back to article Guess who's here to tell us we're all totally wrong about net neutrality? Of course, it's Comcast

Comcast has barreled into the fight over net neutrality by arguing that the current rules impose "onerous" regulations and "substantial costs that undermine investment." The filing [PDF] to the FCC – America's broadband watchdog – comes a day after internet giants Google, Facebook, Amazon and others argued through the Internet …

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Net neutrality is rubbish

    Demand nationalization of infrastructure, and breaking up all monopolies. Telcos and tech giants.

    Ban vertical integration. ISPs should not also be content providers, especially sports.

    1. Palpy

      Re: "Net neutrality is rubbish"... down with private fibre!

      Free the photons! And on copper, electrons want to be free!

      I do admire the concept of societal control of infrastructure which delivers societal benefits. But in capitalist societies, which do reap benefits compared to socialist ones, there is a tension between private and public ownership. Sometimes the tension is constructive, believe it or not.

      But when Comcast, a company ranking very high on the consumer-hatred scale, says "...that it will do all the things that the rules seek to impose voluntarily and willingly" one is inclined to think, "In a pig's unwiped arse you will, you pack of conniving price-gouging liars."

      (I apologize for being circumspect and mincing words, but children and the naive elderly may read this and I do not wish to offend.)

      I eagerly anticipate salvation from His Muskiness' plans (https://www.theverge.com/2017/5/4/15539934/spacex-satellite-internet-launch-2019) to use SpaceX!!! Internet!!! to blow Comcast's last-century ISP galleons out of the water with satellite connectivity.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Net neutrality is rubbish

      Demand nationalization of infrastructure, and breaking up all monopolies.

      Hate to break it to you but nationalisation is, by definition, the deliberate creation of a monopoly.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Net neutrality is rubbish

      I agree with all that except nationalization. Comcast needs competition, and in my area they're about to get it.

      I would hate to see Comcast go the way of Verizon DSL due to Title II regulation. Comcast is expensive and their customer service sucks, but they run a solid network and they fix problems promptly.

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Funny how Comcast invested billions despite net neutrality

    They're in the middle of a program of upgrading their plant nationwide to support DOCSIS 3 with end user speeds up to 1 gigabit. They didn't start on this after Trump was elected, but two years ago (right about the time the FCC made net neutrality the law of the land)

    AT&T claims that net neutrality didn't make a difference in their investment, so even if you believe Comcast then if you also believe AT&T you have to accept that this claim isn't something that can be assumed to be true, like Pai does. Some claim AT&T is only saying that because they're waiting for approval of their purchase of Time Warner, but speaking up for net neutrality is hardly the way to curry favor with a republican administration.

    I still think Title II was a stupid way to do this, but congressional inaction allowed no other way. Now that republicans control the congress and white house they have no excuse not to pass legislation to modernize telecommunications law. Oh wait, I forgot they're so incompetent they can't even pass something they've been promising voters since 2010, so I guess we shouldn't expect much on this front.

  3. jimdandy
    Windows

    Crusty Old Bast*rd says - Huh? D'ya mean that since we hae na choice but wha' the Crown gies us that we shouldna bitch and complain aboot it? Oot here in tha West, tis nae choice but tha (now nationally owned) prong o' the local lackey ta get our low-speed connexions. Now they intend to limit us to "shared" local wifi internet after we'd all been promised a nice fat pipe to tha hoose.

    If ah still ha' me teeth I'd bite the prong that feeds me. Instead Ah'm gonna erect a big one fer 'em; a giant antenna tha'll bring me direct broadcast TV and satellite Internet.

    F**k em.

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Translation

    "Onerous" regulations - "We can't do what we want to milk customers"

    "Substantial costs that undermine investment" - "It costs so much more not to put the content filtering and bandwidth-restricting hardware in place that to do so".

  5. handleoclast

    Never trust

    Never, ever trust any company which says "You don't need to introduce laws to make us do this because we're going to do this anyway."

    There are two reasons.

    1) If they really were going to do it anyway, then the law will make absolutely no difference to them. So they have absolutely no reason to oppose the law.

    2) If they really were going to do it anyway, then the law will prevent their competitors gaining unfair advantage by not doing it.

    So any company that says "Don't introduce a law because we'll do it voluntarily" is a bunch of lying, fucking arseholes who cannot be trusted. Don't do business with them unless you have no other option.

    1. Someone Else Silver badge
      Unhappy

      Re: Never trust

      So any company that says "Don't introduce a law because we'll do it voluntarily" is a bunch of lying, fucking arseholes who cannot be trusted. Don't do business with them unless you have no other option.

      From your accent, I believe you live on the East side of the Pond. If so, then you may not know that, here in the Colonies, if we have Comcast as the provider in a given area (which is my situation), we really have no other option.

  6. rfrovarp

    Aren't they the ones that throttled Netflix?

    Didn't Comcast throttle Netflix until Netflix coughed up more money a few years back?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Aren't they the ones that throttled Netflix?

      You mean when Netflix was overloading Comcast's network every evening and not paying Comcast a dime? I fail to see the fairness in that "neutrality".

      1. John Gamble

        Re: Aren't they the ones that throttled Netflix?

        Netflix wasn't overloading Comcast's network, Comcast's customers were overloading Comcast's network.

        Their customers will connect to popular things, that's just the way of it. If Comcast can't satisfy their customers, that's their lookout. Blaming Netflix is absurd.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Aren't they the ones that throttled Netflix?

          So Comcast throttled its customers' Netflix connections - possibly in an automatic net-neutral manner - until Netflix paid Comcast for routing priority?

          Netflix was THE bandwidth hog a few years ago, and still is one of the biggest hogs.

  7. Harry Stottle

    Does Net Neutrality correlate with Broadband Speeds?

    Honest question to which I suspect I can guess the answer but do not know.

    Where are the highest broadband speeds? The answer to that might be provided by posts like this

    The crucial question is whether any of those have retained or discarded net neutrality. My belief is that they've all retained it but I can't find sources to sustain that belief. If my conjecture is valid, why would anyone anywhere be arguing to discard neutrality? Why would even the greediest American capitalists not seek to emulate the success of their Asian exemplars?

    Or am I missing something?

  8. Someone Else Silver badge
    Pirate

    The "arguments" given by all the presenters tot he FCC are nothing but presenting lawyer-istic statements trying to protect their income streams, and get a leg-up on the competition. (Quite frankly, I trust Google, Faceplant, et al to be objective more than I trust Comcast...and I do not trust those knuckleheads at all.)

    But none of this matters, because Chairman Pai-hole has no allegiance to anybody but his paymaster...which would be the cable lobby (read: Comcast). I suspect that Comcast's presenting of this light-on-fact-but-heavy-on-bullshit tome was done at the behest of Pai himself (or one of his minions) so that he can take cover when he rules in favor of the fat-asses at the expense of the rest of the world.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020