Living in NY this sounds like a great upgrade to my current FIOS service but somehow I wish I was living back in my old hometown of Fairfield, Iowa. The local ISP, LISCO, is rolling out FTTP that features 100/100 Mbps as standard service in a package that also includes phone service with 1500 minutes of long distance for $60/month! Is this possibly the best deal in the country? Makes me feel like I'm getting taken for a ride by Verizon.
http://www.liscofiber.com/pricesresidential.htm
Give Me Flexibility or Make Me a Criminal
on
Death By DMCA
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
As a consumer I prefer flexibility. The more options I have for using a purchase the more likely I am to buy it. In what other industry exists the mentality that the more restrictions that are placed on products the better off the industry will be? Imagine if you could only buy a particular brand and style of shoes to go with a particular brand and style of suit or a particular brand and size of nails to use with a particular make of hammer.
Everything that the entertainment industry is suggesting is causing me to think more and more about what my options will be for circumventing restrictions so that I may "enjoy" music and video in the manner I desire. It scares me when I stop to think that I am trying to devise ways to break the law.
Be that as it may I have no doubt that as greater restrictions are placed on what I legally acquire in both media and electronics I will buy fewer legitimate products and put my resources elsewhere.
"We've all heard stories of children on some of these social websites meeting up with dangerous predators."
I've also heard stories of children meeting up with dangerous predators who are their teachers, priests and ministers, physicians, friends, relatives, siblings and parents. Perhaps children should be kept in social isolation until they reach the age of majority or turned over to Willy Wonka for safe-keeping.
I wonder if anyone has pointed out to these astute members of Congress that without net neutrality it would be possible for well-funded opponents to pay for much better access of their campaign websites to voters?
Also, moving beyond the Googles, Amazons and Yahoos, does all this mean that superchurches will have better access to me than my local Methodist church, that the Havards and Stanfords will have better access to my college-bound children than the nearby small four-year liberal arts college, that it will be easier to buy a ticket to a Broadway show than one to a local production by the hometown theater company?
The net should be regulated in a manner similar to a common carrier. To expect the telcos and cable operators to play fair is like expecting someone who cheats at cards to play fair. Telcos and cable operators have routinely stacked the deck in the past. I expect them to continue to do so.
Slashdot Mirror
Living in NY this sounds like a great upgrade to my current FIOS service but somehow I wish I was living back in my old hometown of Fairfield, Iowa. The local ISP, LISCO, is rolling out FTTP that features 100/100 Mbps as standard service in a package that also includes phone service with 1500 minutes of long distance for $60/month! Is this possibly the best deal in the country? Makes me feel like I'm getting taken for a ride by Verizon. http://www.liscofiber.com/pricesresidential.htm
This should help Sen. Stevens unclog his tubes.
As a consumer I prefer flexibility. The more options I have for using a purchase the more likely I am to buy it. In what other industry exists the mentality that the more restrictions that are placed on products the better off the industry will be? Imagine if you could only buy a particular brand and style of shoes to go with a particular brand and style of suit or a particular brand and size of nails to use with a particular make of hammer.
Everything that the entertainment industry is suggesting is causing me to think more and more about what my options will be for circumventing restrictions so that I may "enjoy" music and video in the manner I desire. It scares me when I stop to think that I am trying to devise ways to break the law.
Be that as it may I have no doubt that as greater restrictions are placed on what I legally acquire in both media and electronics I will buy fewer legitimate products and put my resources elsewhere.
"We've all heard stories of children on some of these social websites meeting up with dangerous predators." I've also heard stories of children meeting up with dangerous predators who are their teachers, priests and ministers, physicians, friends, relatives, siblings and parents. Perhaps children should be kept in social isolation until they reach the age of majority or turned over to Willy Wonka for safe-keeping.
I wonder if anyone has pointed out to these astute members of Congress that without net neutrality it would be possible for well-funded opponents to pay for much better access of their campaign websites to voters? Also, moving beyond the Googles, Amazons and Yahoos, does all this mean that superchurches will have better access to me than my local Methodist church, that the Havards and Stanfords will have better access to my college-bound children than the nearby small four-year liberal arts college, that it will be easier to buy a ticket to a Broadway show than one to a local production by the hometown theater company? The net should be regulated in a manner similar to a common carrier. To expect the telcos and cable operators to play fair is like expecting someone who cheats at cards to play fair. Telcos and cable operators have routinely stacked the deck in the past. I expect them to continue to do so.