Slashdot Mirror
Cablecos, Telcos Working To Strengthen the Duopoly
The LA Times is running a piece on cooperation among cable companies and telcos. No, not cablecos cooperating with telcos; rather, both industries working on industry-wide initiatives aimed at getting a leg up on the other. AT&T, Verizon, and Qwest have been working on a site, Moveroo.com, aimed at easing the pain of people moving within the US — by making it easier for them to hook up with the incumbent telco at their destination, for instance. Odd that there is no mention of which cable services might be available where they are heading. The cablecos are cooperating on a more ambitious initiative to standardize targeted advertising nationwide, using data gathered from the set-top boxes used by Time Warner, Cox, Comcast, Cablevision, Charter, and Bright House Networks. The article quotes a spokesman from a utility consumers' action group: " [The spokesman] said these moves by the telecom and cable industries may be good for the respective businesses, but they almost surely won't be good for consumers. 'All they're doing is creating obstacles to each other's industry from gaining an advantage,' he said. 'That's not competition.' Well, it is. But not the kind that benefits customers."
Given that the government has been bought and paid for by large corporate donors and there is no other game in town, and given that boycotting is impractical (and would make no difference) --you expect us to do WHAT exactly?
Jesus was a communist, Jesus was a pacifist, Jesus was a communist, Jesus didn't like the rich - Reagan Youth
Back to the topic at hand, I firmly believe these industries need to be nationalized. Or at least something along the line of utility companies. The fact of the matter is they exist to serve the citizens (or at least should due to public easements and what have you), but their commitment is to making that dollar... I don't see how that is ever going to change. But I do see how I never have to worry about gas or electric company trying to pull some underhanded move or using my payments to fund lobbyists to further their agenda. Nah when the power company wants to raise rates it's done in a public forum and it has to be okay'd by whatever governmental committee is in charge of that. Which obviously isn't a perfect system but it works and you don't see massive consumer unrest towards entities with such oversight.
On the Oregon Cost born and raised, On the beach is where I spent most of my days
" [The spokesman] said these moves by the telecom and cable industries may be good for the respective businesses, but they almost surely won't be good for consumers. 'All they're doing is creating obstacles to each other's industry from gaining an advantage,' he said. 'That's not competition.' Well, it is. But not the kind that benefits customers."
People have been saying this all along. There is no move by either company that is aimed at achieving anything other than coin for the shareholder. Their level of collusion with the **AA et al is debated, but seems inevitable. We are seeing the beginnings of the next level of content cartel being born. Each is seeking to be the biggest triple or quadruple-play content provider. The rumors that they want to charge you for access to various content on the Internet is not so far fetched as you might at first think. The large ISPs finally figured out that they now own the distribution channel for content in the foreseeable future and want to own it the way that the **AA have previously done.
No, I'm not wearing a tin-foil hat, this is a logical conclusion. Without control of distribution there is no big bucks to be made, no expensive houses, cars, coke parties. Yes, $45 for your standard package, with tiered charges for extra 'Internet channels' like YouTube or Google or MP3World etc.
What they are fighting about now is how to legally divide up the Internet content and not be taken to court. Comcast just lost one of the test battles.
If remuneration for good services rendered were their goal, there would be no court cases. There would be no throttling of traffic. There would be no hints of collusion with the **AA. There would be no one questioning what ISPs should monitor and what they should not.
In an ideal world, a massive boycott of commercial content would put everything in perspective for them. Unfortunately that won't happen. We are all the poorer for it.
What can be done? support independent content makers now. Encourage more bands to use the pay what you like model. Eventually the message that if people won't even pirate your content, you are not worth supporting will become an industry insiders golden rule.
It's time that such a message was sent to those spending money in Washington. Sad that it will never get there.
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
I've been pricing packages for phone/television/internet lately, and have found that the local Verizon and BrightHouse offerings all happen to offer a minimal price of $100/month plus equipment rental and misc fees moving the realistic cost to $130/month, and a demand for long-term contracts with heavy penalties for ending the contract.
I was pricing these because we had work crews installing the FIOS lines around the neighborhood, and wanted to see how I could use that fact to negotiate a better price with either the cable company or the new Verizon FIOS. But I was surprised at how strictly each company matched eachother's offerings without offering any cheaper options for those interested in the cheapest option. I was interested in FIOS speeds a little, but I discovered that they would be cutting the independently-powered copper and replacing it with an 8-hour battery on the wall of the house. But... if they do that, and then a hurricane comes, then the landline is nothing more than a glorified cellphone with an 8-hour battery... most hurricane power outages last much longer than that, and there is a need to call city lines for messages on drinking water and the like that just aren't available from radio.
In any case, I don't understand the rationale of Verizon here - they're spending all this money rolling out the fiber for FIOS, but they aren't using the opportunity to compete other than offering faster, but still traffic-shaped internet. The end result is just two cables running to neighborhoods, each privately owned and vulnerable in the same ways, but not really distinguishing themselves.
Ryan Fenton
The pieces became obvious last month. It's not something that could happen in a competitive system and it's not something I would have imagined just a year ago but the end of the free internet is here.
The cable company doesn't need to know that the screen is blanked, the audio is off, and you've left for the weekend -- meantime, your STB is religiously searching out reruns of Speed Racer or maybe the original Star Trek. If one person, just one person does it they may think he's really sick and they'll ignore it. And if two people, two people do it, in harmony, they may think they're both faggots and they'll ignore both of them. And three people do it, they may think it's an organization. And can you, can you imagine fifty people a day,I said fifty people a day? And friends they may thinks it's a movement.
Well, Arlo, what if millions -- yes, millions -- of people sold their non-watching cable time to run up the viewership for worthy programs like My Little Pony? Easy enough to coordinate over the internet, after all. Either the producers go into panic mode changing their programming or else they give up on spying on their "customers." Either way, it's all good.
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
Anyone posting or moderating on this thread should be aware that Erris, myCopyWrong, willeyhill, westbake and Odder are the same person.
twitter sockpuppets can be recognized from the shilling and the fact that 11 out of 12 post at -1 for trolling.
I had hoped that twitter wouldn't use his latest account for astroturfing, but I was obviously wrong.
Also watch out for these.
The twitter monologues. Click on my homepage and be amazed.
no, nitwit, the industry is colluding to eliminate competition.
They're using their grammar skills there.
They are both going to have severe pain over the next two to three years. A lot of folks are going to be more worried about food than cable.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
Yeah... that's what pretty much every industry tries to do. This isn't any more blatant than a lot of other monopolizing decisions, I don't know why everybody's acting so surprised.
--------
While I am not claiming that anything you wrote was incorrect, I hope you understand that relevant facts can, and in politics usually are, - subjective. What is relevant to one individual is not relevant to another.
Adam Smith in economics, and James Madison in politics, ( among many others ) used the term "interests." There are many areas of objective and common interests, but in general there can be no such thing as objective journalism. The advertiser funded media serves the economic and political interests of it's paying customers - above the economic and political interests of it's readers.
Democracy and markets are both based on serving the needs of their customers. They are both based on competition. Competition of politicians for votes and competition of products for sales. They both serve the PUBLIC interest.
An advertiser funded media does not serve the public interest.
I_Voter
Cotton Patch Socialism: Origins and Ideology
http://www.geocities.com/stewjackmail/cps.html
This Socialist Ideology is famous as the shortest and simplest Socialist Ideology known to exist. Additionally, it's near universal acceptance by the general public puts it into a class of it's own. No pun intended.
granted, that most industries try to do this, but collusion is illegal.
The FTC under the current administration hasn't been enforcing many regulations.
They're using their grammar skills there.
Erm, no - more like editors at Broadbandreports.com have been using it for years
In reality, liberals are just arrogant people who think they know how to spend your money better than you do. That's not to say that they aren't well-meaning, they're just hopelessly misguided.
Man, you hit the nail on the head. Every government advocate suffers from the same problem. They all believe that if only we could get really smart people in control (liberals), everything would be great. Some people never learn from history, which is why it is, as they say, destined to repeat itself.
Its = possessive. It's = "it is"
Why do you insist on crapflooding Slashdot this way?
Because Slashdot lets him write posts bigger than 140 characters. Grandparent post was 201 characters long, not counting markup or bracketed domain.
Idaho population ~ 1,466,465
Kansas City Metropolitan Area (ranked 29th Us Metro)
~ 1,985,429
Treasure Valley ID ~587,689 (ranked 86th)
I say approximately, because these are probably 2006 figures and people die and are born every minute.
So yes in the top 100, but you're also talking about 1/3 of the entire state's population and rather small in comparison to Houston or Dallas-Ft. Worth. You could triple your state's population and still not equal the population of either one of those metros.
Not exactly a fair comparison. Not to mention the natural layout of the two places, that allow you to use hydro cheaply as opposed to the options the residents in the state of Texas can. Although, I'll bet if Texas wanted to they could build a nice large field array of solar power and power the whole state from a single plant rather cheaply.
They've got plenty of places with nice sunny desert like conditions.
I have a cell phone. Ha, ha!
And the cableco can have my rabbit ears when they pry them out of my cold, dead fingers.
P.S. Please don't tell either of them about my power company's fiber/wireless network.
Have gnu, will travel.
Mods? Are you high? How the HELL is the parent a troll? Stop pushing an AGENDA when you moderate and START thinking prior to clicking. Please? I'll give you cheezburger... I promise.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Parent post contains 218 characters. If you want to troll using confusing names, could you please do it in under 140 characters?
You assholes character count now?
That was a joke son. "Twitter" has two meanings: a microblog service and a /. user with alleged sockpuppets.
Please tell me where a "free" market exists in the land of internet and telephone service? You can "choose" to either buy from the telco monopoly, or the cable monopoly... Your only other choice is to not have service... which isn't a real option in this day and age. If I can't email future employers my resume` or
And if you don't like either of these non-competitors products, you're simply out of luck. Sure, you can buy "third-party" DSL but that still requires you to have a phone-line from the telco, or live on the (tiny) part of the network they've upgraded to allow "no-phone-service" DSL. Any way you slice it, you either do business with the monopoly, or you get bent. ...and even if you're using one of those third-parties on a "no-phone-service" DSL, the 3rd-Party is paying the telco on your behalf... You are a customer by proxy.
Who did what now?
There doesn't have to be multiple players for a market to be free. A free market is simply one where by individuals determine unilaterally whether or not an they will exchange resources with another individual who is also free to make the same decision. That has nothing to do with whether or not a seller (or buyer) has a monopoly. It simply means that any party involved in an exchange is so by their own choosing.
Yeah, WTF? My comment is not a troll! Usually these comments of mine will be moded "overrated" or "redundant", but troll! That takes some real guts. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: you can't read the whole discussion unless you read at -1.