2009-04-16, 22:23 | Link #42 | |
It's bacon!
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Up and to the Left
Age: 43
|
Time Warner Backs Off Metered Billing
Quote:
|
|
2009-04-16, 22:26 | Link #43 | |
ひきこもりアイドル
IT Support
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Pennsylvania , United States
Age: 34
|
Quote:
But, still... they are still going to do the metered billing in the originally planned places they going to do it in... but not in Rochester, NY.
__________________
|
|
2009-04-17, 19:14 | Link #45 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Age: 35
|
Quote:
|
|
2009-04-18, 10:04 | Link #49 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Age: 35
|
atleast comcast is reasonable, but really there shouldn't be caps on the interent, if your going to do a pay for how much bandwidth you use thats fine, but trying to milk out dated lines and nickle and dime us with surcharges of 1$ per gig is ridiculous. They would never try to implement this kind of policy in a market that had fios, go figure. Any way we should get rid of the monopolistic cable companies and have open competition, so that we can actaully catch up to countries in europe or countries like japan or south korea.
|
2009-04-18, 15:31 | Link #50 | |
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
Author
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 66
|
Quote:
This is simply one of those arenas where populist sentiment needs to be thumping politicians on the head because no matter how big the donations - it won't matter if their voters are pissed off enough. The large ISPs need to be kept on as tight an accountable leash as possible - especially if they're incestually bonded to corporate content providers (like Time-Warner or Comcast). These guys would dearly like to pervert the Internet into a passive consumer experience like broadcast or cable tv.
__________________
|
|
2009-04-18, 15:43 | Link #51 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Age: 35
|
Well the two biggest issues are 1) time warner, comcast are service providers and content providers leading to conflict of interest when they try to preserve their content services such as cable, and ppv, 2) and more importantly is that they have monopolistic franchise and have carved up the states into their own little domains, and with the way the internet is today, they pretty much are like a utility, a utility with zero regulation, and this is a problem. Heres hoping that we can get some antitrust action here to break up the monopolies these companies have in the areas. I'm all for deregulation, but when there is a monopoly established, there is no way free markets can work accordingly, and the fact that dsl/telecos are pretty much in bed with the cable companies it grows more and more apperant how little choice we have in ISPs.
|
2009-04-18, 15:48 | Link #52 | |
ひきこもりアイドル
IT Support
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Pennsylvania , United States
Age: 34
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
2009-04-18, 15:59 | Link #53 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Age: 35
|
Quote:
|
|
2009-04-20, 19:19 | Link #54 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Age: 35
|
wow jesus fucking christ, they bascially "delayed" their tiered plan to appease customers but theri still roling this crap out in the early fall after a "re-education" of how rare those bits and bytes on the internet are... i really feel sick to my stomach on how this monopoly is trying to squeeze the little guy dry of whats left of his money.
|
2009-04-24, 13:01 | Link #56 | |
ひきこもりアイドル
IT Support
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Pennsylvania , United States
Age: 34
|
Now Time Warner is now lobbying to ban local competitors from operating in Time Warner serviced areas in North Carolina.
Quote:
__________________
|
|
2009-04-24, 18:04 | Link #57 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Age: 35
|
the story behind wilson, is that city officials asked time warner to increase speeds for their residents so that it would promote business growth in the region, at&t and tw both declined so wilson decided to provide this service to its residents, this was after the local cartels had said no to a speed increase. Now tw wants to force the city to stop, and buy up the infrastructure for cheap. And when they do buy it up, there not gonna decrease the price, up the bandwidth, instead their give the same shitty service but stuff more and more customers on the system. this is what makes me so frustrated, state legislators say its anti business, but when you have a monopoly on the region a free market solution can never occur, guess my state officials are just retarded.
|
2009-04-25, 14:59 | Link #58 | ||
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
|
How does this
Quote:
lead to this? Quote:
|
||
2009-04-25, 15:06 | Link #59 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Age: 35
|
But they have a monopoly on the regions services. Look in your town, unless you have fios, you only have your cable company. Ask me then how can people choose whne the internet is such a crucial part of daily life? Monopolies don't help us, and the cable companies are strangling us with their cartels.
|
2009-04-25, 23:04 | Link #60 | |
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
Author
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 66
|
Quote:
If I don't "choose" to use my electric company - I have no electricity. However, they're a *regulated* monopoly, which means I have some indirect input in how they operate/profiteer via the Public Utility Commission, a government entity.
__________________
|
|
|
|