 |
 |  nasadude
join:2001-10-05 Rockville, MD
·Comcast
| Re: 5th principle said by TK Junk Mail :Consumers are free to take their business to another provider if the provider doesn't run their private business to the consumers liking. this presumes one has another provider to turn to. I only have one choice and that's comcast.
Leaving me with no option but to drop broadband or put up with their crippled offering. | |
|
 |  |   gheezer Compooters R Us Premium join:2002-12-20 Henrietta, NY
| Re: 5th principle Not to rain on your parade or anything like that, but a cable modem isn't considered an "End Point" of the Internet. I believe they're referring to the Public Peering Exchange Points. -- Join the NAVY, see the world....It's mostly water! | |
|
 |   packetscan Premium join:2004-10-19 Bridgeport, CT clubs: | Amen. When there is another choice. -- Who do you want to pay off today? | |
|
 |  Bass2nv
join:2001-01-19 Wyoming, MI | I'd love to actually have someone other than Comcast to go to. But since my other choices are SLOW 144/144 dsl or dialup. I'm pretty much stuck with Comcast. | |
|
 |  |  |
 |  |  |  fiberguy My views are my own. Premium join:2005-05-20
| Re: 5th principle said by mobnuke : Conca$t That's almost as cute as M$ ..... not.  | |
|
 |  |
 |   G_Poobah
join:2004-01-17 Schenectady, NY
| Why in the world would there be a rule like #5? That's a pointless rule, since if the ISP follows rules #1-4, then there should be no NEED for idea #5.
The only time rule #5 would apply, is if the provider doesn't follow rules #1-4.
The CORRECT rule #5 : If the provider fails to obey the first rule, then it should be banned from selling internet service, or advertising what they sell as internet access. Because if they don't follow #1-4, then they are NOT an ISP -- Sure the internet has lots of porn and piracy, but I'm sure there's a downside to it. | |
|
  i5050MbSoon Formerly TwoKDialup Premium join:2002-06-07 Coloma, MI | Yabbut... Since these "private" businesses are using "public" resources (terrestrial right-of-way or public airwaves), they should be subject to network neutrality regulations. It's a shame we have to legislate good business practices for some operators. | |
|
  rit56
join:2000-12-01 New York, NY | scorecard one company isn't very assuring. | |
|
 |  bmn ? ? ? Premium,ExMod 2003-06 join:2001-03-15 hiatus | Re: scorecard Well, the principles were only posted yesterday if the article date is correct... If there is only one provider on the list in six months then its time to worry. -- This space intentionally left blank. | |
|
 |  |   justncredible
@rr.com
| Re: scorecard They are idiots, they sound as if they have not built a decent network and are trying to sap bandwidth from other providers. They are just looking for a free handout. I would be worried if any company supports this, I would not work for them or invest in such a company. Wireless is crap anyways. | |
|
 |  |  |  bmn ? ? ? Premium,ExMod 2003-06 join:2001-03-15 hiatus
·Packet8
·Cox HSI
·AT&T Southeast
| Re: scorecard said by justncredible :
They are just looking for a free handout. Oookay... Yeah, that's what network neutrality is all about.  -- This space intentionally left blank. | |
|
 |  |  |  WirelessMajr Premium join:2005-08-03 College Place, WA
| So what you're saying is that commercial wireless service should not exist? And the laptop owners should all keep crowding hotspots, or using America's largest free wireless provider (linksys)?
I have to disagree with you. Wireless is here to stay, and it is not crap as you so claim. | |
|
 |  |  |   Unregistered user
@cofs.net | They're just trying to sap bandwidth from other providers? Wireless is crap? Exactly what are you talking about, and what does it have to do with network neutrality?
Oh, you don't have a clue what you're talking about. Never mind. | |
|
 |
|
 |