The cable lobby loves to bring up rural areas but when we gave them millions to build out they just took the money, said fuck it and did jack shit. I’m beginning to think that they prefer to under serve those areas and then use that as a bargaining chip to get everything they want.
Cable lobby vows “years of litigation” to avoid bans on blocking and throttling
Submitted 7 months ago by kinther@lemmy.world to technology@lemmy.world
Comments
Imprudent3449@lemm.ee 7 months ago
foggy@lemmy.world 7 months ago
I am in New England. Looking to buy a home. The amount of area that is not covered at 100/10 is fucking criminal. Like, they upped my price this year. For what? Transferring packets didn’t get more expensive. Did you go e your employees raises? No? Are you expanding your infrastructure? No?
Like what the fuck.
tocopherol@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 months ago
Numerous places I’ve lived had contracts with Comcast so there was no option but them, and the speed is shit, maybe they needed to raise prices to pay for their forced monopolies.
AdmiralShat@programming.dev 7 months ago
The power companies in my area started installing fiber on the power lines and running their own ISPs.
No data caps or anything, I’m raw dogging these torrents at like 80 megabytes a second, I even started running my own home server
sqibkw@lemmy.world 7 months ago
80 megaBYTES? What part of the US are you in?
Speculater@lemmy.world 7 months ago
I almost feel bad for rural people until I realize they’re the ones voting for the people who make sure rural people don’t get services. Redneck America wants to close the USPS for fuck sakes.
KinglyWeevil@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 months ago
My parents live in butt fuck nowhere and are in a fiber co-op paying like $70/month for unlimited 1gbps up/down.
Meanwhile I live in the (extremely left) Capitol City of my state and pay Comcast $165/month for like 175mbps capped at 1TB, with some absurd overage fee like $10/5GB over until I hit $100 over and then it’s “unlimited” but seems throttled.
Aecosthedark@lemmy.world 7 months ago
In Australia we watched American ISPs do exactly that and then we did the exact same thing with the exact same result because our politicians are corrupt pieces of shit with no backbone, integrity or ethics.
Kiosade@lemmy.ca 7 months ago
The dumbasses that gave them the money should have made it so the companies did the work FIRST, then get reimbursed when they could prove they finished it. Whole thing was stupid.
daikiki@lemmy.world 7 months ago
Eminent domain the final mile and be done with it. These companies have no business holding our national infrastructure hostage.
uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 months ago
Taxpayers have already paid them billions for broken promises. It’s been long demonstrated the oligopolistic communications industry cannot be trusted to provide what the public needs at fair pricing.
Its time to nationalize ISPs.
Ultragigagigantic@lemmy.world 7 months ago
Revoke their corporate charter, nationalize their infrastructure, sell it to municipal ISPs.
androogee@midwest.social 7 months ago
Shoot them all into the sun.
mPony@lemmy.world 7 months ago
Nuke them from orbit - it’s the only way to be sure
ASeriesOfPoorChoices@lemmy.world 7 months ago
apparently its less effort/energy to shoot them into deep space.
but either way is good.
gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 months ago
They’re a bunch of mindless jerks who’ll be the first against the wall when the revolution comes, that’s for sure
hansl@lemmy.world 7 months ago
Nah, just allow communities to build their local infrastructure. Trust me. You don’t need to threaten the status quo, just allow the market to compete.
Every town where local fiber is available, Comcast and Spectrum suddenly have cheaper and more reliable service. It’s magical.
WarlordSdocy@lemmy.world 7 months ago
I mean yeah that’s what monopolies do. They eliminate competition by either buying it out or lowering their prices/improving service to drive them out of business so they can then raise prices again. Just cause a small company can come in and make things better while they’re able to be around doesn’t mean we shouldn’t go after these monopolies and cut them down so they can’t have this power.
spikederailed@lemmy.world 7 months ago
I lived in Charlotte, NC when Google announced GFiber was coming. Instantly AT&T started running as much fiber as possible and Charter(spectrum) was trying to get people locked into cheaper 3 year contracts. Ultimately AT&T got fiber first so we went with them, and it was vastly better. Charter was getting 60% packet loss every night from oversold infrastructure they didn’t care to fix, as before the announcement the only competition was AT&T uverse in some parts of the city.
phoneymouse@lemmy.world 7 months ago
Jessica Rosenworcel is a champ. She has been fighting this fight for years. The week Ajit Pai (Ashit Pie) ended net neutrality using falsified public comments, a group gathered in front of the FCC to protest the change. I went down there for a few hours and Jessica came to the window and waved to us.
skygirl@lemmy.world 7 months ago
Haha oh man it’s weird to see this mentioned.
I helped organize that protest. Thanks for coming down with us!
phoneymouse@lemmy.world 7 months ago
Thanks for organizing!
Shdwdrgn@mander.xyz 7 months ago
“heavy-handed regulation will not just hobble network investment and innovation, it will also seriously jeopardize our nation’s collective efforts to build and sustain reliable broadband in rural and unserved communities”
They said exactly the same thing when the first net neutrality laws were getting put in place, then after the laws went into effect the companies went on to invest record amounts in innovation and infrastructure. Funny how their words are completely meaningless.
kibiz0r@midwest.social 7 months ago
Yaknow what does hobble investment and innovation?
It rhymes with “shmonopolies”.
tabular@lemmy.world 7 months ago
Innovation these days just means ways to milk people.
just_change_it@lemmy.world 7 months ago
Innovation is part of the executive buzzword bingo board for all announcements.
It doesn’t actually mean anything to these people. The only thing that has weight is what will enrich the wealth of the ownership class (shareholders.)
Shdwdrgn@mander.xyz 7 months ago
You mean like “innovating” faster connections speeds that they’ve been withholding from us for decades, but can suddenly flip a switch and advertise faster speeds when another provider competes with them? Yeah, I wouldn’t know anything about that… ;-)
blazera@lemmy.world 7 months ago
thats cool how money lets you just, reject consequences for years
Boozilla@lemmy.world 7 months ago
Works even better if you dye your skin orange and poop your pants.
Zorque@kbin.social 7 months ago
That's not money, that's being a convenient scapegoat for the people in power.
DarkDarkHouse@lemmy.sdf.org 7 months ago
The one thing I learned at Trump University
superfes@lemmy.world 7 months ago
Why can’t you just be decent people?
bjoern_tantau@swg-empire.de 7 months ago
originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com 7 months ago
money corrupts. its always money. humans are weak
demonsword@lemmy.world 7 months ago
This can only be true in a system that actively rewards greed. For most of the Homo Sapiens history money didn’t even exist.
orphiebaby@lemm.ee 7 months ago
Money doesn’t corrupt, money just allows people to let loose on a lot of the stuff they weren’t able to do. As the saying now goes: “money doesn’t corrupt, money reveals”.
NatakuNox@lemmy.world 7 months ago
Can’t wait until my liberal city finishes our city owned isp. You can’t trust business to be in control of essential services
ElectricAirship@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 months ago
There was an academic paper put out a long time ago that basically argued for essential services like food, water, etc to be given non-profit status so corpo’s couldn’t do this sort of thing.
redfox@infosec.pub 7 months ago
Every piece of shit greedy corporation can’t hide from their lies when they say things are too expensive to implement correctly or pay people appropriately when they are simultaneously posting profits measured in billions…
TheFriar@lemm.ee 7 months ago
Those last couple paragraphs with the quotes from ISPs…make no fucking sense. They’re saying it will “restrict access for rural customers.” How? They say it’ll slow internet down across the nation. How? How can ARST.com just run those quotes and not even explain how they’re bullshit or even just call into question their reasoning? Shoddy journalism if you ask me.
RemoveEgoDivineFreedom@lemmy.world 7 months ago
Eat the rich. Fucking cunts.
db2@lemmy.world 7 months ago
A threat like that should disqualify them from even trying to do it,
friend_of_satan@lemmy.world 7 months ago
You hear that, law school students? Job security! Because lawyers are the ones who really win in situations like this.
Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 7 months ago
Fuck Ajit Pai. And fuck conservatives. They did this.
rusticus@lemm.ee 7 months ago
Not just conservatives but Trump.
Buttons@programming.dev 7 months ago
Let me plug Counter Points, a favorite political show of mine.
They recently talked about FTC Chair Lina Khan and Apple’s monopoly, the government’s anti-trust lawsuit against Apple, and monopolies in general. www.youtube.com/watch?v=rMyChnACLKQ
Forgive me plugging this tangential video.
If the cable companies want lawsuits, let’s give them what they want in the form of anti-trust lawsuits and break them up.
ATDA@lemmy.world 7 months ago
‘We know we’re the bad guys so we’re going to announce our intentions like a comic book villain…’
minkymunkey_7_7@lemmy.world 7 months ago
“And we also know that there’s nothing you can ever do about it.”
FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today 7 months ago
Good, let them use their money on litigation instead of lobbying.
Silentiea@lemm.ee 7 months ago
I mean maybe they decided it was going to be easier to buy a judge than another FCC chair?
FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today 7 months ago
Are there any past examples of companies getting out of fines that way? Even Facebook had to pay 20Bn, you would think they could have gotten a judge for only 15 if it were so easy.
Sanctus@lemmy.world 7 months ago
These people forget that they have to exist physically alongside us “citizens”. Your layers of obfuscation won’t save your reputation forever. Eventually people will be so tired of everything be stacked against us we’ll just riot and take from these corpos.
Fedizen@lemmy.world 7 months ago
how are so many of Joe Brandon’s appointees so good?
reddig33@lemmy.world 7 months ago
Sounds like a good time to switch to 5G internet and cancel cable.
NateSwift@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 months ago
I just wish it wasn’t so latent :(
dunidane@lemmy.sdf.org 7 months ago
Or if it was available most places.
PriorityMotif@lemmy.world 7 months ago
I’m getting 40 ping is that good or bad?
autotldr@lemmings.world [bot] 7 months ago
This is the best summary I could come up with:
The Federal Communications Commission has scheduled an April 25 vote to restore net neutrality rules similar to the ones introduced during the Obama era and repealed under former President Trump.
“A return to the FCC’s overwhelmingly popular and court-approved standard of net neutrality will allow the agency to serve once again as a strong consumer advocate of an open Internet.”
In October 2023, the FCC voted 3–2 along party lines to seek public comment on restoring net neutrality rules and common-carrier regulation of Internet service providers under Title II of the Communications Act.
While there hasn’t been a national standard since then-Chairman Ajit Pai led a repeal in 2017, Internet service providers still have to follow net neutrality rules because California and other states impose their own similar regulations.
“Reimposing heavy-handed regulation will not just hobble network investment and innovation, it will also seriously jeopardize our nation’s collective efforts to build and sustain reliable broadband in rural and unserved communities,” cable lobbyist Michael Powell said today.
The cable group argues that restoring net neutrality rules will interfere with the Biden administration plan to expand broadband access with a $42.45 billion grant program that will distribute public money to ISPs.
The original article contains 521 words, the summary contains 199 words. Saved 62%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
Treczoks@lemmy.world 7 months ago
When companies protest against regulation while claiming that they already adhere to the same rules, then something is clearly off, and one better gets regulation through, because they plan to ditch that adherence as soon as the governmental regulations are off the table.
deranger@lemmy.world 7 months ago
Lmao, really? The audacity of these cunts.
baronvonj@lemmy.world 7 months ago
Wow. Talk about professional gaslighting. Not enough people are aware that the Obama-era FTC enacted the policy because AT&T, Comcast, and Verizon were all caught throttling Netflix and prioritizing their own competing services.
Socsa@sh.itjust.works 7 months ago
Thanks Obama
Socsa@sh.itjust.works 7 months ago
And tethering. Verizon was basically forced to stop blocking tethering apps by the FCC. My complaint was one of the ones which started the enforcement.
SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 months ago
The Lion, the Witch, and the Audacity of this Bitch.
bisby@lemmy.world 7 months ago
Oh good, if that is all true, you wont have to change anything to be compliant with new laws and should have no issue with them.
WhatsThePoint@lemmy.world 7 months ago
Money has no shame. Businesses only have reactionary shame in relation to possible loss of money.
Socsa@sh.itjust.works 7 months ago
It’s funny because wireless ISPs literally advertise that they throttle video to certain resolutions unless you buy a higher tier.
Mango@lemmy.world 7 months ago
ROFL! Order today and you can get unlimited bandwidth for YouTube and Netflix specifically!
Plague_Doctor@lemmy.world 7 months ago
That’s incredible.