Slashdot Mirror
Net Neutrality Bill Sails Through the House But Faces an Uncertain Political Future (washingtonpost.com)
House lawmakers on Wednesday approved a Democrat-backed bill (alternative source) that would restore rules requiring AT&T, Verizon and other Internet providers to treat all Web traffic equally, marking an early step toward reversing one of the most significant deregulatory moves of the Trump era. From a report: But the net neutrality measure is likely to stall from here, given strong Republican opposition in the GOP-controlled Senate and the White House, where aides to President Trump this week recommended that he veto the legislation if it ever reaches his desk. The House's proposal, which passed by a vote of 232-190, would reinstate federal regulations that had banned AT&T, Verizon and other broadband providers from blocking or slowing down customers' access to websites. Adopted in 2015 during the Obama administration, these net neutrality protections had the backing of tech giants and startups as well as consumer advocacy groups, which together argued that strong federal open Internet protections were necessary to preserve competition and allow consumers unfettered access to movies, music and other content of their choice.
For all the people that say both parties are the same, here's a clear difference in policy.
Unless you're against Net Neutrality, don't vote for the GOP next cycle
If my ISP starts fiddling with my connection I'll pick another ISP. Remember buying internet access is a voluntary transaction between two parties if you don't like the service pick someone else.
The 1990s called and want their ISPs back.
We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
It's going to be stopped by the Senate because Mitch McConnell has never denied being bribed by the telco/ISP industry. He has been bribed by the Coal industry - he's the one who started the lie about the "War on Coal" and then backtracked.
I haven't seen anything that Mitch has done for the people of Kentucky. Nothing. Plenty for the moneyed interests that back him - but nothing for the average Kentuckian.
What does that tell you?
Mitch sure loves his private jet - how do you afford that on a Senate Majority Leader's pay?
That's not always an option, especially if you live in a building that has an exclusive contract with Comcast.
My internet is still working for me for what I reasonably expect from my ISP for the price I am paying. If my ISP starts fiddling with my connection I'll pick another ISP. Remember buying internet access is a voluntary transaction between two parties if you don't like the service pick someone else.
Let me know how well that works out for you when picking a non-fiddling ISP is about as easy as finding gasoline "on sale" in your town.
And it's that bury-your-head-in-the-sand mentality that will allow monopolies to eventually eradicate your ability to choose. You won't even notice it until it's too late. For a large portion of our internet service (cellular), you're already down to choosing from one of the few monopolies left.
My internet is still working for me for what I reasonably expect from my ISP for the price I am paying. If my ISP starts fiddling with my connection I'll pick another ISP.
Remember buying internet access is a voluntary transaction between two parties if you don't like the service pick someone else.
Yeah, I'll make sure to switch from my one cable provider to my one cable provider if they start acting up.
We have multiple services installed but use none
Downmodded? Repost!
Get the government out of business decisions. That is the domain of The People.
You supporters of Net Neutrality are fools; you are letting in the government's Trojan horse.
I’m a hardcore Network Neutrality supporter & I really wish NN was a single Issue that would get people to change Who they vote for but it isn’t. Without sufficient Senate support this bill is completely useless grandstanding and affects no-one but ineffectual cheerleaders.
Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
And if you only have one provider because of monopoly deals?
And if you only have one provider because of monopoly deals?
Thats my point.
We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
Doesn't surprise me that this horse manure is from an AC.
Mitch McConnell should not have the authority to deny a vote on a bill passed by the House. Nancy Pelosi should not have the authority to block a bill passed by the Senate.
We need a rule that forces a vote on any bill passed by the other body after a suitable period of time for debate. We as voters have a right to know where our elected officials stand, otherwise the people lose control to wealthy donors.
Greed is the root of all evil.
Actually, it's even worse than that; these Internet monopolies have their foundation in government-granted monopoly rights, and thus you want government to save society from government.
Well, yes. IF you're going to give out government-granted monopoly rights (which IS what has and is happening), then ALSO ensure government-enforced neutrality.
Otherwise, get government COMPLETELY out of the business and don't give out the monopolies in the first place.
You are dangerously stupid.
There's no technical challenge to net neutrality. There's only a greed challenge.
And sure, we can build the mesh networks, I'm all for that. In the meantime, let's use political power to stop the ISPs from ripping everyone off.
These are not mutually exclusive.
By the way, will the mesh network be neutral, where node owners get paid for bandwidth? Or will people be levying charges based on the destination of packets?
who woulda thunk it. The propaganda is so strong. The Shapiros, Petersons, Rubins, Weinsteins run the IDW that occupised most /. minds. But STEM is supposed to appeal to smart people, isn't it.
Unless you are in a market that is served by a single provider, in which case you just go without reasonable access?
You clearly do not understand the issue at all.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
How are you planning to build mesh networks when there's limited (read: monopoly) choices for the actual connection to the internet? It's all well and good to have a mesh connection, but if that's dependent on a filtered/metered/throttled/non-neutral connection to the backbone, what's the improvement?
We know how Mitch McConnell or Nancy Pelosi votes; everyone can see happening exactly what you're saying, and yet McConnell and Pelosi still get voted into office. So, you've proved yourself wrong.
Secondly, if you know how your representatives vote, then guess who else knows how they vote? The wealthy donors. So, if you really wanted your representatives to be able to vote their consciences despite taking donations from the special interest groups, then you'd actually support private voting such that nobody gets to know how anyone voted.
You're just not very good at thinking. Typical leftist.
That monopoly was granted by the local government, whose election you were a part of. So, you have no grounds to complain about that. If you've really had second thoughts, you could just move - the monopoly doesn't follow you.
Of course, this isn't really relevant. The monopoly ISP sets its prices as high and service as low as it can without losing customers and/or political support. NN just means you get screwed on price instead of service. The point of NN is for technology companies to get access to the pipe you're paying for, whether you happen to care about them or not.
Political grandstanding by one party in congress, controlling one house, will not pass the other party, controlling the other house, nor the presidency (who has to sign it).
Thank God for divided government.
-Styopa
Seems to me that you and your ilk are the dangerous ones.
Looking to the Dear Leader to solve every little fucking issue (including which pronouns people must say) is what's dangerous.
CAPTCHA: unaided
Yup, you can always move from one place where the local gov't gave out a monopoly to another place where the local gov't gave out a monopoly. This behavior is endemic and widespread. You'll just move from one monopoly to another.
Really.
So in order to get around a bad-faith company abusing their market position, I should conduct a multi-hundred-thousand dollar transaction to sell my house, pack up all my earthly belongings at financial and time expense, and move to where another company may or may not be abusing their monopoly position already?
There is a non-zero probability that you are a massive idiot.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
You were downmodded because you are an idiot.
Reposting the same idiocy doesn't change anything - you are still an idiot.
Discuss this YESTERDAY?
Cheerleading on Slashdot never changes I guess..
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
running the Senate, I doubt there will be any debate or that the bill will even go to the floor.
This is what happens to countries that choose bad leaders. They fail.
https://tech.slashdot.org/story/19/04/10/160207/net-neutrality-bill-sails-through-the-house-but-faces-an-uncertain-political-future#
I am SHOCKED that the gubmint of USAmurikens cant even offer net neutrality, nevermind universal healthcare (even CUBA has that gais!!!).
#shitholecountry
#MurikanProblems
Just like the zealots here. Engineering warps the mind and engenders bigotry and sexism.
Without even trying c-span channel surfing yesterday I found republicans explaining their opposition in the form of bashing Title II.
Democrats could have avoided this problem. They could have defined clean NN. If republicans still wanted to attack clean NN at least their excuses for doing so would be more transparent and less defensible to voters.
Take your life into your own hands. Build the world you want, like our forefathers did.
By turning ever more to the warm, inviting, strangling hands of the Nanny State, you are building a tyranny for future generations. All so you can sit there comfortably, whining about how the latest SuperHero movie could be streamed in higher quality for cheaper.
1) No substantive point here. Nothing but insults 2) You have no idea who I am, even though I, unlike you, have the courage to post without the mask of an AC. 3) I enjoy debating with trolls. You won't win against me, and you'll just continue to show that you're incapable of arguing an well-thought point.
Well don't complain about Congress it's your local city or municipality that you should complain. Government is the problem not the solution.
Way to respond without actually giving an example of how it could be done with the current infrastructure.
No it doesn't. You died because of net neutrality. How are you even posting this?
So... that's where things stand. That's the deal.
"You participated in the elections, so you cannot complian about current laws"
That argument would have stopped the Social Rights Movement on its tracks, luckily nobody thought about it at the moment!
Then complain to your landlord or move if Internet access is that important to you. Still voluntary to purchase it.
With Congress split, both House & Senate will spend half their time overwhelmingly passing bills that would never be passed by the other chamber, signed into law or pass constitutional muster. These are strictly demonstrations to garner more campaign funds or to inflame the support base. It's a jerk-off fest.
The Russians have won. They have made the world a cesspool of distrust, greed, fear and hate.
That's totally irrelevant.
Also, the AC covered why seeing the representative's vote is not necessarily a good thing.
Google, Facebook are not regulated monopolies. AT&T and the cable companies are. I think this is giving more power to more lightly regulated entities to control internet content. They already are with their restrictive content policies.
Stop Preaching Decentralized internet until you know what is required.
You can not off set your self from the current system if you will still require the current system to make yourself work.
This is not decentralized from the current system. That is just TOR.
You want something that separates yourself from the current system you have to actually replace it.
This would require finding enough private sector players that would actually want to build a full ARP network to replace the current internet. which hey that would be a break through.
a mesh network ... that a joke does no one know what a mesh network actually is out side the trigger happy term google made it for their wireless access points?
What is a non-"grandstanding" role of the House when the Senate is held by a different party?
It'll be killed by Mitch McConnell in the Senate. The Dems will then add it to the growing list of reasons to vote for them and not the GOP, which given that this is a partisan issue (voting is generally along party lines with one or two GOPers breaking ranks when they know it's safe to do so as it dies in the Senate) I don't think that's unfair.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Every time this issue comes up, the goal posts move on why it's not needed or why it's implementation isn't good enough, especially in places like Slashdot.
First, it was because the "free market" will handle everything. We've already seen how that works out, which is was prompted the FCC to implement this in the first place.
Next, it was that the FCC shouldn't be able to make such regulations at all. The only appropriate way to solve the matter is an act of Congress.
Finally, when Congress starts to move on the issue, that isn't deemed adequate either. Instead, the argument then morphs to "this wouldn't have occurred if the government didn't grant the ISPs monopolies". It's a strange point to make because it mostly talks about what should have been done YEARS and YEARS ago but not what should be down NOW. Just because something was born out of a flawed process doesn't mean you should surrender to making improvements.
People will go very far simply so they can refuse to admit their preferred political party is on the wrong side of this issue. I suppose that rings true for all types of people, but this particular one is pretty interesting considering a MAJORITY of voters across the political spectrum agreed that NN was a good thing before the Republican FCC repealed it.
I think the AC is implying that if votes were secret, then the politicians would be inclined to vote their conscience (against the big donors) even after taking giant bags of cash from those same donors.
I'm also pretty sure that notion is laughable.
Actually, imagine the industry panic if people just started saying "fuck the Internet, why do we even need it at all?" and canceled.
You call your utility companies and tell them to start sending paper bills again, and pay them by check or over the phone.
Actually call the pizza place down the street you like to get pizza from and tell them what you want to order.
Buy things from local businesses instead of ordering them from Amazon; most businesses on the Internet have phones too, you know, you can call them to order something.
Go to Redbox and get a DVD instead of 'streaming' things.
Like some particular music? Buy a CD of it instead of 'streaming' it.
Want to be 'social'? Actually show up and be actually social with people, live and in person instead of using cancerous 'social media'.
Buy a newspaper to find out what's going on in the world.
And so on.
You don't have to have Internet. We lived just fine without it for 200 years, you can live without it now, if need be.
If many people started doing that in response to ISPs being shitty, they'd have to change their practices.
Engineering is what allowed you to post here, if not for that, you'd be bashing rocks to start fire while wrapped in furs outside your crowded and shit-smeared cave.
Vote with your wallet. But you can't because your so addicted to it.
You haven't actually shown how it's precluded from being done on current infrastructure either.
Why pretend you're fiscally responsible, treasonous GOP?
The facts don't support that, idiots. Now enjoy prison!
This is the internet people. Save it!
https://www.youtube.com/c/BrendaEM
The opposite should happen. The government is only able to grant the monopolies through their power of eminent domain. To me, that is the doctrine that says the public's need is so overwhelming that we're going to use the force of government to seize someone's property.
Well, if it is so important to the common good that the use of force is justified, then the resource should not leave the public's control. Just like the roads, the communication and power infrastructure should be taken over by the government. ISPs and power generation should remain private businesses. The government should create rules to control how the resources are accessed and used, just like the roads. It should have always been this way.
Ever notice how the worst parts of our system are the result of poor decisions early on?
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
Brought to you by Mitch 'Atherosclerosis' McConnell.
Actually, imagine the industry panic if people just started saying "fuck the Internet, why do we even need it at all?" and canceled.
You call your utility companies and tell them to start sending paper bills again, and pay them by check or over the phone.
Actually call the pizza place down the street you like to get pizza from and tell them what you want to order.
Buy things from local businesses instead of ordering them from Amazon; most businesses on the Internet have phones too, you know, you can call them to order something.
Go to Redbox and get a DVD instead of 'streaming' things.
Like some particular music? Buy a CD of it instead of 'streaming' it.
Want to be 'social'? Actually show up and be actually social with people, live and in person instead of using cancerous 'social media'.
Buy a newspaper to find out what's going on in the world.
And so on.
You don't have to have Internet. We lived just fine without it for 200 years, you can live without it now, if need be.
If many people started doing that in response to ISPs being shitty, they'd have to change their practices.
None of those helps me much with not wanting to drive 80 miles to use my college's computer servers (the closest college with a PHD program to my full time job) or saving on gas by working remotely (as bad as cable costs are, gas costs are worse).
Vote with your wallet. But you can't because your so addicted to it.
True, could just quit my job and college because I can't do it without an internet connection! You offering to cover my expenses?
Besides, the giant bags of money buying politician meme is kinda silly, because it is inefficient from the corporation's perspective.
Which makes more sense:
A) Constantly paying a ransom to keep the politician voting for your concern on every bill that comes up.
B) Finding politicians that leaned a little in your direction, then paying a little to support them and keep them in office.
If I were in Congress, I could not fathom selling a vote for a few tens of thousands. We're talking about selling off my honor and possibly damaging my country. A vote for a bill like NN would be worth at least a million. But, if I were inclined to support NN, then I wouldn't be upset that Google contributed a $10K to my relection effort.
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
and lord knows I've done polls on this forum to ask if anyone was going to change their vote. But as part of a broader narrative that the GOP consistently ignores the Will of the People I think it will change votes.
See, this is the difference between the GOP and the Democrats. The GOP pushes their narratives and their policies relentlessly. They lost on Net Neutrality time and time again but they never stopped. Eventually random election cycles and a crap candidate put a pro-corporate Republican in the Whitehouse and now they've won. It'll take a sea change in American politics to get NN back. The Dems would have to take a super majority in the House, Senate and maybe even the presidency if it wasn't at least 70 (for a veto override).
That said, this is the Dems trying to get a message out. One that I'd argue is correct. The GOP really isn't your friend. They do what their donors do 100% of the time and ignore regular folk. We see that in the last tax bill, in the wars they keep us in, in their opposition to the ACA's pre-existing condition coverage and in pretty much everything they do. That point needs to be hammered home because there's a strong taboo about "partisanship" in this country. But as always facts don't care about our feelings and the facts are what the facts are, the GOP has been running against public opinion for decades now. Sure, there are right wing "Blue Dog" Dems who do the same, and the folks who spearheaded the NN vote are the same folks talking about primarying those Dems...
I'm saying there's something left to salvage in the Democratic party. I stopped thinking that way about the GOP ages ago.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
That's why you're just a prole. You have nothing but stupid ideas rattling around in your high-fructose-laden skull. Go back to Instagramming your breakfast.
BOTH parties are corrupt. BOTH parties consistently do things that serve the interests of a few, to the detriment of the many. The particulars of WHICH few they serve are different between the two parties. The flavor of the arguments they use to justify their actions is different two.
But your belief that one party is intrinsically morally superior to the other is not only false, it is harmful. That belief is what motivates party-line voters to remain party-line voters. The phenomenon of party-line voting supports the entrance of corrupt candidates into the playing field. Though this is just one factor among many, it is a big one.
YOU have a biased, one-sided perspective. YOU are an extremist, and that extremism blinds you far more than you realize, and motivates you to act in ways that are ultimately harmful to the greater good, and even harmful to your own agendas.
YOU need to learn to think and see objectively before you will get an accurate handle on politics.
Let Americans vote on it directly - the Republicans are already bought off and will never allow Net Neutrality back.
Here you go. Learn you some history.
Here is a liberal claiming the GOP is racist, meanwhile he supports a KKK member as governor of VA (Northam). He supported a KKK leader as a DNC Senator for 60 years, Robert Byrd. He supports Twitter censoring people like Diamond and Silk, along with Candice Owens (black women). But because Obamacare was a complete shitshow and everyone now knows it, the only reason for opposing it at the time was racism? Then he attempts to claim the GOP proposed and passed Obamacare themselves, not a SINGLE ONE voted for it.
Why does he support a KKK member as a governor? Because if the governor steps down it is more than likely a GOP member will become governor. So it is more important to support the KKK than possibly give up any power. That's a liberal for you. No morality, no ethics, just a blind lust for power at any cost.
Vote KKK, vote DNC!
In a sane political world, representatives would look at how their constituents were affected by legislation and vote accordingly.
The people who have the most to lose by the lack of net neutrality are the ones who live in areas where there is a wired broadband monopoly. The vast majority of those areas are outside the major cities, and mostly Republican voting.
Republican legislators who are looking out for their constituents should thus be in favor of net neutrality.
Or at least, they should offer market-based amendments to it like "NN only has to be enforced in areas that have a wired broadband monopoly".
The fact that this IS a partisan issue means it's being treated as tribal bullshit.
Again. As usual.
To a Lisp hacker, XML is S-expressions in drag.
Otherwise, get government COMPLETELY out of the business and don't give out the monopolies in the first place.
"In the first place" was many decades ago. You can't stop what already happened. However, you can stop it from happening again -- and more than two decades ago federal law stopped anyone from handing out a cable communications exclusive franchise to anyone. That's about ten years more than any existing franchise was good for, so for more than the last decade there have been and are no cable exclusive franchises anywhere in the US.
But cable isn't the only Internet service method, and no ISP has every been granted a monopoly anywhere in the US. Ever.
For many people cable really is the only viable Internet service method. DSL bandwidth isn't adequate unless you live very close to the DSLAM, and wireless is way too expensive.
Because building out a cable network is massively expensive as well as a bureaucratic nightmare, it basically means that incumbent operators are de facto monopolies, even without the monopoly contract.
Remember when Google was trying to throw billions of dollars around making city-wide fiber networks, and then gave up? Yeah, if they can't get it done, what chance does some small-time operation with orders of magnitude less capital and political might?
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
Good ol Net Neuterality: setting the precedent for governments to decide the flow of information.
Have a nice time replacing your front door after it's been kicked in by law enforcement for having just threatened to assassinate 537 elected politicians of the United States Government. I hear that the FBI and the United States Secret Service takes jokes like that in stride, and has a great sense of humor.
Also, threats of violence against people you disagree with is super helpful and not at all how petty despots run tin-pot dictatorships. I personally love how you are calling people traitors while advocating for direct violent overthrow of the rightful government, elected by the people under the duly approved Federal election laws and the United States Constitution - a document that people like you claim to defend and protect.
Who is the "treasonist" again ?
Cable service is a natural monopoly. The first company to enter a market has to pay (Or get the taxpayer to pay) the vast costs of infrastructure - digging up roads to lay cable, buying rights to install distribution cabinets, the expensive stuff. Once done, they can charge whatever they want, for there is no alternative for the customers. For a second to enter, they would have to pay just as much - to gain access to a contested market, where all the potential customers are already signed up with an incumbent. Not worth the expense.
For many people cable really is the only viable Internet service method.
That has nothing to do with what I said.
it basically means that incumbent operators are de facto monopolies,
That also has nothing to do with what I said. I replied to a comment about governments handing out monopolies. That doesn't happen any more, and it happened so long ago that none of those still exist.
Oh my how did we ever survive before the 1990's when we started having the Internet? It was all stone knives and bearskins living in caves then BOOM, Internet!
Oh no, it is certain, it is DOA. Just as intended. Did you really think the party of Hollywood cares?
Google is a bad example. Google wants to own the wires to make data mining easier, so enthusiasm for Google fiber is low, and rightfully so.
F' google.
Because there's always SOMETHING that one party campaigns for or wants that you don't like, so there's no party for you to vote for. So CLEARLY you don't bother voting. Or you're a hypocrite or liar and just want to stop anyone not voting for the excessively pro-corporate neonazi republican party.
I dare you. Wear a stiff collar, though.
They want to make it easier because without the choice, you use a bent coathanger to abort, risking death and even incomplete death of the fetus which will live and bleed for a long while inside the womb.
All of them are also widely accepted in the Democrat side too. Not one of them isn't. About all you'll see is that the private industry isn't allowed to fuck about and skeedaddle when it fucks up. For nukes, it seems without government taking on the risk, nobody is willing to make or run one.
Kermit Gosnell was an abortion doctor, who is now in jail. He has said what he has done is now completely legal in NY and no one has disputed his claim.
Definition of late term abortion is up for debate, but 3rd trimester is usually agreed by all. Kermit would perform 3rd trimester abortions by inducing the mother to give birth. She would give birth to a fully alive baby and he would then cut its spinal cord with a pair of scissors. He did this hundreds (maybe thousands) of times. This is pregnancies in their 8-9 month he did this with, the born babies would easily have survived and were not "part of the mother".
This is why your left wing sites won't deny it. It has happened, it does happen, and they made it legal. If they intended this not to happen they would support the right to life bill where a live born baby could not legally be killed. Again why they won't deny it. A mother saying she is too stressed is good enough reason for 9th month abortion in NY. Again why they won't deny it.
This happens, they don't want it discussed because it is an indefensible position. They are evil.
Found the piece of shit liberal. He is upset that people are publicly posting DNC platform positions that he fully supports but doesn't want public.
Probably also supports the censorship of black women like Candice Owens, while at the same time supporting KKK member VA governor Northam. Yep, typical liberal is a racist bigot that only wants old white guys to speak in public (Sanders/Biden). They start name calling when you post the truth about them.
Poor little KKK supporter.
to your federally protected NN ready wireline.
As equally slow as all NN protected networks.
No competition. No innovation. No community broadband.
Your telco monopoly can enjoy full federal protection with NN rules and laws to keep out any new services.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Really.
So in order to get around a bad-faith company abusing their market position, I should conduct a multi-hundred-thousand dollar transaction to sell my house, pack up all my earthly belongings at financial and time expense, and move to where another company may or may not be abusing their monopoly position already?
https://www.news.com.au/techno... Not so far fetched - that was our Prime Minister at the time, who was directing the government owned nbnco on the expectations of the national broadband network implementation - the new monopoly for fixed line connections.
I'm sure you can see the irony where the owner of the entity that is going to make broadband available to every single premise in the nation is telling someone to move house for a better internet connection. Just WTH are they going to deliver?
Oh my how did we ever survive before the 1990's when we started having the Internet? It was all stone knives and bearskins living in caves then BOOM, Internet!
RadioShack had this awesome catalog full of special order parts. Blockbuster had aisles of movies. Circuit City had all the cool new gadgets. The local mall wasn't a fucking ghost town.
---
DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
"For many people cable really is the only viable Internet service method."
Really? I love my cable internet, but if it went away, I can access the net on my phone's data package. Also, there's the Hughes satellite and the Excede satellite, and maybe another, not sure. And in the forseeable future, Elon Musk and at least one other is dedicated to having a large constellation of low earth orbiting satellites to do the same connections as all these others.
What monopoly?
And who was it shot her? Ooooh, it wasn't a leftie, it was a rightwinger.... Fucking lying asshole you are.
They only had a filibuster proof (but with Joe Biden as that member, it still wasn't filibuster proof with that Republican Inside(tm) senator) for three days. And the repugnants were using the filibuster incessantly because they could.
And you support the military, yes? They're all trained murderers to a far greater degree than "Abortion is murder", because most pregnancies do not carry to term naturally. If anyone is a baby killer, it's nature. Which would be that Gawd you love so much for you. Remember too he gave explicit instructions on how to properly abort a fetus too, it's in your holy book you've only read the portions you like of.
Unless you can afford it, and most of the USA's population are now unable to afford it, and nearly all of them unable to afford chronic treatments.
Oh my how did we ever survive before the 1990's when we started having the Internet? It was all stone knives and bearskins living in caves then BOOM, Internet!
That statement didn't work so well to convince my boss.
Can't handle a little dissent? Gotta downmod someone's legitimate opinion? Repost! (maybe we need Moderation Neutrality)
Your position is absurd.
You want a violently imposed monopoly to save society from a voluntarily grown monopoly.
You want a political solution to a technical problem.
Actually, it's even worse than that; these Internet monopolies have their foundation in government-granted monopoly rights, and thus you want government to save society from government.
How about instead, you work with people on alternative forms of connection? Put your money where your mouth is, and help people build mesh networks and the like. Build competition, which is the truest separation of powers, and which is therefore the more reliable way to thwart tyranny in the long-run. Government is NOT your friend.
* There are greater needs than high-bandwidth for your Netflix binging or PornHub sessions; you don't need much bandwidth to communicate important issues—text is enough. We need a DECENTRALIZED Internet; no amount of centralized planning for net "neutrality" is going to give us that.
* Like a typical prole, you think it is a legitimate argument to say "But I can't imagine how it would be done!". Your inability to innovate, or to route around authoritarianism, is why you are a prole, just going about your mediocre life, worried about your Netflix and Porn.
And how about "natural monopolies"?
In the end, either WE, THE PEOPLE decide what services are available and set the terms and conditions
Or THEY will, to our detriment.
for examples, see Insulin pricing
No.
This monopoly exists because INDUCEMENTS were granted to Cable operators nationwide, city by city
Then bought and their "guarantee" maintained when the signing party no longer participated.
Good old Net Monopoly, with Capitalists deciding the flow of information
I'll take WE THE PEOPLE for 600