The latest FCC plan to boost US broadband? Prevent competition in apartment blocks America's broadband watchdog, the FCC, has unveiled its latest harebrained effort to boost the availability of internet access across the nation: restrict competition. In a memo penned this week by the regulator's chairman Ajit Pai, the former Verizon lawyer said he would introduce a new proposal for "multiple tenant …
"developer cables building,"
But that's an added cost for the developer.
Trump is a developer.
Please note that I am simply making two unrelated comments and am not inferring anything by using them in such close proximity nor implying any form of syllogism.
Because he's almost unique in having no personal or professional scandals. He's too cozy with the cable companies, but that's pretty much par for the course regardless of administration. Obama's head of the FCC was a former cable lobbyist.
When Pai starts taking private jets for personal vacations, spends $30,000 on a desk or is accused of abusing his wife only then would he be on the same level as others Trump had or still has in his cabinet. By comparison he's the paragon of virtue, why would Trump get rid of his least controversial guy?
Why doesn't Idjit Pai do what a couple dozen other Drumpf appointees have done and bug out? I'm sure he could get a hellacious comp package from one of the telcos.
Because he's *already* working for the telcos, perhaps? He's their "inside man", so they can't have him leaving only to be replaced by someone who isn't beholden to them.
See title. Same with cable TV.
There's the problem with the whole "Cable-TV" infrastructure, isn't it? Back when cable-tv was first being rolled out in the late 70's-early/mid 80's, communities and counties granted *exclusive* coverage contracts to one and only one company. The smart thing would have been to grant contracts to at minimum TWO companies. So too bad if you couldn't have one company kicking back bribes to government officials, too bad if they couldn't build such outrageous profit margins that they could overrun the entire entertainment industry.
Seems Ajit Pai and his masters in the cable/telco industries miss their heyday of beligerent monopolism, and want to do all they can to bring it back. They just might do it, and destroy the internet in the process.
"...and destroy the internet in the process."
I think that will find that the internet is a bit more robust that you imagine. It was after all developed from a system designed to survive a nuclear war. (Arpanet)
In any case I think that your UScentic view is misplaced. There is a lot more to the internet than the FCC and the US.
I think that will find that the internet is a bit more robust that you imagine. It was after all developed from a system designed to survive a nuclear war. (Arpanet)
I think you severely missed the point. Doesn't matter whether the physical infrastructure survives, the a=content thereof is well on it's way to being destroyed, and anti-consumer regulation will contribute to that.
In any case I think that your UScentic view is misplaced. There is a lot more to the internet than the FCC and the US.
Yeah, we'll see how Article13 plays out for you folks...
I discussed this issue this morning with a near retirement age former colleague of mine, who is currently working as a property manager for an office building.
The issue is not that simple when you get to multi story buildings - its communications `backbone` so to speak. His specific building is over 35 years old, and has only the basic communications capability - land line telephones. The only way to get any internet access above dial up rates is through DSL. His employer will not pay to wire up the building, and nor are any local ISPs willing to run service into the building, drilling through fire walls and fire stopped floors to reach a tenant on an upper floor, unless the tenant pays for those installation costs, or sign on to a fixed term contract that provides for termination fees in the event of early cancellation (recovering those `costs`).
His employer is adamant - `We won't pay for that.`, and they wonder why once tenants' leases are up, they move on; resulting ever increasing vacancy ratios. He, despite his age, recognizes that 21st century communications infrastructure is an absolute must. And they have seen it every year as more and more tenants depart. He can't wait to retire, he just hopes that there is still a company to retire from, and not be put out of work because the company went bankrupt. And that is exactly what the ownership is doing.
>The only way to get any internet access above dial up rates is through DSL. His employer will not pay to wire up the building ... drilling through fire walls and fire stopped floors to reach a tenant on an upper floor ...
You can (rules & regulations permitting) installl cabling on the outside of a building. In todays world you could probably install a line-of-sight link between ground floor and upper floors - technically not cabling/wiring...
@Fatman
Sadly (for you at least), I can tell you don't live in a decent sized (for audience pool) condo in Toronto. Where I live, the building was originally established with cable. The cable's still there if you're mad enough to want it. However, at least two companies are now also in the building offering fiber to the apartment. Both of them came in at their own expense and established infrastructure as needed. If Apartment A has Company 1 fiber, and Apartment B next door has Company 2? Well, no big - two strands of string down the hall in the ceiling voidspace. I know at least one of those companies does not require a fixed term contract, because I'm with them - 250 Mbs symetric uncapped, for C$50 a month. I could have 1Gbps for C$100 if I needed it. Oh - and because I asked, they give me a naked transducer so I can run my own firewall/ routing. If I wanted to get really paranoid I could have both of them run a line to me and have failover.
Ah yes. But that's Canada - so behind them times compared to the US, right?
Somewhere in history the definition of "free" has been changed. The idea behind "land of the free" isn't about having the ability to pick whichever company you want to so you can binge-watch your favorite show.
The pursuit of happiness is about having the option to pursue it, not a right to a government-supplied happiness. And that's without even getting into the what the founders meant by happiness.
We in the UK are in no position to gloat. And with the ERG wanting to strip our rights to align with American business interests, and our moronic citizens voting for it...
And the tory members prefering a UK break-up than damaging their party (though how they think their party would survive a breakup is beyond me)
Pai is a horrible corporate tool, but I'd rather crappy internet to the things that wll happen to us if brexit isn't stopped.
This post has been deleted by its author
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2023
