|
|
|
|
|
by freedomben
3127 days ago
|
|
I think you missed the point there wrt Google. > The most expensive part? Litigating the ability to share real estate on telephone poles with companies like AT&T and Comcast. This privilege granted to the ISP’s is granted by local government regulations. Thanks to these regulations, Google Fiber was only able to upgrade 33 of 88,000 telephone poles in Nashville. He/she is making the point that net neutrality addresses the symptom, not the cause. The cause is government regulation in the first place, so net neutrality is regulation to fix a problem created by regulation (not necessarily my position, but that's what I get from the author). |
|
Since there is virtually no competition in large parts of the world, it is very important to force the single monopoly to behave in the interest of the consumer with laws.
The regulations the author is talking about are not the same regulations that enforce net neutrality. Net neutrality has nothing to do with sharing telephone poles.