Sounds like the words of a Suit that is pissed at the fact he can't make as much money as techies cause he hasn't got the skills (tech skills that is). Nor does he have any tact, common sense, or an ounce of intelligence in his statements. You must be a very bitter man (I assume you're a man, could be a Eunuch though). News flash for ya genius every one has mental problems. And from the sound things your worse off than most people are (sounds like you have a lot of issues to work out there son). Just because you can't hack it in the technology world is no reason to go off crying about it like a 3 year old little girl. And don't worry about being in our shoes you wouldn't have the IQ to even lace the damn things up much less the balls to try. You Velcro wearin short bus riddin Mongoloid
Heaven forbid that we Christians should ever be as intolerant and callous of others as they are of us. I mean that literally and quite seriously.
That is a very admirable goal but that has not been the case since Rome took up christianity as it's officall religion. Before this point Christians where persecuted and treated very poorly (as I am sure you know) But once Christianity was more main-stream the roles where reversed. Christians where the perscutors and pagan religons where the persecuted. Since then Christianity throught out history has been the most intorerlant callous self-rightous holier than thou group of people to ever exsist (excpet for maybe nazis, but even they claim to be christians). I.E.: The Crusades, The Inquisition, The Salem Which Trials etc. etc. etc. ( I could make a list about 2 pages long but I think you get the point) Now, that is a gerneralazation (very a large one) and there is a very large number of wonderful people that are christians but the majority have no tolerance for different ways of thinking. I know this on a personal level because I was brought up seventh day adventist (a huge bunch of kooks, but that is a different story all together) in a small town in Oklahoma. You don't get more bible belt than that. Wonderful place to witness the intolerance of other religons and different ways of thinking.
I didn't really want to get into either but I just can't help myself. It is that old debater in me that gets me everytime.
but anywho.... To me it is the fact that beleieving makes no sense that gets me. To many contradictions, inconsistancies, and stuff that is blatantly wrong for me to believe.
That made no sense... and had no context to what I was saying whatsoever. See that was what I was getting at. Whatever your satan or your god believed had nothing to do with the point I was getting at. But you did a good job in proving my second point. What I was saying is this A:) vengefulness == characteristic of your satan, b:)wrath == chracteristic your satan.
Come on you didn't think the part with Bill Gates being pulled into the army briefing and then got shot in the head wasn't funny? Or the deal with Satan and Sadam gettin it on wasn't funny? Damn I am about to fall out of my seat laughing just thinking about it. Come on man lighten up the world isn't just computers and code. Try developing a sense of humor you life might be a lot more fun.
Vengefullness and wrathfulness are qualities of this so called Satan fellow aren't they. It amazes me how easily christians can make absolutely no sense but it is ok because the believe . Whatever... you fruitcake
Well Of course a lot of people are only going to care that her voices will no longer be apart of the show. She did a wonderful job on that show and that is how the masses know her. And you right I wouldn't mourn your passage if you died tomarrow. If you start mourning random peoples deaths then you better have a shit load of black in the closet cause tons of poeple die everyday. Now you may say the Mary Bergman was a random person because I never met her. But that is not the case. I heard her voice at least once week. Which makes and interaction of sorts, which means that she is not some random person. The fact of the matter is everyone in this world has lost someone or will lose someone it is a fact of life. Sure I feel compasion for her family and friends, but I can't really get choked up about the lose and grieving they are feeling. If that where the case I would be crying my eyes out everyday for the 1,000s and 1,000s of people that die everyday. So whats left? Focus on the things Mary Kay Bergman did that affected our lives. And that is through her voices on south park. This maybe a tad on the self centered side but it is more common sense then anything
By George I think he's got IT!!!!! What I explained to you was basically a reverse of what open access is trying to do. If I had a T3 or so for my bone I would be getting people in through the cable instead of phone lines. But the point was still the same. You can bridge the cable to telco with out many problems and achieve the size bandwidth with increase in price, but only for those who go with and another ISP. People not using another ISP will stay pay the same price for a cable pipe. People who go with another ISP are gonna have to pay for the cable acces and then the ISP. So in that sense your right the will be more of a cost. I do however totally agree with you when you say open access is wrong. And your right I didn't need the breakdown of the telcos but it reassures me you know what your talking about. It wouldn't be that difficult to get a straight route to the isp, it would take a new set of routing tables, but your talking 15-20 minutes a router. It wouldn't be that hard to implement open access. I have studied this too, I worked for an ISP for 4 years. And the fact is in a straight technicall sense it would not be that difficult and the difference in speed and cost would be neglegible. But.... that ain't the point. Open access doesn't create competition. The cable company will still own the pipe and consumers will be subject to their whims. And really I don't think open access is even good at heart it is just a bunch propaganda put out by AOL and every other ISP who saw themselevs losing customers and jumped on the bandwagon. I don't want the FCC jacking with my bandwidth just because some corporation is threatend by it. I agree with there are a lot of confused readers, most of them are programers, I am sure, and aren't network enginers or sys admins. It seams the majority of programs aren't that informed about the nuts and bolts of a WAN. Not all mind you but it seams like a majority.
Eventhough I really didn't follow what you are getting at (try being a bit more clear with your points). I will tell you thhe equipment you would need:
Well let's see I would probably use a 3COM Total Control modem bank (that would be my hardware)connected to lets say an Intel 10/100 switchable hub (again that would be my hardware)and the cable modem (which I went ahead and bought instead of leasing, soooo that too would be my hardware, hmmm it looks like it is all my hardware). Now, if you are talking about using someone elses hardware further down stream, that is what all ISPs do. Your typicall ISP owns all the equipment up to the gateway (where they tie into the the backbone)the rest of the equipment is owned by other people so in that context every ISP is a middleman. Sometimes it is necssary (sp?) to call people stupid in public when they obviously don't know what they are talking about. This way if someone reads your post, and they now even less then you do, they won't go away being less informed and worse off because they read your post. The only thing worse than no information is dis-information. Sorry not trying to be a troll here just being honest
No wonder you post anonymously. It is very very easy to do. All you have to do is have a few cable pipes coming in to your office (you could do it with one pipe but bandwidth would disapear real quick). Hell, I can setup an ISP in my own living room with my cable modem as the backbone. But I like my bandwidth TOOOO much to let some one else use it. Don't believe me? Ask me. I tell you exactly how to do it. Using Linux as the server of choice of course. Try not to make yourself look stupid in public, it is a bad thing.;) Open acces is wrong though see my other post on this subject and you will learn why it is really flawed. Technically impossible, sheesh where do these people come from.
Open Access BAHHH!!! Letting ISPs terminate connections across cable networks will do nothing for us consumers. Only competeing cable comapnies can rectify the problems that are happening
We are talking about bandwidth. Big difference. I don't deny that cable companies pretty much suck when it comes to content ov TV channels. But that is not what is being debated here. We are debating if the cable companies should be forced to allow ISPs to run service over ther data connections.
Here I go again, this is basically a repost that I have posted at least 20 times about this issue but I guess I will have to keep syaing this over and over and over. Cause people still don't get it.
First thing Tau, content doesn't have jack to do with anything here, we are talking about bandwidth. I don't pay Time Warner for their pretty little pictures. I pay them for my 800kbps downloads. And secondly who paid for the copper at this point is irrelevant (sp?), the fact is cable companies control the copper. For all practical puposes it is thiers. Besides when you are talking about the grants, those didn't include switches, routers, and hubs. That came from the cable companies pockets. And that is quite a pretty penny. But even that doesn't matter because the competition that your advocating will amount to absolutely nothing.
What people don't realize here is that allowing ISPs to terminate connection across the cable companiy's copper is not going to create the competition that will effect the level of service people recieve. The cable company will still run the show when it comes to the physical layer. Understanding that, any logical person will come to the conclusion that the cable company will still have controll on your level of service, no matter who you are paying for your IP address. You will still pay the cable company for the connection, and then you will pay you ISP for the ip address. The cable company is still gonna get your cash for the bandwidth. The only competition that is taking place here is for the ip address. It would be exactly like a dialup. You have bad line noise on your phone and can't hit a 56k connection? Your ISP can't do anything about it. This will hold true in an open cable network. You have extreme latency on your neighborhood segement? Your ISP can't do anything about it. The only compititon that will effect your level of service is competition of the PHYSICAL LAYER!!!!!!!! Open access advocates are trying to fix a glass table with sledgehammer here. Wrong tool, it won't get the job done. Open acces will do nothing for anbody except shoot the consumer broadband market in the foot. I had put this with my orginal post but Hemos took it out, (I am sure most people are getting sick of me saying this but)The consumer broadband market it too young for the FEDS to be muking around with it. Case Closed, End of Story.
Exactly my friend. Not only that but opening up cable markets to ISPs creates a competition which != better service! The cable company will still have a monoply of the physical layer. I don't know how many times I have tried to tell people this but I guess I will just have to repeat myself untill I am blue in the face. Competition for the IP address is all that will be accomplished from opening up the cable networks. And who really gives a whoot where you get your ip address from. It is physical layer that is important. If there is no competition in the copper customers will see no effect from opening the network. With one exception, current customers will see their bandwidth fall from a raging river to a tiny little stream. As I had put it in the original story post, which Hemos so graciously removed, the consumer broadband market is in an infantile stage. It is way too young to be getting mucked with by the government.
I agree but you where wrong in the Stats about the number of stidents signing up for comp-sci majors. New Yotk Times had a story not long ago saying that comp-sci majors have 4% in the next year, and most people say they will dropping even lower
No one is saying that 21st century starts on Jan. 1 2000. We are talking about the next millennium.. err... however that damned word is spelled. That doesn't take place until 2001.
It is a common misconception for people who don't know the difference.
I do however agree with you that something needs to be done, I don't know about fed regulation (The Feds always leave a funny taste in my mouth) But maybe the cable markets should be opened up to allow multiple cable service providers in any given area. I guess though, I am lucky I have RoadRunner service through MultiMedia and they really kick ass. Sure I pay through the nose for their service (My cable bill is $110 a month OUCH!!), but if I have a problem it is fixed immediately. I am however really intrested in hearing more about BBOEL (Broadband over electrical lines)it is still a couple years out, still having problems with popping breakers when there is high modulation, but that will be the best competitor for cable. And the really cool thing is in my area the Single electrical company we have is having to make room for other electrical companies so there will be competition already in place. The next few years in the "Last Mile" market will be a very intresting drama to watch unfold.
The first argument is debatable. But I am telling you after working 5 years for an ISP I have a nose for these things. The more ISPs running over cable will result in more marketing and more comapnies rushing to get people on cable. But this is more of hunch than anything. And your missing something in the cost of DSL you also have to pay for the line as well as the isp. So it cost more like $75-$80 rather than the $40 you mentioned.
You have missed my whole point here. I will try and be a little more clear this time. Opening up the cable networks will not create competition. At least not the competition that will affect your level of reliability and the size of your bandwidth. It will not matter who you use for your ISP the media your connection will be going over will still be the cable company's network. See what I am saying here? You will have to pay the cable company for the data connection on their network, even if you get your IP address from "Ma 'n PA's ISP" you will still pay the cable company for getting your connection to whatever ISP you choose. You will still be at the mercy of the cable company to supply a level of serivce to your isp. This is the exact same situatuion with a dial-up line or DSL line. The company which owns the pipe controls your bandwith. Case in Point: Right about when modems started hitting 28800 and higher. Common problems started popping up such as line noise and frequency caps. Placing frequency caps on phone lines is common place for telcos. It can double or even triple the nummber of voice channels on a phone line but it limits frequency modulation so you end up getting only 24400 or 16400. The isp can't do anything about it. You call your ISP to complain they will say "Sorry call your phone company." Your at the mercy of the telco, and the first thing the telco will tell you is "Sorry we only promise data rates at 9600 over normal voices lines. Would you like to have some information on getting ISDN serivce?". Transpose this to the cable world. You connect to "Ma 'n Pa's ISP" through your local cable provider and for some reason you're barley getting 64K. You call Ma' n PA' and they see that there is a %20 packet lose at your neighboorhood segement. You will hear "Sorry. Nothing we can do about it call your cable company". The ISPs are not competitors in the broadband market. The only companies that will be competitors are other broadband players (a.k.a DSL/Satilite/BBOEL providers). Making cable comapnies allow ISPs to offer service over the cable nwtwork is not the right fix. And if you can't do something right don't do it at all, cause in the long run you will screw things up worse than they where.
How long have you been on the net? How long did you wait for broadband service? Is another year or so going to be that big of diference in the grand scheme of things? I have been online since the BBS days and 2400 baud was like a pitbull on crack as far as speed goes. If I had to wait another year to get reliable broadband it really wouldn't make that much of a differnce. But as it is now I have reliable braodband and I don't not want anyone jacking around with my bandwidth.FACT: The opening of the cable networks will add more users on the network and the bandwidth of current users will drop to near modem speeds. Anything that promotes the loss of MY bandwidth is EVIL!!!! FACT: Opening the networks will not create the competition you want. Cable companies will still own the pipes the only competition will be about who you get your IP address from. You are still going to have to pay the cable companies for the data service then you will have to pay the isp ontop of what you pay the cable compaines. It is basically 6 one way half a dozen the other. ISP services prices will more than likely go up to take into consideration the price they have to pay to run connections across the cable infillstructre. DSL connections (which is basically the same thing, you pay for the line then pay the ISP) and are generally twice that of a dialup. So either way you are going to pay high prices and the cable companies still has control over the media. The effect you want will not hapen untill other broadband players come into the market (DSL/Satilite/BBOEL) This might be a ways of in some places but it is the only thing that is going to promote true competition. You mentioned the opening of the telco networks that happened awhile back in your last reply. Well, the telcos where ripe for the picking. How old was the telephone market when the feds finally broke them up and opened up their networks? I am not sure on exact dates here but I know we are talking at the least a good 40 years or so. Consumer flavored broadband is at it's oldest 8 maybe 9 years old(very extremely liberal questimation there).It is likle punishing an infant child for not being able to play Mozart's 6th synphony on the piano. Give it time and it will work itself out. Patients IS a virtue.
I use RoadRunner and for the time being it is uberfast!!! However if RoadRunner ever starts slacking I have the choice between DSL and ISDN (I can get ISDN really cheap, but still not worth it). I have a general bad taste in my mouth from fed agencies, but the FCC knows exactly what it is doing here. With tech advances even your power company is going to be offering broadband in the next few years. The Last Mile is such an infant market that any interfernce would greatly damage the fragile balance it has now.
Slashdot Mirror
Sounds like the words of a Suit that is pissed at the fact he can't make as much money as techies cause he hasn't got the skills (tech skills that is). Nor does he have any tact, common sense, or an ounce of intelligence in his statements. You must be a very bitter man (I assume you're a man, could be a Eunuch though). News flash for ya genius every one has mental problems. And from the sound things your worse off than most people are (sounds like you have a lot of issues to work out there son). Just because you can't hack it in the technology world is no reason to go off crying about it like a 3 year old little girl. And don't worry about being in our shoes you wouldn't have the IQ to even lace the damn things up much less the balls to try. You Velcro wearin short bus riddin Mongoloid
Heaven forbid that we Christians should ever be as intolerant and callous of others as they are of us. I mean that literally and quite seriously.
That is a very admirable goal but that has not been the case since Rome took up christianity as it's officall religion. Before this point Christians where persecuted and treated very poorly (as I am sure you know) But once Christianity was more main-stream the roles where reversed. Christians where the perscutors and pagan religons where the persecuted. Since then Christianity throught out history has been the most intorerlant callous self-rightous holier than thou group of people to ever exsist (excpet for maybe nazis, but even they claim to be christians). I.E.: The Crusades, The Inquisition, The Salem Which Trials etc. etc. etc. ( I could make a list about 2 pages long but I think you get the point) Now, that is a gerneralazation (very a large one) and there is a very large number of wonderful people that are christians but the majority have no tolerance for different ways of thinking. I know this on a personal level because I was brought up seventh day adventist (a huge bunch of kooks, but that is a different story all together) in a small town in Oklahoma. You don't get more bible belt than that. Wonderful place to witness the intolerance of other religons and different ways of thinking.
Yeah your right but I can't help myself
I didn't really want to get into either but I just can't help myself. It is that old debater in me that gets me everytime.
but anywho.... To me it is the fact that beleieving makes no sense that gets me. To many contradictions, inconsistancies, and stuff that is blatantly wrong for me to believe.
That made no sense... and had no context to what I was saying whatsoever. See that was what I was getting at. Whatever your satan or your god believed had nothing to do with the point I was getting at. But you did a good job in proving my second point. What I was saying is this A:) vengefulness == characteristic of your satan, b:)wrath == chracteristic your satan.
Hehe Apparently he did
The Halloween Special with Korn barely beats out Cartman Gets an Anal Probe in my book
Come on you didn't think the part with Bill Gates being pulled into the army briefing and then got shot in the head wasn't funny? Or the deal with Satan and Sadam gettin it on wasn't funny? Damn I am about to fall out of my seat laughing just thinking about it. Come on man lighten up the world isn't just computers and code. Try developing a sense of humor you life might be a lot more fun.
Dude what does being Jewish have to do with anything except making stupid pricks like youself prove your ignorance?
Vengefullness and wrathfulness are qualities of this so called Satan fellow aren't they. It amazes me how easily christians can make absolutely no sense but it is ok because the believe . Whatever... you fruitcake
Well Of course a lot of people are only going to care that her voices will no longer be apart of the show. She did a wonderful job on that show and that is how the masses know her. And you right I wouldn't mourn your passage if you died tomarrow. If you start mourning random peoples deaths then you better have a shit load of black in the closet cause tons of poeple die everyday. Now you may say the Mary Bergman was a random person because I never met her. But that is not the case. I heard her voice at least once week. Which makes and interaction of sorts, which means that she is not some random person. The fact of the matter is everyone in this world has lost someone or will lose someone it is a fact of life. Sure I feel compasion for her family and friends, but I can't really get choked up about the lose and grieving they are feeling. If that where the case I would be crying my eyes out everyday for the 1,000s and 1,000s of people that die everyday. So whats left? Focus on the things Mary Kay Bergman did that affected our lives. And that is through her voices on south park. This maybe a tad on the self centered side but it is more common sense then anything
By George I think he's got IT!!!!! What I explained to you was basically a reverse of what open access is trying to do. If I had a T3 or so for my bone I would be getting people in through the cable instead of phone lines. But the point was still the same. You can bridge the cable to telco with out many problems and achieve the size bandwidth with increase in price, but only for those who go with and another ISP. People not using another ISP will stay pay the same price for a cable pipe. People who go with another ISP are gonna have to pay for the cable acces and then the ISP. So in that sense your right the will be more of a cost. I do however totally agree with you when you say open access is wrong. And your right I didn't need the breakdown of the telcos but it reassures me you know what your talking about. It wouldn't be that difficult to get a straight route to the isp, it would take a new set of routing tables, but your talking 15-20 minutes a router. It wouldn't be that hard to implement open access.
I have studied this too, I worked for an ISP for 4 years. And the fact is in a straight technicall sense it would not be that difficult and the difference in speed and cost would be neglegible.
But.... that ain't the point. Open access doesn't create competition. The cable company will still own the pipe and consumers will be subject to their whims. And really I don't think open access is even good at heart it is just a bunch propaganda put out by AOL and every other ISP who saw themselevs losing customers and jumped on the bandwagon. I don't want the FCC jacking with my bandwidth just because some corporation is threatend by it. I agree with there are a lot of confused readers, most of them are programers, I am sure, and aren't network enginers or sys admins. It seams the majority of programs aren't that informed about the nuts and bolts of a WAN. Not all mind you but it seams like a majority.
Eventhough I really didn't follow what you are getting at (try being a bit more clear with your points). I will tell you thhe equipment you would need:
Well let's see I would probably use a 3COM Total Control modem bank (that would be my hardware)connected to lets say an Intel 10/100 switchable hub (again that would be my hardware)and the cable modem (which I went ahead and bought instead of leasing, soooo that too would be my hardware, hmmm it looks like it is all my hardware). Now, if you are talking about using someone elses hardware further down stream, that is what all ISPs do. Your typicall ISP owns all the equipment up to the gateway (where they tie into the the backbone)the rest of the equipment is owned by other people so in that context every ISP is a middleman.
Sometimes it is necssary (sp?) to call people stupid in public when they obviously don't know what they are talking about. This way if someone reads your post, and they now even less then you do, they won't go away being less informed and worse off because they read your post. The only thing worse than no information is dis-information.
Sorry not trying to be a troll here just being honest
No wonder you post anonymously. It is very very easy to do. All you have to do is have a few cable pipes coming in to your office (you could do it with one pipe but bandwidth would disapear real quick). Hell, I can setup an ISP in my own living room with my cable modem as the backbone. But I like my bandwidth TOOOO much to let some one else use it. Don't believe me? Ask me. I tell you exactly how to do it. Using Linux as the server of choice of course. Try not to make ;) Open acces is wrong though see my other post on this subject and you will learn why it is really flawed. Technically impossible, sheesh where do these people come from.
yourself look stupid in public, it is a bad thing.
Open Access BAHHH!!! Letting ISPs terminate connections across cable networks will do nothing for us consumers. Only competeing cable comapnies can rectify the problems that are happening
We are talking about bandwidth. Big difference. I don't deny that cable companies pretty much suck when it comes to content ov TV channels. But that is not what is being debated here. We are debating if the cable companies should be forced to allow ISPs to run service over ther data connections.
Here I go again, this is basically a repost that I have posted at least 20 times about this issue but I guess I will have to keep syaing this over and over and over. Cause people still don't get it.
First thing Tau, content doesn't have jack to do with anything here, we are talking about bandwidth. I don't pay Time Warner for their pretty little pictures. I pay them for my 800kbps downloads. And secondly who paid for the copper at this point is irrelevant (sp?), the fact is cable companies control the copper. For all practical puposes it is thiers. Besides when you are talking about the grants, those didn't include switches, routers, and hubs. That came from the cable companies pockets. And that is quite a pretty penny. But even that doesn't matter because the competition that your advocating will amount to absolutely nothing.
What people don't realize here is that allowing ISPs to terminate connection across the cable companiy's copper is not going to create the competition that will effect the level of service people recieve. The cable company will still run the show when it comes to the physical layer. Understanding that, any logical person will come to the conclusion that the cable company will still have controll on your level of service, no matter who you are paying for your IP address. You will still pay the cable company for the connection, and then you will pay you ISP for the ip address. The cable company is still gonna get your cash for the bandwidth. The only competition that is taking place here is for the ip address. It would be exactly like a dialup. You have bad line noise on your phone and can't hit a 56k connection? Your ISP can't do anything about it. This will hold true in an open cable network. You have extreme latency on your neighborhood segement? Your ISP can't do anything about it. The only compititon that will effect your level of service is competition of the PHYSICAL LAYER!!!!!!!! Open access advocates are trying to fix a glass table with sledgehammer here. Wrong tool, it won't get the job done. Open acces will do nothing for anbody except shoot the consumer broadband market in the foot. I had put this with my orginal post but Hemos took it out, (I am sure most people are getting sick of me saying this but)The consumer broadband market it too young for the FEDS to be muking around with it. Case Closed, End of Story.
Exactly my friend. Not only that but opening up cable markets to ISPs creates a competition which != better service! The cable company will still have a monoply of the physical layer. I don't know how many times I have tried to tell people this but I guess I will just have to repeat myself untill I am blue in the face. Competition for the IP address is all that will be accomplished from opening up the cable networks. And who really gives a whoot where you get your ip address from. It is physical layer that is important. If there is no competition in the copper customers will see no effect from opening the network. With one exception, current customers will see their bandwidth fall from a raging river to a tiny little stream. As I had put it in the original story post, which Hemos so graciously removed, the consumer broadband market is in an infantile stage. It is way too young to be getting mucked with by the government.
But the end of the enginering ride was economic blowout. Not some random thing that only effected enginers. The author was very misleading about this.
I agree but you where wrong in the Stats about the number of stidents signing up for comp-sci majors. New Yotk Times had a story not long ago saying that comp-sci majors have 4% in the next year, and most people say they will dropping even lower
No one is saying that 21st century starts on Jan. 1 2000. We are talking about the next millennium.. err... however that damned word is spelled. That doesn't take place until 2001.
It is a common misconception for people who don't know the difference.
I do however agree with you that something needs to be done, I don't know about fed regulation (The Feds always leave a funny taste in my mouth)
But maybe the cable markets should be opened up to allow multiple cable service providers in any given area. I guess though, I am lucky I have RoadRunner service through MultiMedia and they really kick ass. Sure I pay through the nose for their service (My cable bill is $110 a month OUCH!!), but if I have a problem it is fixed immediately. I am however really intrested in hearing more about BBOEL (Broadband over electrical lines)it is still a couple years out, still having problems with popping breakers when there is high modulation, but that will be the best competitor for cable. And the really cool thing is in my area the Single electrical company we have is having to make room for other electrical companies so there will be competition already in place. The next few years in the "Last Mile" market will be a very intresting drama to watch unfold.
The first argument is debatable. But I am telling you after working 5 years for an ISP I have a nose for these things. The more ISPs running over cable will result in more marketing and more comapnies rushing to get people on cable. But this is more of hunch than anything. And your missing something in the cost of DSL you also have to pay for the line as well as the isp. So it cost more like $75-$80 rather than the $40 you mentioned.
You have missed my whole point here. I will try and be a little more clear this time. Opening up the cable networks will not create competition. At least not the competition that will affect your level of reliability and the size of your bandwidth. It will not matter who you use for your ISP the media your connection will be going over will still be the cable company's network. See what I am saying here? You will have to pay the cable company for the data connection on their network, even if you get your IP address from "Ma 'n PA's ISP" you will still pay the cable company for getting your connection to whatever ISP you choose. You will still be at the mercy of the cable company to supply a level of serivce to your isp. This is the exact same situatuion with a dial-up line or DSL line. The company which owns the pipe controls your bandwith. Case in Point: Right about when modems started hitting 28800 and higher. Common problems started popping up such as line noise and frequency caps. Placing frequency caps on phone lines is common place for telcos. It can double or even triple the nummber of voice channels on a phone line but it limits frequency modulation so you end up getting only 24400 or 16400. The isp can't do anything about it. You call your ISP to complain they will say "Sorry call your phone company." Your at the mercy of the telco, and the first thing the telco will tell you is "Sorry we only promise data rates at 9600 over normal voices lines. Would you like to have some information on getting ISDN serivce?". Transpose this to the cable world. You connect to "Ma 'n Pa's ISP" through your local cable provider and for some reason you're barley getting 64K. You call Ma' n PA' and they see that there is a %20 packet lose at your neighboorhood segement. You will hear "Sorry. Nothing we can do about it call your cable company". The ISPs are not competitors in the broadband market. The only companies that will be competitors are other broadband players (a.k.a DSL/Satilite/BBOEL providers). Making cable comapnies allow ISPs to offer service over the cable nwtwork is not the right fix. And if you can't do something right don't do it at all, cause in the long run you will screw things up worse than they where.
How long have you been on the net? How long did you wait for broadband service? Is another year or so going to be that big of diference in the grand scheme of things? I have been online since the BBS days and 2400 baud was like a pitbull on crack as far as speed goes. If I had to wait another year to get reliable broadband it really wouldn't make that much of a differnce. But as it is now I have reliable braodband and I don't not want anyone jacking around with my bandwidth.FACT: The opening of the cable networks will add more users on the network and the bandwidth of current users will drop to near modem speeds. Anything that promotes the loss of MY bandwidth is EVIL!!!! FACT: Opening the networks will not create the competition you want. Cable companies will still own the pipes the only competition will be about who you get your IP address from. You are still going to have to pay the cable companies for the data service then you will have to pay the isp ontop of what you pay the cable compaines. It is basically 6 one way half a dozen the other. ISP services prices will more than likely go up to take into consideration the price they have to pay to run connections across the cable infillstructre. DSL connections (which is basically the same thing, you pay for the line then pay the ISP) and are generally twice that of a dialup. So either way you are going to pay high prices and the cable companies still has control over the media. The effect you want will not hapen untill other broadband players come into the market (DSL/Satilite/BBOEL) This might be a ways of in some places but it is the only thing that is going to promote true competition. You mentioned the opening of the telco networks that happened awhile back in your last reply. Well, the telcos where ripe for the picking. How old was the telephone market when the feds finally broke them up and opened up their networks? I am not sure on exact dates here but I know we are talking at the least a good 40 years or so. Consumer flavored broadband is at it's oldest 8 maybe 9 years old(very extremely liberal questimation there).It is likle punishing an infant child for not being able to play Mozart's 6th synphony on the piano. Give it time and it will work itself out. Patients IS a virtue.
I use RoadRunner and for the time being it is uberfast!!! However if RoadRunner ever starts slacking I have the choice between DSL and ISDN (I can get ISDN really cheap, but still not worth it). I have a general bad taste in my mouth from fed agencies, but the FCC knows exactly what it is doing here. With tech advances even your power company is going to be offering broadband in the next few years. The Last Mile is such an infant market that any interfernce would greatly damage the fragile balance it has now.