Slashdot Mirror
AOL Time Warner Netscape CNN... and AT&T?
Baldrson noted a bit running on Yahoo right now where the AOL, Time, Warner, Netscape, CNN mega corporation is in talks with AT&T for their cable network. The inevitable and scary consolidation continues ever onward. The US govt will be sold on eBay in a few years, but only Microsoft and the corporation formerly known as Netscape AOL Warner CNN AT&T Time (NAWCAT) will be left to bid. But since Nawcat will already own ebay, there will no doubt be rumors of unfair play.
aaaaaannnd.... Weeeeeeeeeeeeee!
Oh my God! There was this guy and he came over and he was like, "Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!"
Oh my God! i went over to my mom and she'd be like, "Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!"
That's so funny. Cause i went home and i said, "Hey Dad, Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!"
Oh my God! And then there was this guy and he goes, "Hey, i gotta knife" And i go, "Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!"
Yo, i went up to a thug gangster and he was like, "Yo, motherFucker" "Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!"
Yo, i saw Ar-Two-Dee-Two on the street and he was like, "Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!"
"Bleep!"
Yo, i saw this kid in a wheelchair going over a hill really fast "Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!"
Yo, i was watching a movie theater and this guy, he was like, "Oh, i got popcorn"
And i was like, "Oh my God... Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!"
When you're a kid and ya wanna go, "Weee!" But you ain't got drugs yet... You hold out for your life. Hold on to your little gonads... and strife.
Gonads and Strife
Gonads and Strife
Gonads and Strife
Gonads in the lightning!
Gonads in the rain! "Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!"
Yo, i saw a squirrell run across the street and he didn't get hit by a car, so he was like, "Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!"
_ _|\__/|
/ o `./
{o__, \ {
/ . . ) \
`-` '-' \ }
'---.~_ _ _|
Any ideas how this might affect Road Runner users? (Cable service from Time Warner)
WWJD.... for a Klondike bar?
CNN is a news channel owned by the Time Warner, and now the part of the Time Warner AOL company, their name is not part of either companies name.
This also isn't a merger so much as it is one large company buying a share of the assets of another. The rest of AT&Ts opperations would be seperate.
We never learn from our mistakes. The only new history is the history we do not remeber...
don't forget the fact that aol is foaming at the mouth for Yahoo! Check it:
i s?STRING=aoltimewarneryahoo.com&STRING=Search
http://www.networksolutions.com/cgi-bin/whois/who
Forget Microsoft. Fear AOL.
The world moves for love. It kneels before it in awe.
does this mean we'll get a 30 day trial AOL phone as well as CD?
Laws against monopolies are great, but if nobody bothers to enforce them, they are USELESS.
Would somebody please explain this to governments around the world? One day the companies will be TOO BIG to enforce anything upon! If one company owns, say 75% of the media, they can make AND break poloticians because this company OWNS the public opnion (sad but true).
Maybe the /. readership should redirect its collective energies towards AOL/TW. We all know MSFT is going to self-destruct.
-k
Is the future. With microsofts software, xbox/mediastation settop boxes, aol/tw cable networks and content, its the obvious thing to do. Plus it'll put an end to that pesky competition between aol/ms for all things networked.
...USAOLTW&T ?
I dont think so. The obvious merger will be between Micro$oft and the US government (they're already buisness partners). The new corporation/nation will be called MSA (The Microsoft States of America) and will include the DMCA and a new Microsoft law, banning use and production of software by any entity except MSA....
Make even shorter URLs - 8LN.org
"Citing ``people familiar with the situation,'' the paper said AOL would hold a 40 percent interest in the business and leave AT&T with the majority control it wants.
So AOL/TW won't get the entire AT&T cable market, just part of it.
Yet another reason I use ADSL.
quis custodiet ipsos custodes - Juvenal
I'm placing my bid that NAWCAT and Microsoft merge to form 'the worlds most evil corporation ever' putting aside their differences about instant messaging since they are now one company. Then they'll buy out a major oil company like Sun OIL and a major computer manufacturer, and the government will be afraid to break them up or even challenge them because they will control everything. What will their new name be? MYNAWCAT
[Something witty and intelligent should have appeared here.]
{Traicovn}
Why'd they stop? 'Cause all the "dark future" stuff they read about kept coming true! Reality TV, Corporate owned gov'ments, cameras in your toliet...Gee, I guess we really do live in interesting times.
It's a Brave New 1984.
Furry cows moo and decompress.
In the USA...
AOL is the internet (to most people)
Time/Warner is entertainment (to most people)
CNN is news (to most people)
Netscape is the browser (or used to be...)
ATT is long-distance phone service (to most people)
hmmm.....
Why not buy Microsoft (they are computing to most people)
-- Andy
A Washington Post article about this stated that a new and seperate company would be spun off. It also noted that AT&T already has a 25% stake in AOL Time Warner.
This merger with AOL may be a step in the right direction, by creating a company that is again focused on a single product line and that is backed by companies with significant resources. Could this step be the the one that puts cable broadband service back in the right direction?
Having been a Cable customer since 1997 I have seen my cable service provider aquired three times already. Back then I subscribed with Highway 1 when there were undoubtedly less than one thousand subscribers. While the market was growing, service continued to improve. Now broadband seems to have become a commodity and service has deteriorated.
One can only hope that by creating a more focused company, and one that is back by deep coffers, that this might just be what the industry needs.
So at&t may merge with AOL/Time-Warner (netscape, like cnn are parts of their respective companies and are not part of the name)... why are people just now assuming this is the end of the world? Compaq aquired DEC, and then was aquired by HP. I would imagine that gateway will merge sometime in the next 3 years. I think people are forgetting about the massive expensives it takes to start and finish a tech project (whether its software or cable lines), and this is why companies like NullSoft, etc become part of larger ones. So who's left? Microsoft... yeah... IBM, Intel... check... Sun... still there... Apple... unfortunatly(;-) no offense to apple fanatics)... I don't see a problem with this, as it is the survival of the fittest and if one were to check out the computer history books, they'd realize that the same companies that dominate now have been doing so for 20+ years, and in some cases 40-50+. Conglomerate corporations aren't inheritantly bad, in-fact I would like to hear one example of a corporate merger that hurt the consumer. Mercedes & Chrysler, no. Apple & Microsoft (yes, apple did sell part of its soul to Bill), nothing too bad. Aol, et al... that remains to be seen and if some of the rumurs are true (about the cable access) then I may have to rethink my position. Now if Microsoft merged with RedHat, I'd be scared...
can't sleep slashdot will eat me
Could you please remind me again why it's called the Land of the Free?
Censorship on Slashdot
Thus it's NAWnCAT now
Seems like every time one of these mergers happen, the head tacos come on TV babbling about what a greate synergy this merger is, etc. And how it will give them the oppportunity to improve efficiency, eliminate redundancies (this means mass layoffs), etc. etc.
Hell, if they're going for efficiency, then probably the best solution is to get it all over with and just have one monopoly corporation doing all computer related stuff.
Why doesn't the government instead of trying to break up Microsoft just insist that it merge with AOLTW, Apple, Sun, GE, GM et. al. and be done with it. And as layoffs help a company improve efficiency, they should encourage MSAOLTW[A-Z]* to layoff everyone. Now that would be efficient!
(Wearing my corporate dude hat, where is the "synergy" (whatever that is?) here in this current merger?)
Snow Crash - Neal Stephenson
a sp ?theisbn=0553380958&vm=a
Anyone?
http://www1.fatbrain.com/asp/bookinfo/bookinfo.
Were that I say, pancakes?
One day* the galaxy is sold on ebay through money order to a being of infinite horror.
*in the year 3000.
Everybody knows that AT&T Broadband is for sale. It only makes sense that another cable company would be the one making the purchase. Comcast made the first offer, Cox is rumored to be interested, of course AOLTW is going to be interested. It makes sense for them. This isn't so much an evil megalo-corp bent on world domination as it is a large company that probably can't hit growth targets without making acquisitions.
And as far as size goes, there are plenty of companies out there that would dwarf AOLTW...some people need to calm down and take a look at the world before freaking out...
Juiced? Or Not?
AOL - Time - Warner - Castle Rock Entertainment - New Line Cinema - Fine Line Features - CompuServe - Netscape - Nullsoft - AOL MovieFone - Digital City - MapQuest.com - Spinner.com - The Atlantic Group - Rhino Records - Elektra Entertainment Group - London-Sire Records Inc. - Warner Bros. Records - Warner Music International - Time Life Music - WB Television Network - HBO - Cinemax - Time Warner Sports - CNN - CNN/fn - CNN/SI - CNN Headline News - TBS - TNT - Cartoon Network - Turner Classic Movies - HBO Independent Productions - New Line Television - Turner Original Productions - Warner Brothers Television - Warner Brothers Animation: Looney Tunes, Hanna-Barbera - Time Warner Cable - Time Life Books - Book-of-the-Month Club (managed by Bertelsmann) - Little, Brown & Co. - Bulfinch Press - Back Bay Books - Warner Books - Oxmoor House - Time Magazine - Life Magazine - Fortune Magazine - Sports Illustrated - Money - People - Entertainment Weekly - In Style - Southern Living - Cooking Light - The Parent Group (Parenting, Baby Talk, Baby on the Way) - This Old House - The Health Publishing Group - Real Simple - Golf Magazine - Popular Science - Ski - Yachting Magazine - DC Comics - MAD Magazine - Atlanta Braves - Atlanta Hawks - Atlanta Thrashers - Turner Sports - Goodwill Games - AT&T (anyone know all their wholly owned subsidiaries?) - ...
Capitalist Libertarians (sic): are we having fun yet? Are plutocracies great or what?
CowboyNeal for president!
"Hit any user to continue."
... if people knew a bit more about economic necessities, they'd clearly see that there's no need for 'buying the government'. No government in the world will make decisions opposing their economical big players. That's what their counsellors are for, to prevent them from conducting stupid things that scare away the ones that pay their chairs (no, not directly, I'm not talking corruption here).
This is one of the simplest economical rules, which Marx (and I guess Adam Smith as well) had already pointed out, and not much has changed since then in that respect. The big corporations can make better use of that dough instead.
A World in a Grain of Sand / Heaven in a Wild Flower,
Infinity in the Palm of your Hand / And Eternity in an Hour.
(Disclaimer - I'm British, these are nominally American companies and this would mostly affect American users. Flame away if you think this is none of my business.)
I have to say, this whole saga sounds so much like AOL etc. _daring_ the government to stop them. They can't quite believe they're getting away with it but hey, if they can buy the world before anyone notices and complains then they might as well give it a try...
Someone _really_ needs some backbone to stand up to this, it's ridiculous. A company like this would have so much power it isn't funny and they need stopping. From a shareholder point of view, a company this large would likely be quite unwieldy and so probably wouldn't be as good value as the individuals currently are collectively.
Except look at the current 'business friendly' Whitehouse. Oh well, better luck in 2004, guys.
Greg
(Inside a nuclear plant)
Aaaarrrggh! Run! The canary has mutated!
Seems it's all that's left you...
...
Welcome to Switzeland 8)
A kiss from Old Europe
It takes 40+ muscles to frown, but only four to extend your arm and bitchslap the motherfucker
poor little microsoft, all by it's lonesome out there in the big bad corporate world.
send contributions via paypal.
...which are not usually discussed on /.
Micro$oft is a real threat in the computers/software world and this is what this site is for. Don't like it? Try visiting a different site.
Make even shorter URLs - 8LN.org
I just hope that the hewlett-packard compaq merger doesn't ever enter into this...they could take over the world.
The anti-salmon
I read a book called Red Mars where corporations on earth started buying small countries for their resources. They then had to govern the people of the country. The corporation wasn't much different than a government other than that economic policy was the law above everything else. Everyone fears that coporations will control and manipulate industries to work towards their goals, but isn't that what a government does now?
Outdoor digital photography, mostly in New Engl
An interesting resource guide to what the major media companies own.
which is what they will say when you ask for better service....
The difference between Theory and Practice is greater in Practice than in Theory.
It's these guys. Increasingly, this AOL/Time Warner/CNN/Netscape/AT&T company will control what information you get, and how you get it. That's scary. I can always get different software. Usually, I can't get more than one cable provider, though. And if they control the content on that cable, then I only know what they let me know.
I'm waiting for"NAWCAT" and MS to have the big big sword dual in the end... Personally, I just want to watch when money and power come spewing from the neck of the loser.
Then, of course, we all go into hiding.
It's the name of "The Company" from the "Aliens" series for those who missed the reference.
UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
Let's face it, US government is already open to the highest bidder, like some banana country
- Trial against Microsoft, canceled
- cancellation of the Balistic arms treaty, (military
expenses will rise again....)
- killing off environment treaty.
- Organising Bush to be elected to help this all
Good point.
;)
Better luck in 2004 eh?
That wasn't luck! We voted him in, blech.
why not read the daze good gnus, & possibly acquire your own, alternative 'net "business" address?
have you seen these guys? yes, the resemblance IS uncanny.
fud iis dead. the stuck markup "bull" is dead. the bull was killed buy a sh!tstorm of billoneous MiSleading ?pr? FUDgepacking.
These companies are getting too big for their own good, and especially for OUR own good. They have way to much power. And the sad part is, there's not much we can do about it. The Government cares too much about the income that Lobbying generates and will not move to act. Case in point, the Microsoft Anti-Trust case. A year ago, Microsoft was on the verge of a breakup. Now, they'll just get a slap on the wrist.
And all because we had to elect a simpleton...
Antarctica is looking rather inviting now...
Blog Prophyts - Right On, Man
against monopolies. In and of itself, monopolies are not illegal. Iit's only when you abuse that monopoly power that it's against the law.
Since law wont do anything to break up these Monopolies, we will have to wait until the big up coming Revolution of the less mindless people getting fed up about it within the next decade.
Some will stand up and change the world, the only good thing i can see in this is that the world will become closer to one big place, cause everything relates to everything instead to just some local affairs...we will fight not religion but wealthy companies, who will buy guns then, not terrorists but companies protecting them selfs. Who knows what the future will bring =)
Quazion.
*humans tend to create and then destroy...its history...*
WAANCT
(OK, I'm ignoring Nullsoft there, but still...)
A little planning goes a long way...
We voted him in, blech.
"We" as in "The people who manipulated the votes and intentionally miscounted ballots"? SCNR...
This message is provided under the terms outlined at http://www.bero.org/terms.html
No, I see the revival of the Acme(tm) brand!
Leave Rob out of this. He's not whining, he's concerned, as alot of us are. These consolidations and mergers are getting out of hand.
Blog Prophyts - Right On, Man
here:
Why Broadband Is So Narrow?
where the state of broadband is discussed in good detail. In fact, this month's issue of Forbes ASAP had a few articles (check the first 4 listed starting at Internet II in particular) discussing the current viability of broadband, future implications of Internet II, how the Internet should grow in the future, and how the government should help its growth.
I don't know enough about the current situation regarding these topics to make intelligent comments about it, but these articles IMO did a good job painting the current picture. I HIGHLY suggest these articles for anyone not familiar with the current nightmare growing in broadband regulation/deregulation, the growth of the net, and DSL vs. Cable Modem providers.
t.
"Corrupting our youth one mind at a time"
Right now, it's still possible (though not fun) to keep you head down and avoid most of the fallout.
When the bullets start flying, consumers be the first casualties. ["Hey, that guy's buying the competing product! Quick, kill the competition's cash flow!"]
There is nothing so silly as other peoples traditions, and nothing so sacred as our own.
TEC (The Entertainment Company)
TSSC (The Stock and Securities Company)
TCC (The Communications Company)
TTC (The Technology Company)
TPC (The Porn Company)
TGC (The Government Company)
Who knows, maybe some more, but then eventually we'll only have...
OCP (Omni Consumer Products)
Personally, I can't wait to get my own ED-209. I think I'll paint it Lavender..
The Dopester
"Yes, I'm a Karma Whore, but I'm doing it to pay my way through school."
Seriously though, in the timeline for the roleplaying game Cyberpunk, corporations successfully lobbied for a federal law deputizing their security officers to enforce the law within corporate controlled "security zones" (city business districts, company owned housing developments, etc). How long before that happens for real?
This is great news for all of us. We finally have a company that would challenge Microsoft.
The reason Microsoft is more dangerous is primarily that Microsoft is a danger internationally.
AOL is a big ISP in some European countries, but nowhere near the biggest.
Time Warner isn't important outside the US.
Most people in Europe don't even know CNN exists.
Netscape is mostly gone anyway.
AT&T isn't important in Europe.
Microsoft is more dangerous - they own a huge market share pretty much anywhere in the world.
Ideally, boycott both - but killing Microsoft is more important.
This message is provided under the terms outlined at http://www.bero.org/terms.html
I really do not think this is that bad. I own a Playstation 2, and write for ps2insider.com, and the console will be getting net access soon... AOL net access. Being a true geek, this was met with initial disgust, but I think my attitude is changing.
This may create one behemoth of a co. but it will take this (maybe more) to give M$ any real threat. The PS2 will have real player and AOL (IM as well) and will not support any M$ crap. I'd rather have AOL and netscape than IE and MSN.
The sheer number of people with PS2's is staggering and still growing, it is going to enable a network of users who will have complete control over how they game, as well as interact in ways that will integrate these separate technologies into one seemless UI.
I like it, it overthrows MS in just about every respect and actually does a BETTER job. I think they are slowly building a better mousetrap, and you need two dogs about the same size for a good brawl. As much as I love it Linux is not that big (yet), and competition (even just two players) is better than none.
I could be wrong and the world might turn into a Shadowrun'esque situation, but at least it will be someone who can actually outdo M$ in every respect... heck even force it's own standards over just what Billy wants.
In fact, a recognized monopoly is a business in a very peculiar position--in addition to making a profit for its stockholders, it has to look out for the good of the market so it isn't accused of abusing its monopoly power. (*cough* MICROSOFT *cough).
No corporation could *ever* gain enough power to defeat a government. If worst came to worst, the gov't would simply order the dissolution of the corp. If the corporation fled to a rival gov't, the local gov't could simply declare them enemies of the state, and thus make working with them (i.e., being their employee) an act of treason.
Worry about corps having undue political influence over the gov't's power, but not more power than the gov't.
Dangerous, how? They're not controlling what information you're receiving and how you can receive it. Once one company controls the media, they also control everything that you know. That's real danger.
Those damn Europeans will be litting companies like GE and Honeywell merge.
Best Slashdot Co
A company like this would have so much power it isn't funny and they need stopping.
Cue the anarchist terrorists with stolen ex-Soviet antitank weapons...
"How many light bulbs does it take to change a person?" --BMcC-->
They do.
AFAIK current versions of M$IE take you to msn.com immediately (controlling information). Thanks to Smart Tags(tm), they'll provide you with whatever related information they see fit, even if you avoid accessing msn.com.
By attempting to monopolize M$IE and Media Player, they control how you receive information. Once they've succeeded killing of competitors, they'll add censoring of "dangerous" websites (e.g. linux.org, redhat.com) to their monopolist information access kit.
This message is provided under the terms outlined at http://www.bero.org/terms.html
I did vote him in. I neither manipulated votes or miscounted ballots. You got a 2 on this post while the man you replied to got a zero. Hello, were you even following the election? Gore made himself into an ass during the electional proceedings. Hell, even Gore was going to "manipulate" the counts by counting improperly punched ballots.
I have to agree with the rule of law and not rule of the people in this case. Bush won by the law as it stood. If the law changes by the set precedents, thats fine. I do feel sorry for the people who misvoted in Florida, because their voice was not heard. However, I do not blame this on the President. I blame this on the citizens of Florida who did not stop and take the time necessary to study the ballot and how the ballot punching was to be performed.
Mod me down, I don't care. Karma is meant to be burnt on this board apparently. Go against the liberal thinking even a little and you get moderated back to the stone age.
I/O, I/O, its off to disk I go, with a read and a write, and a bit and a byte, I/O, I/O, I/O, I/O
Well? What HAS he done that is so wrong. If you wanna make claims and point the finger at someone, then at least come packing with some reasons...oh...I forgot...this is Slashdot. You've got quite the pack of "yes" men (and women) here. Your point doesn't HAVE to make alot of sense.
...does it mean that AOL would finally have enough bandwidth that it wouldn't have response problems during peak usage times? That's one of the frustrations I had with using it.
"How many light bulbs does it take to change a person?" --BMcC-->
I thought I read something about this months ago. And, well, my only choice is Road Runner. Anyone know when I may 'select' my cable modem provider?
"There ought to be limits to freedom"
This already *has* happened. Read a little about William Randolph Hearst.
"He may look like an idiot, and talk like an idiot, but don't let that fool you. He really is an idiot." - Duck Soup
Nah, the really big companies may not have 37 billion dollars in cash with no debt, but if Gates tried to get into, say, the auto market, you'd see his stock value drop by 95% in about two days.
Those companies are still riding on speculation. Once an OS and the hardware get "good enough", the profits will start to decline and the market will move from novelty into long-term growth, which means cutting costs.
I am for the complete Trantorization of Earth.
<RANT>
Hmmm...all this talk about monopolies and no mention of the US gov't on the list.
Wronged by Microsoft/AOL/Large-company-name-here? Well you can sue them. Defective product? You can return it and get your money back. Forced to use their product? No.
Wronged by the gov't? You have to ask their permission to sue them. Defective product, say, welfare, social security, energy policy, can you get your money back? No. There is no customer service department at the US gov't. They take your money and your freedom and you have ZERO say. Forced to use their product? Yes - they take it right out of your paycheck before you see a dime. FICA, medicare, etc. And at a rate over 1500% of the original income tax levy. Don't ever think this will go down substantially, it never has once implemented.
I am truly amazed, at least on the US side, at how incensed we are at the major corporations who can do nothing to force me to do anything but we simply let our government take our freedom and our money and in fact get into bed with them to defend us against said corporations. The government is the definition of monopoly.
</RANT>
What the heck did he do that's so wrong? Has everyone forgotten how many of these mergers started and/or finished under Clinton? The Clinton administration's degree of intervention was so feeble that it was symbolic at best. The only thing that happened was the judge ruling for a MS breakup...but that's now off the table. However...have you SEEN the list of things that the Goverments IS making MS do? If you really think about some of the things on that list...a breakup would have almost been preferable. Seriously...go read it.
Stop lying, MS has removed Smart Tags from the browser because of the complaints. But other companies will be jumping on the Smart Tags bandwagon really soon and using it to their own advantage, like AOL for example.
CNN is a news channel owned by the Time Warner, and now the part of the Time Warner AOL company, their name is not part of either companies name.
Neither is Netscape which is also a subsidiary and isn't part of their name either. I thought it was quite obvious that the name was a joke and they main point of it was to show how big AOL Time Warner is getting.
This also isn't a merger so much as it is one large company buying a share of the assets of another. The rest of AT&Ts opperations would be seperate.
Exactly where is it mentioned that this is a merger? It is mentioned in the Slashdot blurb as well as the linked article that AOL is attempting to buy AT&T's cable network. The slashdot blurb jokes that at the current rate AOL Time Warner will soon own everything except for Microsoft.
I am completely stunned by the fact that not only could you post a comment that implies you don't get what are obvious exagerrations used in a humorous context but the fact that your post is at +5 indicates that a bunch of slashdotters don't either.
"electional"? Is that from the George W. Bush dictionary? Why is it that the hundreds of thousands of words that are already in the English language are never enough for GWB and his supporters?
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine.
Politics is the entertainment wing of industry. You don't need to 'buy' a country. All you need to do is buy the people who sit in key organizational, policy and operational roles in government. Those are called elections.
Looks like Linux failed, AOL is going after World Domination one step at a time.
> Most people in Europe don't even know CNN exists.
Very true. I was in Europe during the Gulf War, and the BBC was where it was at (as an English speaker on the continent.)
I even remember the CNN guys bragging about how brave they were during the 3-day ground war, hiding in their hotel. Meanwhile, some BBC people drove around the streets filming things, a shot-up mural of Saddam, etc. and got stopped, detained, then sent back to the hotel in all the confusion.
I am for the complete Trantorization of Earth.
This was posted on here on firday.
-teknopurge
Techienews Network help us beta!!!
Website Hosting
But, I have decided to eduate myself on economics so that I can attempt to right a manifesto about what is happening in America. And no I don't plan on living in a little shack in Montana...I just think that if someone can spell this situation out, others may see it for what it is and we can change it.
I understand the basis behind Socialism, Communism, and Marxism, and even Capitalism...however it seems to me that we can no longer claim that we follow the tenets of capitalism anymore in America. (And we have not been for some time.) My understanding of Capitalism is based on the idea that BOTH the supplier and the demander must be aware of their roles. That is, the suppier knows he must be competitive and provide a product that the market will desire. Also, and just as important, the consumer must be intelligent, make good purchasing decisions, and promote competition.
Yet, I know longer see this in America. Companies, such as AOL/TimeWarner/CNN/Netscape, grow ever larger, and seem to defy the basic laws of Capitalism by raising prices for declining quality on a non-restrainted "product". AT&T wireless is another perfect example. Some of these conglomerates truly have decided that it is okay to knife the baby on some of their customers because intelligent consumers are "too expensive". This spells trouble, I think, because it is contrary to the rules of capitalism. Instead of two equal sides giving and taking, we now have one side providing and the other begging. Almost like economic feudalism.
So my question: Has anyone come across any literature that describes this behavior or outlines what happens when Capitalism tilts on an unequal balance--both in favor of the supplier and the consumer? I have read some Smith, Marx, etc, and plan on reading much more. Any help would be appreciated.
Scott
"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."
I'm sorry to say, but most of the lofty goals set by corporations that merge are rarely met. In the case of HP and Compaq, there will be a myriad of problems that won't simply go away because the names have changed on the letterhead.
Similarly, there is a limit to how large a corporation can grow. (No, it isn't "the world".) The larger they get, the harder it is to maintain all the information flow and vital activities that keep a business from falling apart due to misdirection (essentially bad communication) and other redundant practices that inevitably evolve in a large corporate 'organism'.
Does this mean the death of cable providers? Possibly, to the competition - but at this point I would be looking at the efforts being made to establish a 'undernet' out of the reach of commercial entities. Even if it begins as a barely-linked WiFi cloud, it is still something.
Hell, if we could harness half the idealism here I think that it would be easy enough to establish city "clouds" of connectivity and then grow outward from there...
Hotblack_Desiato
** By reading this post, you've agreed to my EULA - which includes not modding-down due to difference in opinion. **
"Oh well, better luck in 2004, guys."
Hehe. I sure hope so.
I will vote for Bush in 2004 as well.
Hopefully he won't have to deal with thieves like Gore and Daley anymore.
since the present administration believes that monopolies are for the good of the people, AOL will be able to follow through on their master plan to eliminate the telco's and all other isps, and make it the AOL net, rather than the internet. all they have to do is restrict access to time warner sites to aol members only, and make the price of cable access the same as dialup (they're almost a parity now). the only question is can they accomplish it in the three years left of the current administration.
Well, if this is the case, Id like to stand up and suggest that they *should be*. I have no interest in being a servant to monopolies - nor do I have interest in being a martyr (like living in the bush without electricity to avoid the power company).
Most people would agree - and guess what, in a democracy, people make the laws of the land... even those that affect the economy (*gasp*). I suggest when a market doesn't have fair competition it should:
A) be 'bought' by the government and offered as a non-profit public service (because the free-market 'advantages' are not at work.. and they are the purpose of this whole capitalism thing (as far as the citizens are concerned))
B) be broken into competing business to encourage/stimulate competition, price movements, innovation.
People have been so polluted by corporate-speak media that they actually feel it is not 'right' to enact law that might effect the economy - free markets rule today - and democracy can take a back seat... "Power" should exist in no entity that is not democratically* elected.
Bollocks to that mess: see here friends
*as in 'real' democracy, not the circus of smoke and mirrors that the Plutocrats of USofAmerica organize every couple years...
Considering that just a year or so ago, Time Warner sold "my town's" cable system to AT&T in a territory swap.
Except look at the current 'business friendly' Whitehouse. Oh well, better luck in 2004, guys.
It is going to take more than 3 years for the Americans to start voting, and demanding democratic reforms, that will enable them to re-ignite their democracy. The Republicrats have been colluding to exclude all others for 150 years - why does it matter who they elect, there will be no change from either party... nothing of consequence... maybe they'll debate about education reform or public health care - yet again...
The entire political system is so corrupt (literally) that it is an outright sham(e).
What concerns me are three basic issues:
1. The monopolistic aspect of this potential merger. There is already a paucity of competition for broadband in the U.S. with most people probably only having a single choice. Having a company as huge as AOLTW controlling a majority of the cable modem business in the U.S. would likely result in service degradation and rising rates. Just look at Microsoft to see what a monopoly does for/to consumers.
2. Because AOL is a proprietary service aimed at the Internet neophyte, many people are concerned that the only choice for broadband would be a high-speed pipeline through which AOL could pump its ceaseless banner ads and spam. In addition to the content issue, the proprietary nature of the service would make it impossible for people to run FTP servers, web servers, mail servers, etc. (contrary to popular belief, customers may run servers under the terms of many cable franchises).
3. AOL has a long history of censoring users. While this might make some religious zealots and guilt-ridden absentee parents happy, it is a chilling prospect to those who wish to engage in adult discussions on anything from breast cancer to S&M clubs.
You have to be silly to think that humonguous companies have morals. The only moral and only rule is to make money. If it takes killing a few, who cares, especially if it's in a far away country. You have to increase your profit or you suck and die. Read this about Coca-Cola and browse through this google search. Being an unionist (trade unions) is one of the most dangerous "pastimes" on Earth. And if you think it doesn't happen in the "Civilized" world - think again.
$HOME is where the
-- silver_p
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I cannot believe a company of this size and scope has not aroused more attention of anti-trust investigators than it has. The AOL/Time Warner corporate viewpoint can reach nearly every facet of American culture. Take a look (credit: Columbia Journalism Review):
Online Services
Other
Joint ventures with the following companies:
Time Warner - Books
Time Warner - Cable/DBS
Time Warner Inc. - Film & TV Production/Distribution
Time Warner Inc. - Magazines
Magazines listed under Warner Brothers label
Time Warner - Music
Other Recording Interests
Joint Ventures
Time Warner - Online/Other Publishing
Time Warner - Merchandise/Retail
Theme Parks
Time Warner Inc. - Turner Entertainment
Film Production
Sports
Other Operations
ya think?
As one of my professors said, in 10 years there will only be 3 companies: Microsoft, AOL, and WalMart.
*as in 'real' democracy, not the circus of smoke and mirrors that the Plutocrats of USofAmerica organize every couple years...
The USA is not and never has been a democracy- its a republic. Pretty big difference.
"The defense of freedom requires the advance of freedom" - George W Bush
Time Warner isn't important outside the US.
What?
What again?
"electional"? Is that from the George W. Bush dictionary?
Sounds more like Al Sharpton to me. "And things done got full of electional corrupticizing, ya-yus."
--saint
Histarical chect pounding aside, AT&Ts broadband unit has been it a hurt for a long time. It's not suprising that AOL Time-Warner is considering this purchase.
As for weather it's good for consumers: well, market forces have acted to consolidate ISPs throughout the world. This isn't just a U.S. phenomenon. Perhaps the minimum efficient scale of this kind of service is similar to that of telephone service (vary large). We've learned from the past 100 years that regulation of monopolies isn't *always* a good thing. There are certain natural monopolies in free markets. We have seen this in telephone service, where we tried to regulate a natural monopoly out of existance, then after those regulations were eliminated - at a time when there were several large competitors in the market - a consolidation took place, not because of anti-competitive practices of one player, but because it was more efficient to do business on a larger scale than any on the indevidual players were able to do in their form at that time.
The same might be said of the internet access market. Given the bariers to entry, (exhorbinnet infastructure cost, support costs, etc.) it might be more cost effective to operate on a vary large scale, rather than have many small competitors in the merket. Just look to the DSL service provider market for evidence of this. Independant DSL service providers have been going under right left and center. This is not because of anti-competitive practices, or pricing; it's because they weren't able to cost effectively manage infastructure and support. Perhaps this market is simply a natural monopoly and the free markets are moving to increase efficiency.
Or onthe other hand, it could be a massive conspiracy... which I grant you would make for a better story, but just isn't true.
--CTH
--Got Lists? | Top 95 Star Wars Line
And then Slashdot can become an AOL channel, and Slashdot Radio can be featured on CNN Tech! Finish selling out, guys, and try to get paid in something other than food stamps. Take the money and run while you can!
You know it's just a matter of time, guys. Listen to "Geeks in Space Episode 36: We're Really Dancing" somewhere around 20:00 and replace your references to "Easel", "Just A File Manager", and "Out of Business" with "VA Linux", "Just A Source Control Script", and "Out of Business". Show's over, the monkey's dead, sue ya.
AC's cheerfully ignored
Leaving aside the morality or practicability of the situation, AOL would just be a vertically integrated media content supply and delivery supply chain. (Imagine AOL at reliable broadband speed... Why, they'd become huge. Oh. They ARE huge.)
But not all the way down to the hardware it would run on. There are sensible reasons why you're not likely to ever see them bid on shares of Intel any time soon.
As the automotive industry has shown, in hard or unstettled time, that's just not a good idea. If you fall out of favor at anypoint in the chain ("We don't like < whatever > !") the entire chain falters.
Why do you think the vehicle manufacturers don't make tires? If Ford couldn't sell cars because of Firestone's bad press, (or Ford Tire Company's bad press,) a third of the automotive production capacity of the Western world be dead in the water. One faulty tire making machine spewing out substandard product could idle hundreds of thousands of people and cause economic dislocation greater than the GNP of many nations (combined!)
Only in the area of operating systems (I won't quibble about the operating part,) do we have such a ridiculous concentration of supply versus demand with just ONE supplier having acquired, by successive illegal and anti-competetive means, 85% of the total market.
When the patforms shifts to 64-bits and implements bio-metric security, the 85% will find themselves hamstrung in their efforts to improve their lot.
Luckily, M$ can't get in where security is an issue. NO company, NO country is going to risk using M$ anything in contracts where they have to garantee 99.999999% up time or face the consequences. (M$ Outlook crashes on me almost EVERY time I use it. Its the only piece of M$ software in my house and I use it to remind myself of how bad their products are.)
"Starwars" and the Missile Condom" will be the death of M$ if you play it right. Linux is hard to hack and much more reliable. Prove it (with help from ths NSA, etc) and the rewards will be truly great.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
Hey, whatever happened to pithy wit?
-- @rjamestaylor on Ello
At least it's still called America Online in other parts of the world; while the US is being replaced by a huge congolmerate so is the rest of the desireable earth.
-- @rjamestaylor on Ello
time to add a new domain .borg
Sig Sig Sputnik
The USA is not and never has been a democracy- its a republic. Pretty big difference.
America is a Republic in this sense:
An autonomous or partially autonomous political and territorial unit belonging to a sovereign federation.
Each independant 'autonomous territiorial unit' is a democracy in itself.
Please, if you want to debate symantics, be honest about it...
Unfortunately we've allowed such companies to exist by doing things backwards. The government allow the AOL/TW merger on the stipulation that they would enact certain remedies. Most of which have not come to fruition.If they should not or should the new company decide to circumvent those remedies it will be very difficult for the government to push back and fix the problem without millions of dollars of investigations and court costs. So why didn't the government say "before you merge you have to do A. B. C.". I mean before I let my kid play games he has to have his room in order. Why didn't the government hold the companies to the same premise, "get your business in order and then we'll talk". Because AOL/TW fastracked the issue through "experts" and lobbying. By showing that a delay would be "detrimental to the economy" and "fiscally damaging".
So what's the best rule of thumb that we can go by. How many markets should one company be allowed to compete in before it's considered "anti-comptetive"?
"Do not be swept up in the momentum of mediocrity." - anon
Lameness
-- @rjamestaylor on Ello
This isn't about backbone.
Anti-trust laws don't work. Look at M$. Look at the modern Petrol industry. We tried breaking up the mega-monopoly Standard Oil in the early 20th century, and look where we are now: Exxon-Mobil et. al. AOL-Time-Warner and consolidation aren't the problem: people willing to turn over control of their lives to a company and pay for the privilege of doing so is the real issue. Perhaps private interests encouraging this kind of neo-slavery (serfdom?) should be discouraged from it, but we certainly won't affect positive change from your implied (correct me if I'm wrong) Neanderthal approach of nuking every increasingly complex corporation just because they have a shitload of capital and appear to be "buying up the world" (tell me you'd act differently if you were on the board of, say, AOL).
You speak as if the state-capitalist system in the UK were better. Obviously, any system run by the same government that so deftly handled foot and mouth is superior to what we have over in Unistat.
I assure you, there is nothing daring about this. The people who control these companies are working hand-in-hand with legislators to make this consolidation smooth for all the controlling parties. The real dare is to their client base: to stand up and learn how to use products that cede control to the end user and not to the originating corporation.
Cheers,
Rene
See you on the playa.
Well, I have had both and am currently stuck with AT&T@home. GOD, what I would not give to go back to TW. Everyone always said how bad TW was but currently being with AT&T is SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO much worse then being with TimeWarner, I can only hope those that blast TW get stuck with AT&T for a few months, then they will realize what bad is. Bad is about 1/3 of the speed of TW's network. Bad is getting disconnected several times a day, every day from the AT&T network and getting told by support that the only thing they can do is to send another tech out to my house Monday - Friday between 8am and 5pm with a 2hr window and that the first time slot avail. is in 2 1/2 week, about 3 weeks after the last tech was out, which was 2 1/2 weeks after the last tech which was 2 1/2 weeks after the first tech.
;-)
I truly HOPE that TW buys AT&T@home so I can finally get some good service. BTW, I tried to get DSL, but Qworst (AKA Qwest)only offers DSL in about 5% of my city and lucky me, I don't live in that part. So unless I want to go with Dialup, I'm stuck with dealing with the wonderfull people of AT&T and Excite (excite owns @home and the backbone and hardware AT&T uses).
If you got TW or someone other then AT&T don't bitch, you got it good, because you could always be stuck with AT&T and see what bad service REALLy is.
I see a lot of people saying "well, at least the corps don't have weapons.", "at least they aren't fighting wars", etc. This reminds of an issue of a great comic book a while back. The comic was 'Scud, The disposable Assassin', about a robot purchased from a vending machine to do a killing and ends up on his own (spiritual in the end) quest to save existance.
In one issue he was teleporting around existance (on some time traveling horse...cant explain it now) and ended up on this planet in the middle of a war with another planet. Except, there were no weapons, *or* causulties (in our current sense). The two planets were rival media corporations and the war was for the control of the entertainment of the masses. A corporation planet would score a victory when one of its movies would draw more viewers on the enemy planet than what was produced there.
Perhaps this is slowly starting...one large mega-information-media-corporation fighting to gain the gray apathetic masses by launching mindless drivel entertainment at them.
- A non-productive mind is with absolutely zero balance.
- AC
Thank goodness Disney is still independent. I'm sure they'll save us from the whole MS/NAWCAT duopoly.
Oh well, better luck in 2004, guys.
2004? What the hell are you talking about? The next election is in 1984. I hear Reagan is going to promise no new taxes, and...
Oh, wait, your right, it is 2001. Sorry, with everything going on over here, I got a little confused.
grep -ri 'should work'
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -lies
Etymology: Latin monopolium, from Greek monopOlion, from mon- + pOlein to sell
Date: 1534
1 : exclusive ownership through legal privilege, command of supply, or concerted action
2 : exclusive possession or control
3 : a commodity controlled by one party
4 : one that has a monopoly
How much of America's opinions are based on what they see on television? How many trust the news media? If they don't believe what they see on CNN where do they go for another opinion, AOL?
With media centralizing aroung AOL/TW and expanding its collective influence with yet another company the size of AT&T it is not the overall size of the company that matters, but the audience it reaches. I consider the effect of a single media entity's influence on the majority of Americans a very big deal indeed.
the problems of this industry.
M$ grew to its present size by using techniques worthy of "Tony Soprano."
Jus't because they grew big doesn't mean that its good. Not for them and not for anyone else.
Right now the PC sales slump (negative growth!) means vastly reduced sale cashflow. Their products are not so useful or so unusable that they can coerce replacement. I know a financial firm using DOS to run their Fax sever. I know someone using Windows 3.11. That's all he needs. I know people using Windows '95 or '98. It came with the PC, it works well enough and that's where they'll stay. Who's got money to waste?
In nature/agriculture a monopoly is called a monoculture and its particularly vulnerable to changed environments conditions, pests and parasites. (Computing equivalent: Change of platform, script-kiddies and viri?)
In economics it called a monopoly and needs special safeguards placed on it before it restricts trade in other areas of the economy.
Not only can M$ cause inflation strictly through greed, endanger its users through its constant lagging in implementing security (I don't think Symantec "et alia", are worried about being made unnecessary,) but its ability to usurp other people's innovations to fold it into Windows is a powerful disincentive to development.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
...just what the hell he's talking about, please go here:
http://www.threebrain.com/weeeeee.html
No, it's not YASFGSL (yet another stupid fucking goat sex link), just try it, you'll like it!
I love how our government thinks that Microsoft is a monopoly, then grants these mega-mergers without blinking an eye.
You quitting proves that the karma kap worked. The most annoying of the whores shut up. --CmdrTaco
Yet another reason I use ADSL.
Plenty of us on cable modems used be on xDSL, before the DSL companies started dropping like flies.
After two providers died without warning, and my account was sold to different ISPs a couple of times, I decided on cable because cable companies have apparently figured out that you need to MAKE money in order to stay in business.
Don't get me wrong, I'd certainly rather have DSL, but I need reliability above all. If and when I ever get DSL again, I'll be keeping the cable modem as well as a backup.
All movements for social change begin as missions, evolve into businesses, and end up as rackets.
I will vote for Bush in 2004 as well.
That's assuming that he seeks re-election.
As a member of the moral community, it is my hope that the GOP encourages Bush to step aside. We need a true conservative, not a "compassionate" one. We need somebody who won't compromise with leftivists on every single issue (stem cell approval, small tax cut, etc.) A "moderate" has no principles of his own and instead relies on polls and "prevailing opinion" to make decisions. George W. Bush is not a bad man, but he's not the moral leader this country needs.
but i like NATWAC better
Heh, wishing for another Reagan, aren't we ?
Well, the main problem with the cable industry is that building it out in the 70s and 80s proved to be a very expensive proposition. Smaller companies financed it with junk bonds and so on, and when they found that adoption rates were lower than expected, they sold out to bigger fish, who sold out to bigger fish. And so on, until AT+T and TimeWarner and a couple others ended up holding the bag of lots of customers and lots of debt (AT+T is billions in the hole).
AT+T's theory was that they were the bluest of the blue chips and they would be able to carry all that debt without a problem. When the dotcom bubble deflated, it turned out they were very wrong.
Cable Internet is probably not a super-profitable business, but it does get the TV subscription rates up. And once you have 'digital cable' installed, you are more likely to do the things that make them the real money -- premium channels, PPV, etc. (And eventually local telephone services, maybe.)
The upshot is that it you are probably right -- it will take very large diversified companies to effectively pay off the infrastructure costs without being swamped. The real moral of the story is that running a wire into everyone's house for a luxury service is a bad idea -- which is why you'll never see fiber-to-the-curb. Expect the next great build-outs to wireless only.
When I hear the word 'innovation', I reach for my pistol.
Reagan, in practice, was far more willing to compromise on sensible issues, especially after his economic advisors failed to deliver their promises of huge growth, and their errors merely cost us a huge deficit.
I'm just wishing for any President that will employ actual thoughtful economists instead of wacky hacks who were laughed out of academia and are looking for revenge. Back to the gold standard!
I thought a command economy was one of the reasons that the Soviets failed. Humans can't manage such huge and complex pieces of social machinery. Nature has to be left to take its course. However, now we're doing the same damn thing, except it's the corporation instead of the government. I fail to see why the same rules don't apply.
I wanna see more conglomerates splitting apart into seperate companies that each to their thing well without the massive overhead of being a small cog in a huge inefficent machine.
Oh, and death to CorporateSpeak as well!
It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
Salmon Rushdie suggests hopefully that there are no tyrannies that cannot be successfully resisted....
He cannot have considered a financial rather than a political/military one.
Political/military tyrannies give in exchange little or nothing; the thinnest illusion of security for their license to pillage and enslave.
By the innovation of offering a miserable amount of money outright thievery and slavery is given the imprimatur of laws and contracts. An illusion is created of acceptance by all parties almost disguising the fact that the various forms of slavery cannot be distinguished from each other by the pittance paid.
With indecent dishonesty, the few can obtain with deceit what would likely be unobtainable by force or coercion. This innovation is clearly the most profound of the Twentieth Century, far beyond semiconductors, air travel and automobiles.
Unlike the flesh-and-blood tyrant, the deathless corporation extends itself endlessly into all dimensions.
A new guide-book is in order, to suggest how to resist an organism that masquerades in providing as little as possible of what the slaves think they want. Of course arrogance (and hubris) will likely see a final resolution in the streets....Perhaps Rushdie is right after all.
"The defense of freedom requires the advance of freedom" - George W Bush
There's been no major netscape release since june 2000? Excuse me?
Netscape 6.1 (released last month) is effectively the *first* release of the new, mozilla-based, rewritten from scratch, standards compliant, stable, fast, skinnable, netscape browser.
You can argue about "fast" (depends on your computer - it flies on mine) and it's certainly not "lean and mean" but it certainly counts as a major release.
I say "effectively the first" because 6.0 was, by all accounts, a complete disaster. While Netscape's official corporate position is still "it was the right product at the right time", even their own developers unofficially admit that this is only because they had to release *something* before they became completely irrelevant. 6.1 is what 6.0 should have been.
Now, I don't know whether their market share has increased due to 6.1 or not (ime 6.0 caused such a backlash that a lot of people are simply not willing to give 6.1 a chance, and those are by definition the people that were willing to give netscape a chance a year ago) but it's simply not true to claim that there hasn't been a major netscape release since june of last year. 6.1 is imho the most significant netscape release since 4.5 (which was the equivalent point in the 4.x series - previous 4.xs sucked in the same way 6.0 did, 4.5 was the first decent release)
We are a liberal democracy - IOW democratic rule, with our rights protected by a Constitution.
" especially after his economic advisors failed to deliver their promises of huge growth"
...
That is certainly debatable.
I have seen as many arguments against Reagan economical policy as for it.
I have seen respected economists argue that 90s growth was a result of Reagan economic policies etc
No offense or anything, but what the hell is this supposed to mean? 6.0 sucked, so you're just gonna pretend it didn't happen?
When I say "major release", I'm referring to version number - that's why they're called "major" and "minor" numbers. I don't consider 6.1 to be a major release, as many bugs as it may have fixed, for the same reason that I don't consider IE 5.5 a major release. If Netscape had sat on their hands until the 6.1 codebase was ready, then called that 6.1, I'd be agreeing with you. Hell, they could call the new version 7.0 if they wanted, except that it would be tantamount to admitting that 6.0 was a dog.
Finally, as an afterthought on speed: I tried and quickly buried NS 6.0. Since then, I stuck with Mozilla builds, until I finally got tired of the waiting game and migrated to MSIE on Windows, and Konqueror on Linux. I'm due to take another look soon, but at the time, no version of Mozilla yet built could compare speedwise to either of those alternatives.
yeah !!!, another steak in the m$ hert
marvel at the beast
There's an easy way to avoid this fate.
http://www.nader.org/
cripes you're snowed.. bush is as big a corporate whore as there's ever been.
Why does anti-Black racism get moderated UP around here?!
I bet this will get moderated down - disagreeing with anti-Black sentiments here on Slashdot seems to always get a -1, Offtopic moderation.
Who is Ms. AOL Twat? :)
Why does anti-Black racism get moderated UP around here?!
That wasn't anti-Black racism. Rather, it was a bit of lighthearted japery pointing out Al Sharpton's laughable habit of making up his own words in what seems a wretched and ultimately unsuccessful bid to appear educated.
The fact that I think he's a buffoon is race-independent, thanks.
--saint
Learn your history dumbass....Reagan lowered taxes when Congress (Both Senate and House Reps.) were both Democrats were spending for every dollar the Gov. brought in, they were spending like a $1.63. This was Democrats doing, not Republicans. Learn some history! Bush Sr. had to raise taxes because of the deficit the Democrats put the US into. DONT even say the Clinton era gave the US a surplus, because it was the Republican Congress that did that in 93-94. Clinton rode the coat tail.....Remember, Republicans want individual rights/privacy/smaller Gov./people to earn their living. Democrats want everything to be paid by businesses (Dont know why anyone would want to go into business then because you're penalzed for being successful for hard work.) Democrats = give something for your freedom. These Democrats elitists goto Hardvard, etc...schools think the know whats best for everyone....I know whats best for me...they don't. Don't be fooled by these Liberal Bastard Democrats...
-------- Of all the things I've lost, I miss my mind the most. --Ozzy
Not to compare such attrocities, but Hitler annexed Austria, took Poland, etc...WWIII?
Now we only have one company to break up when the anti-trust suit is filed.
Just wish they'd hurry up and consolidate. The sooner we have one World Order, the sooner all our problems will be solved.
When the freedom to choose goes away completely, all our worries and cares will disappear forever. Am I the only one who sees this?
- Sheep #49856441
I call the end result SuperGlobalMegaMonolithCorp -- purveyors of everything from Gattica (the police state, not Gattica the movie) to soap, to soup, to nuts, to net access (censored and monitored, of course), to civilian space travel.
I'm concerned about it, but what are the rest of you going to DO about it?
Well?
CmdrTaco oughta take up writing for segfault. He's got a real knack for it.
Oh wait. He's accurately predicting what the world will be like in 5 years. Doh!
If you are so worried about AOL MegaConclomo Inc. taking over your cable think about backing a MUD (Municipal Utility District) where you live. A MUD once established takes control of local utilities and puts them in the hands of an elected board. Let AOL buy AT&T, then watch as municipal districts all over the country take it back piece by piece. There's no more small guy provider any more or at least not for very much longer. That's gone forever. The only recourse we have now is our local (LOCAL) government.
Call me a socialist? Well you get two choices these days, unfettered capitalism building monopolies more powerful then most nations or capitalism held on a leash by prevailing socialism. If a corporation grows too powerfull and holds a monopoly it should get taken by the people with the power of eminent domain.
would you like to try the new jumbo biggie whatamac meal?
Are you pondering what I'm pondering?
AT&T already sold off their cable services division to Mediacom. They got @home too.
nhavar makes a good point.
Though perhaps we should just have a law against really huge companies (seriously!)
You've already encountered this sort of strategy before. Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Beyers is one of if not the biggest name in the venture capital business. They have funded companies ranging from Yahoo! to Amazon to Netscape. Most of the internet revolution rests on the cash they infused into the market (which by the way didn't exist before the companies they backed created it). Complaining that companies all shouldn't own the same thing is a moot fucking argument. Corporations have been scratching each other's backs for years which pretty much amounts to a monopoly if not in name. Stop bitching about one company owning everything you see and hear. Your new Nikes are made in the same factory as Silver Series velcro strap shoes Wal-Mart sells for nine bucks. Tommy Hilfiger shit is made in the same factory that makes Guess shit. A good portion of the stock photography you see in just about everything from advertisements to brochures to magazines are all from a handful of private collections. Stop giving a shit whether your broadband has an AT&T label or a AOL Time Warner label, they're both existing to take your money and then make you thank them for it. Assuming they're going to fuck you over or make you install Windows on your computer is ridiculous, they want the biggest market share they can. Pissing off all the non-Windows users in a given market is not high on their agenda. Besides which if you're not forking over heavy wads of cash for a T1 you should just be happy you've got a broadband connection. Bitching you can't abuse a network service in breech of the service contract is retarded. Besides communication monopolies aren othing new. Silly slashdotters don't remember that AT&T used to own the entire national telephone system. The only competition to corporate giants is municipally owned services (yes that's right kids, low fat socialism) or other corporate giants.
I'm a loner Dottie, a Rebel.
One word: Genom. (cf. Bubblegum Crisis 2040).
once MS controls servers they will have the data.
wake up beyach.
And the DOJ has the GUTS to say MS is a monopoly!!!
>
> "Not true, governments have guns. I doubt
> seriously any business is going to be able
> to fight that."
>
There's a near-future Bruce Sterling novel called "Island in the Net" from 1988 about a couple who work for a company who get involved in revolution (? it's been a few years) as a result of representing their employer's "interests" in a tense political situation. In this story, the corporations are so large and transnational that they transcend states' boundaries and make their own policy. Good enough book; the Amazon reviews call it dated but I liked it.
Does anybody besides me ever wonder from time to time if we could eventually see the two 500-lb. gorillas get together? Maybe it's an aggravated paranoid fantasy, but if AOL ditched Netscape and M$ wanted to roll Hotmail and MSN into AOL...?
Naaaah. The SEC would never stand for it, right?
"How many light bulbs does it take to change a person?" --BMcC-->
IMHO, based on self education during the last year and a half.
Look to the SEC site if you doubt these observations and statements of opinion.
http://www.sec.gov/
http://www.totaltelecom and http://www.thregister.co.uk are good resources.
Microsoft and partner Arthur Anderson Consulting, now Accenture,
have contracted with the US Navy and IRS to provide software and service
John Malone, former scion of Cable Giant TCI, which he sold to AT&T, converting his TCI shares to Liberty Media, which he has now spun off, is partnered with Bill Gates in a quest for global domination of telecommunications.
They have so much cash and leverage that they Are succeeding...Hundreds of Billions spent in the last year alone, buying all viable competition.
Their actions are being masked by name changes to make it appear as if new companies are being formed, and to launch new IPO's to use the unaware to finance their growth.
Their partnership in United Globalcom will likely be the umbrella for this quest.
Malone and Gates are partnered with and/or planning to buy, own or exert shared stock control of UPC, Telewest plc, Global Crossing, Chello, Level3, Carrier One, Jupiter in Japan, NTL, AT&T, Cox-Comcast, Time Warner, Roadrunner, Flextech, Dish Network, Rupert Murdoch's News Corp's SKY, TeleDisc, Deutsche Telecom, Media One, Liberty Media...(yes, boys and girls, your favorite diversions, MTV, TV Guide, Discovery and Learning Channels, Court TV, QVC, Fox Kids, ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox,...on and on), and many other companies with systems and software that actually work.
So called "Reality TV" and infotainment has replaced any real news, and until today's terrorist attacks, has lulled us into a placid "Consumer" state of consciousness.
When did we cease to be citizens of our planet and reduced to consumers of products, to be led like sheep to the nearest shopping mall?
Malone and Gates through Liberty Media, TW Holdings and Microsoft UK, own cable. telephony and internet provider Telewest plc in the UK.
Telewest tried to buy the domain BLUEYONDER.COM from it's 5 year owner and Trademark Owner in the US for a name change of it's Internet service, Cableinet, in January 2000.
http://www.blueyonder.com
After failing to secure the domain, Telewest bought the confusingly similar BLUEYONDER.CO.UK from it's 2 1/2 month owner in the UK.
The owners of BLUEYONDER.COM in California were told that Telewest would use the infringing and confusingly similar BLUEYONDER.CO.UK for it's portal, if they still refused to sell.
When BLUEYONDER countered that the confusion alone would be devastating, they were told that it would be in their best interests to sell.
http://www.blueyonder.co.uk
In March 2000, Telewest staff, partners and customers began using BLUEYONDER.COM in their email addresses.
Telewest distributed a custom version of Microsoft Internet Explorer that contained dedicated buttons for it's member and support sites that illegally linked to BLUEYONDER.COM.
The abuse expanded to the use of the California Company's domain name BLUYONDER.CO.UK in email addresses.
They received over 500,000 unwanted emails, until receiving an attack so serious that their ISP's entire email system was shut down.
Even the Logotype of the CA BLUEYONDER was copied.
The first indication that the thousands of letters the CA company sent trying to inform Telewest customers and their contacts of the abuse of their property rights and the violation of the privacy rights of all concerned had any effect, was the change of the Logotype in the Telewest "blueyonder"Help pages on 9-07-01.
Too Late. The time to stop was before they began. The damage has been done.
http://status.blueyonder.co.uk:888/
Malone's latest gambit is partnering with Rupert Murdoch of SKY, Dish Network, and is attempting to buy TeleDisc with Murdoch and Gates for it's announced satellite broadband operation, Wild Blue.
http://www.wildblue.com
Apparently Malone and Gates are enamored with the Identity that the CA Company BLUEYONDER has created.
Of all the David and Goliath stories of Trade Mark Infringement and Domain Hijacking, this is undoubtedly the most extreme case of the World's largest Corporations stomping on the rights of a small company while they also violate their customers' privacy rights.
How many of us would be able , in reality, to bring suit against the biggest of the big, no matter how solid our case!
On a final note, look for Malone and Gates to get controlling interest of AT&T's broadband assets, of which they are already major shareholders.
They need them.
Remember, they are partners of the high profile bidders for those assets now.
As their centric control of global communications and News and Information grows, the danger of a digital attack on their network that would shut down global commerce becomes ever more likely.
We have come to believe that the recent spate of virus and worm attacks like Code Red/Blue and SirCam are tests of system vulnerability.
Microsoft's monopoly and inherent vulnerabilities have left the door open.
Case in Point: Their Telewest plc has been reeling from these bugs for more than a month.
http://status.blueyonder.co.uk:888/
This has been our opinion, and the Bill of Rights guarantees our right to express it.