[rottencupcakes]

When did our culture shift to this point that everyone puts their problems on the government?

Everyone complains about Apple's closed iPhone ecosystem, then pesters the government to condone jailbreaking and unlocking, which go against the iPhone's terms of service.

Comcast is caught throttling bittorent, and instead of switching providers to satellite or Verizon or anything, everything goes to the government and demands regulation on net neutrality.

Since when did it become the american standard to complain to the government when you don't agree with the terms of service instead of just doing it the old fashioned way and speaking with your money? If high speed internet is so important to you and Comcast is the only carrier in your area, then you are at their mercy - they paid money to expand their service to your region and service you - you don't get to demand that they service you in the most favorable way.

Everyone wants to have their cake and eat it to, and appealing to legislation just seems wrong.

P.S. If you disagree with me and believe that legislation limiting the contacts that can be signed between two parties is necessary, please reply and explain why instead of downvoting an alternate point of view. This isn't reddit.

[SamReidHughes]

> If you disagree with me and believe that legislation limiting the contacts that can be signed between two parties is necessary, please reply and explain why instead of downvoting an alternate point of view.

It's perfectly legimate to downvote people who post without thinking. If you want criticisms of anarcho-capitalism, go find them on Wikipedia. The article was not about the problems you have with human behavior.

[huangm]

There is a big difference between believing that government ought not be involved in certain things and believing in anarcho-capitalism. Your comment seems to be just unnecessary adhominem. If you disagree with the parent, then why not provide a reasoned response that would be more likely to convince?

[dmnd]

> If high speed internet is so important to you and Comcast is the only carrier in your area

This is usually due to a local monopoly having been granted by local government. I think contracts between corporations and government that have the result of reducing competition in the marketplace should be legislated against.

Take a look at the competition that exists between ISPs in places like Europe or Australia to see how it could be. Capitalism works best when competition exists. Obviously it's in the best interest of corporations to attempt to reduce competition in their industry. That doesn't mean they should be free to do so.

[jimbokun]

"I think contracts between corporations and government that have the result of reducing competition in the marketplace should be legislated against."

Or just not legislated into existence in the first place, would have been a good start. But now we need more legislation to undo the damage of the monopoly granting legislation.

So it's not so simple as blaming it on just government or just corporations. It is the collusion of large corporations and government eliminating competition that is the real problem.

[rottencupcakes]

If your local government granted them a local monopoly without negotiating these terms, then that is a local issue.

Why this has to be addressed at a federal level is unbeknown to me.

[leviathant]

"Comcast is caught throttling bittorent, and instead of switching providers to satellite or Verizon or anything, everything goes to the government and demands regulation on net neutrality."

I live in Philadelphia, where the tallest building in the city is the Comcast Center. It's going to be years, if not a decade before I can get FiOS here. The reason Comcast is the only carrier in my area is a result of taking government out of the equation. The big telecom companies don't give back to the government that gives them the tax breaks and concessions that allowed them to become big companies in the first place. At every opportunity they get, they seek to undercut the very country that makes their existence possible.

Take Comcast for example. In Pennsylvania, we have special zoning for dilapidated parts of cities and towns that are designed to encourage renewal - Keystone Opportunity Zones. Google 'em for more detail, but essentially, businesses in a KOZ don't have to pay state or local taxes.

When Comcast announced it was building their HQ in center city Philly (which, despite the piss smell, is hardly dilapidated) they lobbied HARD to get the zoning changed on their plot of land to a KOZ so that they wouldn't have to pay state or local taxes. Sure, they're bringing in jobs, and those people are taking trains into the city and driving cars into the city, and roads and train tracks totally just maintain themselves.

I don't give 'government' a free pass, but I absolutely lean toward government - an entity that arose to further civilization, believe it or not - over corporation, which is entirely selfish. Both can do good and bad, both can be abused.

. . . . . . . My own experience and why I'm pro net-neutrality:

For the first few months that I lived in the city, Hulu was a stuttering mess. We have cable internet, which wasn't as fast as the FiOS we had in the suburbs (which was both faster and cheaper), but was by no means so slow that Hulu should have to buffer. YouTube worked fine. Downloads were fine, but Hulu? Couldn't get through a half hour show without three or four pauses to buffer.

It took a number of complaints to Comcast, and maybe it had something to do with me whinging on my twitter account with the 8000 followers, but after a number of phone calls, Hulu suddenly worked fine.

I can't stand watching cable television, our entertainment center is a Dell Zino HD hooked up to a wall mounted LCD, and we watch Hulu and Netflix almost exclusively. Do you think Comcast are sitting on their thumbs while Hulu eats their lunch? It's not like I can get anything else decent in the city.

If they can get away with crap like that, they will. That is why outside regulation needs to step in.

[orangecat]

then pesters the government to condone jailbreaking and unlocking

More specifically, "pestering" the government for an exemption to a horrible law that they created. I absolutely want less government involvement in matters like that; we can start by repealing the DMCA.

[peterwwillis]

the case in question involves limited licensed spectrums and companies which have legal monopolies over who can use their network and how. it's like bellsouth requiring you to use an Apple for broadband and comcast requiring Microsoft. it's anti-competitive and unfair to both consumers and any company that may want to compete due to the harsh cost of either entering the market or for a consumer to pay for the expensive new devices or contracts. considering this is the most ubiquitous method of communication in the nation (and probably the world) this is something every government should regulate.

[colinprince]

-1 for trying to influence downvoting and for gratuitous reddit reference.

Let your words stand by themselves.

[CamperBob]

P.S. If you disagree with me and believe that legislation limiting the contacts that can be signed between two parties is necessary, please reply and explain why instead of downvoting an alternate point of view. This isn't reddit.

You're being downvoted because you evidently haven't spent five minutes thinking through your position.

The fact is, the minute that Comcast's cable leaves my property line, it's a government matter. If they don't want government interference, then they can figure out a way to provide service without using public land, public monopolies, and public tax breaks.