JohnG 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (179) comment rss

  • On the post: Internet Slowdown Day Generated 1,000 Calls Per Minute To Congress

    JohnG ( profile ), 11 Sep, 2014 @ 07:08pm

    Re: Re:

    BS. We don't have government legislation mandating a certain level of service for restaurants or sports stadiums or other types of commerce. If it were about a certain level of service then we'd be talking about abolishing the monopoly agreements and let companies compete for the consumer's dollar. That will do more to ensure a better level of service for consumers than governmental legislation could ever hope to achieve.

    People bitch about the electrical networks and overloads, blackouts, whatever... that these public utilities haven't invested in the electrical infrastructure. You don't think there'll be similar discussions if the gov't turns Comcast into a public utility? That somehow it'll be different than them? Newsflash: it won't

  • On the post: Internet Slowdown Day Generated 1,000 Calls Per Minute To Congress

    JohnG ( profile ), 11 Sep, 2014 @ 07:02pm

    Re: Re:

    It was the government that purchased all the servers, switches, routers, racks, patch cables, satellites and other gear that makes inter-networking possible? Is that really the argument you're trying to make?

    The government at best helped develop the protocols that power the web, and subsidized some of the cost of laying some of the physical cable (while also selling decades-long exclusivity agreements), but those aren't sufficient reasons to turn the cable co's (and all the other companies upstream of them) into public utilities.



    "And, the whole point of net neutrality is to actually clear the path so that there's much more openness online."

    What's not open online right now? I still fail to see the problem that this legislation is trying to solve. That aside, if this legislation is passed at best you're simply shifting control of some portion of the internet from the ISP to the government. And if you think the politicians care about what you want any more than the ISP you pay each month then I have some swampland to sell you.

  • On the post: Internet Slowdown Day Generated 1,000 Calls Per Minute To Congress

    JohnG ( profile ), 11 Sep, 2014 @ 04:46am

    "Net Neutrality" is the desire for public control over private property. To believe otherwise is to ignore what the internet actually is -- a network of privately owned computers

    If you think the FCC or any government entity is focused on your freedom online and not about centralizing more control for itself, you are delusional.

  • On the post: Reclassifying Broadband Under Title II Becoming Politically Feasible

    JohnG ( profile ), 01 Aug, 2014 @ 06:34am

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    "You really don't understand how the internet works, do you?"

    Yes, I do.


    "Because that's what you just suggested"

    I suggested nothing of the sort. Please go back to high school and re-learn reading comprehension, friend.


    "a lack of regulation in the 19th century"

    Are you referring to the "robber barons" of the time or something else?

  • On the post: Reclassifying Broadband Under Title II Becoming Politically Feasible

    JohnG ( profile ), 01 Aug, 2014 @ 06:12am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    I think you're trying to create a position I didn't make. No, I don't think the business world is free of corruption, but at the same time, a business can't force you to buy something from them (at least, not without a certain kind of help).

  • On the post: Reclassifying Broadband Under Title II Becoming Politically Feasible

    JohnG ( profile ), 31 Jul, 2014 @ 12:46pm

    Re: Re: Title II and Small Business

    Not all traffic is equal, or should ftp traffic be treated the same as VoIP?

  • On the post: Reclassifying Broadband Under Title II Becoming Politically Feasible

    JohnG ( profile ), 31 Jul, 2014 @ 10:34am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    the gov't is currently in the spot as arbiter of monopoly agreements with cable providers.

  • On the post: Reclassifying Broadband Under Title II Becoming Politically Feasible

    JohnG ( profile ), 31 Jul, 2014 @ 10:27am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    "Are you really saying that anarchy is preferable to regulation?"

    Nice strawman. There's a world of difference between "keeping things regular" and anarchy.


    "As soon as profit becomes the primary driver, you have a pure democracy, where the majority always profits at the expense of the minority."

    Your logic doesn't follow. A company may only profit if "it" (the people who work for the business owner) can convince people to engage in trade. By that very definition there is no exploitation or expense as the transaction is mutually beneficial. A free market is not a zero-sum game, nor is the wealth people accumulate.


    "that means people who are higher income and live in more densely populated areas"

    Can people not choose where to live? In terms of infrastructure, are you sure it isn't the people who live in rural areas profiting off the people who live in more densely populated areas by having them subsidize the rural land owner's infrastructure buildout?

  • On the post: Reclassifying Broadband Under Title II Becoming Politically Feasible

    JohnG ( profile ), 31 Jul, 2014 @ 10:13am

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    "but no such thing exists in the internet space"

    You're putting the cart before the horse. There's nothing like that in the internet space because currently government fills that spot. Take government away and then the market will fill the void.

  • On the post: Reclassifying Broadband Under Title II Becoming Politically Feasible

    JohnG ( profile ), 31 Jul, 2014 @ 10:12am

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    "The point is that it is too late for that."

    It's never too late to open up a market to competition. What if nothing had been done about Ma Bell because of that same argument?

  • On the post: Reclassifying Broadband Under Title II Becoming Politically Feasible

    JohnG ( profile ), 31 Jul, 2014 @ 07:20am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Taken out of context I would agree with your assessment. However, we were discussing monopolies, so the rigging I'm referring to is in that context. If you can name hundreds of situations where monopolies came to be without the aid of government I'd welcome you to do so.

  • On the post: Reclassifying Broadband Under Title II Becoming Politically Feasible

    JohnG ( profile ), 31 Jul, 2014 @ 07:18am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    I don't assume corporate interests to be benign, just a better alternative to the corrupt government which has a monopoly on the use of force.

  • On the post: Reclassifying Broadband Under Title II Becoming Politically Feasible

    JohnG ( profile ), 31 Jul, 2014 @ 06:57am

    Re: Re:

    Sure there is. The ideal solution is no government involvement in the internet. That includes infrastructure and delivery.

    The internet poses a massive threat to the political class and the legacy media. What better way to gain control over this threat than to make it a (false, IMO) choice between Title II and 706?

  • On the post: Reclassifying Broadband Under Title II Becoming Politically Feasible

    JohnG ( profile ), 31 Jul, 2014 @ 06:50am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    fair enough... the problem the legacy media and the gov't has with the internet is that it diminishes their (both entities) power and control because it democratizes information. What better way to gain control of that medium than by doing so under the guise of keeping it "neutral"? This is why no government intervention in the internet is better.

  • On the post: Reclassifying Broadband Under Title II Becoming Politically Feasible

    JohnG ( profile ), 31 Jul, 2014 @ 06:34am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    "The subject was government and corporate"

    Right, so was "they" referring to government, corporations or both?

  • On the post: Reclassifying Broadband Under Title II Becoming Politically Feasible

    JohnG ( profile ), 31 Jul, 2014 @ 06:33am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Uh, no. Natural monopolies, what you're describing, exist in economics textbooks only. True monopolies form only with the assistance and continued support of government.

  • On the post: Reclassifying Broadband Under Title II Becoming Politically Feasible

    JohnG ( profile ), 31 Jul, 2014 @ 05:49am

    Re: Re: Re:

    "And the alternative is a market rigged by corporate greed?"

    Markets can only be rigged with government assistance so we're back to my original point.

    "They want to change the internet into a broadcast medium, it's just another television to them."

    Who's "they" referring to there?

  • On the post: Reclassifying Broadband Under Title II Becoming Politically Feasible

    JohnG ( profile ), 31 Jul, 2014 @ 05:22am

    Re:

    No it isn't the right way to go. Consider this -- government is rigged to the benefit of mega corporations and ruling elite... how is it possible they could be neutral towards anything?

  • On the post: Reclassifying Broadband Under Title II Becoming Politically Feasible

    JohnG ( profile ), 31 Jul, 2014 @ 04:36am

    More gov to fix what gov broke in the first place. Why is that the preferred outcome here?

  • On the post: Did Comcast's Infamous Customer Service Call Open The Company Up To Legal Troubles For Lying About Speeds?

    JohnG ( profile ), 22 Jul, 2014 @ 01:22pm

    Re:

    It may or may not rise to the level of fraud. Yes, the rep made a factually false statement. Whether he actually knew it was false is a different matter (though it's not a stretch to think he probably knew). But it doesn't appear Ryan relied on that statement when making the decision to cancel Comcast, and as a result there was no material harm to Ryan because of it.

    It is obviously lying, but I don't know if it rises to the level of fraud.

Next >>