If the net neutrality repeal vote goes through

"

1453R wrote:

Sure, why not. I'm pissed off enough and work is slow enough I can indulge in some more angerposting.

"

JNF wrote:

1) "Blah, blah, blah, capitalism is da debil, blah, blah, blah..."

Capitalism is not the Devil. It is, to the best of my knowledge, the only currently known form of human society that gives the people living in that society a real stake in said society. If you're clever, innovative, or even just persistent enough, you can Make It Big. That's the principle behind capitalism and the free market.

This system relies on a certain set of assumptions that very large multinational corporations have been doing their absolute goddamned best to circumvent since they became a thing. For one, it relies on all possible competitors in the market having free and equal access to the market. If you can't participate in the market in the first place (POSSIBLY BECAUSE OH SAY i DUNNO A BIG TELECOM COMPANY USES THEIR NEWFOUND ABSOLUTE POWER OVER THE INTERNET TO BLOCK EVERYTHING YOU DO), then you can't compete no matter how clever or innovative your idea might be.

For another, it relies on large, established companies being unable to tamper with the actions of smaller, newer start-ups - i.e. their competition. Again, this is free access to the market; if you start a lemonade stand on a street corner somewhere, you're supposed to have a good-faith guarantee that Minute Maid or Tropicana or whatever aren't going to send pinstriped goons to bust up your stand and force you out of the market through coercive or threatening means. Big companies don't get to punch out small ones; they have to compete fairly.

We have just told Big Telecom they can do whatever they like to smaller competitive companies that try to start up. Big Telecom doesn't have to compete for shit. Want to block their website or services from your system, ensuring it's almost impossible for that competitor to reach the market? Ajit Pai says go for it! Want to deny that competitor service in the first place, block or just outright delete any/all of their data that goes through your nodes at all, and make it impossible for them to function until they can get off the ground. Pai says no problemo, Verizon!

This is equivalent to Chevy being granted free permission to station armed guardsmen outside the entranceways to all car dealerships in the United States, Chevy or not, and give those guards free permission to shotgun anyone who tries to enter a dealership other than Chevy. How well do you figure the other manufacturers could compete with Chevy if Chevy was allowed to physically deny people any access to their locations?

"

JNF wrote:

2) How do any smaller companies start out?

Building a brick-and-mortar consumer product store is different than building a nationwide network of exceptionally expensive electronics from scratch. Even if you had the scratch to do that, the actual backbone of the Internet is under the exclusive control of Big Telecom, and they can simply decide that your big shiny new network with all the improved infrastructure and enhanced service capability you just poured your heart, soul, and a mind-blowing amount of money you probably put yourself and your family in hock for a million years to raise don't get to have access to the fundamental backbone equipment that actually runs the Internet. Because that equipment is theirs, and they are no longer legally obligated to provide equal access to it.

This is exempting the fact that private business are typically not permitted by law to build utility infrastructure, as utility infrastructure is protected and regulated by the government. Except when stupid assholes decide to get rid of the "regulated" part, leaving the "protected" part and sticking us all with a bunch of uncontrolled monopolies.

"

JNF wrote:

3) Billions of dollars of infrastructure? LOL

How expensive do you think all of the physical equipment required to build and maintain the Internet is, Junior Nevada Farmer? All of that equipment is "the Infrastructure"; it's the stuff we've got that's old and shitty compared to most other first-world or emerging nations because it's not in Big Telecom's best interest to upgrade it. Because overhauling the infrastructure is a colossally expensive undertaking even for people with the effectively infinite financial resources these guys have.

You don't just write a program on the Internet and become an ISP. You have to build the equipment. And building the equipment is prohibitively expensive for any startup company, even if they had legal permission to try.

Anything else, Jumping Newt Fraternity?

"

Cataca wrote:

Not an expert on ISPs in america at all, but IIRC the issue with letting competition regulate the ISP market is that in most of the regions of america you can choose between your ISP and fuck all.

"

NeroNoah wrote:

What's the point of describing possible regulations and countries where actually the problem was solved :P?

It's amazing to read this threads because it's not like it's impossible to go and read about things outside US.

Bitching about markets it's more or less futile. So being cynical about regulations. The tragedy is that leftwingers laser focus on a regulation without understanding its drawbacks nor researching alternatives and that rightwingers more or less don't care about market failures and rarely advocate deregulation where it matters.

"

NeroNoah wrote:

"

Cataca wrote:

Not an expert on ISPs in america at all, but IIRC the issue with letting competition regulate the ISP market is that in most of the regions of america you can choose between your ISP and fuck all.

What's the point of describing possible regulations and countries where actually the problem was solved :P?

It's amazing to read this threads because it's not like it's impossible to go and read about things outside US. Here is a list of countries by internet speed, start from here. Funnily enough Sweden and Denmark do capitalism better than the US.

Bitching about markets it's more or less futile. So being cynical about regulations. The tragedy is that leftwingers laser focus on a regulation without understanding its drawbacks nor researching alternatives and that rightwingers more or less don't care about market failures and rarely advocate deregulation where it matters.

"

Cataca wrote:

What i say is: Hoping that natural competition is going to regulate prices in a market where there is virtually no competition is like throwing sharks with laser-turrets into the sea, hoping that natural selection is going to regulate their spread.

What you say is: But the EU has a healthy ISP market. Also regulations.

Well, duh.

"

NeroNoah wrote:

"

Cataca wrote:

What i say is: Hoping that natural competition is going to regulate prices in a market where there is virtually no competition is like throwing sharks with laser-turrets into the sea, hoping that natural selection is going to regulate their spread.

What you say is: But the EU has a healthy ISP market. Also regulations.

Well, duh.

No, what I said there are ways to actually make things competitive. I didn't assume competition from the start. This makes your point moot.