Government to Reveal Internet Policy on Tuesday

Status
Not open for further replies.

shin0bi272

Distinguished
Nov 20, 2007
271
0
18,930
0
The FCC really has never been asked to design a broad regulatory shift like this.
Probably because its unconstitutional there Beavis. You find for me the line in the constitution that allows the FCC to even exist let alone regulate how we transfer information over ANY medium.
 

marsax73

Distinguished
Apr 7, 2006
53
0
18,580
0
I'll be ecstatic for 25 Mbps to be affordable. $50-60/month for that speed with Comcast. Right now, paying that for 12 Mbps. If I want 25, I have to spend $100/mo.
 

Trueno07

Distinguished
Apr 15, 2009
164
0
18,630
0
The best I can hope for is that Comcast gets the smack down (even a small one) and is forced to stop it's cheap-scape practices, and provide what they SAY they provide.
 

CTPAHHIK

Distinguished
Jul 21, 2008
41
0
18,580
0
I'm sorry, I think my english is really bad now. Planning to increase speed by 25% in ten years? So, if national average is 4Mbps now, then 25% increase would make it 5Mbps? Quite an achievement in 10 years.
 
G

Guest

Guest
[citation][nom]micr0be[/nom]i gota say im impressed ... can't wait to c what itd all be like in 10 years ...[/citation]
Well sorry to break it to you, but you will be waiting 10 years to see what it's like in 10 years.
 

Dawgsoverrebs

Distinguished
Feb 9, 2010
37
0
18,580
0
While I'm sick of super slow speeds at jacked up prices the fact that the government is even involved with this is infuriating. When will we see that its just another way to control our every move
 

jeverson

Distinguished
Jul 18, 2007
32
0
18,580
0
10 years!? Honestly, I would just be happy with some decent upload bandwidth. I get 7Mbs down and only 312Kbs up. That's ridiculous. When I first started I had 5Mbs down but 768Kbs up. Still not great, but come on. I really wish I could get Verizon's FIOS here but it is not offered in my area. The problem is that the services are being offered by companies that are used to charging what they want because they've never had any competition. They are still also taxed as "utility" companies instead of normal service providers. What ever happened to the US being the number one country everyone else wanted to copy. Now we have to catch up to the rest of the world. Capitalism apparently has it's down sides. Rich get richer.
 

groveborn

Distinguished
Mar 6, 2008
37
0
18,580
0
[citation][nom]Shin0bi272[/nom]Probably because its unconstitutional there Beavis. You find for me the line in the constitution that allows the FCC to even exist let alone regulate how we transfer information over ANY medium.[/citation]
The constitution grants the Federal Government the power to oversee interstate commerce. Since the Internet crosses state lines (as do broadcasts), they have the right to regulate it.
 

frozenlead

Distinguished
[citation][nom]Shin0bi272[/nom]Probably because its unconstitutional there Beavis. You find for me the line in the constitution that allows the FCC to even exist let alone regulate how we transfer information over ANY medium.[/citation]

Strict construction isn't going to hold up over time. The world changes, and so will this country. I don't think anyone can argue that the FCC was a bad thing. Perhaps the FCC hasn't been asked to do anything like this before because...well, nothing like this existed before! The constitution doesn't provide for the construction and use of the national highway system, either - should we demolish all of them because they're unconstitutional? Highways didn't exist in 1787, and neither did the Internet. Get over it.
 

azgard

Distinguished
Dec 20, 2002
52
0
18,580
0
[citation][nom]Shin0bi272[/nom]Probably because its unconstitutional there Beavis. You find for me the line in the constitution that allows the FCC to even exist let alone regulate how we transfer information over ANY medium.[/citation]

Because communications are inherently designed as crossing state lines, and anything interstate falls within the realm of federal government. FCC has enough problems as is this is something individual states would never be able to accomplish.
 

crom

Distinguished
Aug 20, 2007
102
0
18,630
0
If AT&T and Qwest don't come up to standards, pull their ISP license. I can guarantee you that will get them to actually invest in back end infrastructure, while the federal government can pay for other infrastructure upgrades like running fiber.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Paul Wagenseil Streaming Video & TVs 6
G Streaming Video & TVs 5
G Streaming Video & TVs 0
G Streaming Video & TVs 9
G Streaming Video & TVs 10
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 6
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 3
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 10
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 2
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 28
Z Streaming Video & TVs 71
Z Streaming Video & TVs 14
Z Streaming Video & TVs 3
Z Streaming Video & TVs 48
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 25
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 26
JMcEntegart Streaming Video & TVs 96
JMcEntegart Streaming Video & TVs 22
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 37
G Streaming Video & TVs 16

ASK THE COMMUNITY