concept, but what actually happened were that medium-sized (and some quite large) companies used loopholes and other tactics to buy up the actual local carriers or to become the local carrier and yet again squeezed out the small ISPs and now can’t be touched so they enjoy a pseudo-monopoly especially in rural areas. Even the white space spectrum stuff that was supposed to help was a failure and was blocked by almost every major city in favor of the big players.

    Name any small ISP that is of any consequence and how they currently (or even previously) “competed” with the big players. I’ll wait.

  7. CivilServantBot

    |Author

    Welcome to /r/Technology! Please keep in mind proper [Reddiquette](https://www.reddit.com/wiki/reddiquette) when engaging with others and please follow the [Reddit sitewide rules](https://www.reddit.com/help/contentpolicy/) and [subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/technology/wiki/rules) when posting. Personal attacks, abusive language, trolling or bigotry in any form is against the rules and will be removed.

    If you are looking for technical help or have technical questions, please see our weekly [Tech Support sticky](https://www.reddit.com/r/technology/search?q=author%3AAutoModerator&restrict_sr=on&include_over_18=on&sort=new&t=all) located at the top of the sub, or visit /r/techsupport, or /r/AskTechnology. If you have any questions, comments, or concerns for the moderator team, please [send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/technology&subject=Questions,%20Comments,%20Concerns).

  8. W9CR

    |Author

    I’m confused, this article is about ILEC’s and CLEC’s, which is a telecom designation for voice carriers. A MSO is not and will never be an ILEC, many have a CLEC division to offer voice services.

    I’d love fiber everywhere, but it’s crazy expensive to build new plant, and that’s not going to change. What really prevents this is every, state, county, city and town’s local government with their hand out working against anyone who wants to install new plant in the right of way. It’s just stupid expensive to comply with 1000’s of little cities rules and taxes. This means the only ones who will are the incumbents, and they have entire divisions devoted to compliance.

  9. Bo1622

    |Author

    Is it possible to somehow let anyone use the cable or telephone lines? Like somehow claim that these lines are for a public utility and anyone can use them? Maybe then if any company could use those existing lines they could offer more faster internet. Or maybe something all together different. I don’t know if this is possible. Just a thought

  10. austex_mike

    |Author

    I’ve [said it before](https://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/7poy56/at_the_behest_of_tmobile_the_fcc_is_undoing_rules/dsivdc4/), and I’ll say it again, we need to change our approach to this issue, because right now we are fighting a losing battle. We have in power a political party that honestly believes that whatever is good for huge companies should be codified into American law. And let’s also be honest that there are tens of millions of Americans who believe this sort of policy is what is best for them, so we are going to have to deal with this sort of policy-making until we change the narrative.

    As stupid as it sounds, we need to start naming these things in terms middle America can understand. For example:

    Net Neutrality is now called **Freedom Internet**- Tell those middle Americans that we want them to be able to watch Fox news and read Breitbart without the chance of some liberal elitist deciding to charge them more for access to those channels and websites. You could even make a commercial and show a picture of Spectrum Headquarters in Connecticut and “Here is where elites in the Northeast want to decide which websites you can visit, and which movies you can watch, and charge you more for whatever they choose, don’t let them. Support Freedom Internet, and tell these people you want the power to choose your internet, not them.”

    Local ISP initiatives are now called **American Independence Internet**- In fact brand it with the year 1776, you could even call it **Tea Party Internet** because just like the original [Boston Tea Party was a response](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea_Act) to Government colluding with specific companies to give people less choice, Tea Party Internet aka local broadband is a response to government selling us out to the highest campaign contributors.

    It is such a silly sounding idea, but at this point we need to try anything. Any objective person can look at the current FCC plans and see how negative they are for the average American, but sadly the subtleties of the issue are just lost on a huge portion of the population. They hear “less government” or “freedom” and just go with whatever is said next. Perhaps it’s time we helped them by putting these issues in even simpler terms.

    Edit: I would be interested in hearing other people’s ideas to make this issues simpler and easier to communicate and understand. The fewer syllables the better. Ideally we need to[ communicate these ideas on a 4th grade level to be effective](http://www.newsweek.com/trump-fire-and-fury-smart-genius-obama-774169).

  11. > If Americans want fast internet access, they need to tighten the screws on Big Cable, not give it yet more power.

    This first sentence makes me so angry. *Congress* and *lobbying groups* are the ones giving Big Cable more power because they’re the ones getting paid. Most Americans are opposed to this because they’re the ones getting fucked by the ISPs in the end.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.