HardOCP News
[H] News
- Joined
- Dec 31, 1969
- Messages
- 0
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
So AT&T is asking their friends and family to oppose net neutrality? I wonder what would happen if they refused?
I trust the government less then private companies like Comcast to provide my Internet access. (which is sad since Comcast sucks) Plus this current government's number one enemy seems to be any dissenting voices. Nothing like them having control of the Internet.....
Yeah this reminds me of some other similar news story where a corp asked employees to oppose legislation that wasn't in their favor. I thought it was illegal to do so somehow? Maybe it's that Wellpoint story posted just above.
YEAH! It's Obama's fault. Wait...........what we talking about?
I think he said Government, let me check, YES HE DID? Why do you bring Obama out? I don't understand. Please explain? Unless you think Obama IS the Government and we don't need anyone else.
Verizon owns the pipes to the internet. EVERYBODY leases those lines from them. If there is a company that you should be scared of over net neutrality, it is them.
It's a travesty of a mockery of a sham of a mockery of a travesty of two mockeries of a sham.
If Verizon ever tries to take advantage of that monopoly, don't you think the Gov will step in and do something? They sure were quick to protect us from Internet Explorer
Just ask Bell Telephone what happens if you take advantage of a monopoly . . . oh wait, you'd have to ask the baby Bells now .
If Verizon ever tries to take advantage of that monopoly, don't you think the Gov will step in and do something? They sure were quick to protect us from Internet Explorer
DragonMantis said:How many of us believe that a government bureaucracy is the way to attain this? Taking control from the private sector and giving it to government who is going to turn access into a mandate and regulate the companies that provide it. What it should do it get out of the way and help foster availability of multiple channels to the internet in more areas. Then let the private competition put pressure on companies to do the right thing. After all, if you have multiple access options and one player restricts you, you can change providers. If the government controls anything, there is no second option when the government decides that fair and open access requires something akin to the broadcast fairness doctrine -- and administration officials have indicated their support for regulations that amount to this.
AT&T can suck a fat one as far as I'm concerned. I do believe that we need some of this government regulation as corporations WILL not have their customers rights and freedoms as a driving force in their decisions. A Verizon employee that I know has already expressed that the company has an interest in creating a "premium"internet where you pay for faster speeds to certain content, metered by them of course.
Just ask Bell Telephone what happens if you take advantage of a monopoly . . . oh wait, you'd have to ask the baby Bells now .
Are there any more Baby Bells or did they all re-merge to get more powerful than ever?