[TuringNYC]

Yes, but it seems intellectually dishonest to go after big tech (where, often, the "product" is free) yet avoid going after -- say -- big telco or big cable or big pharma -- where you come out of a retail store feeling disgusting because you got ripped off so badly.

By ripped off, I dont mean, I over-spent, but rather I was forced into buying something due to having only a single choice, while not even knowing the ultimate price I will pay.

Where I live in the US -- there is ONE and only ONE broadband provider. If you ask for the price, they give you the three month promotion price. If you press them really hard, you get the ultimate non-promotional price. Then you get the bill and there is a "wire fee", "regulatory recovery fee", "line charge" and all manner of all surprise charges that you didn't agree to except in some blank-check-fine-print fashion.

Say what you might about privacy etc, but my immediate, acute pains are with real monopolies like my broadband provider -- not with which free photo sharing app I need to use

[ceejayoz]

It's intellectually dishonest to pretend Warren isn't going after the telcos and pharma too.

Telecom: https://www.wired.com/story/elizabeth-warren-unveils-plan-ex...

Pharma: https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/kzvy4w/elizabeth-warren-i...

Warren's entire shtick is having a plan for pretty much everything.

[dralley]

>Yes, but it seems intellectually dishonest to go after big tech (where, often, the "product" is free) yet avoid going after -- say -- big telco or big cable or big pharma -- where you come out of a retail store feeling disgusting because you got ripped off so badly.

You must be living under a very heavy rock if you don't think she's going after pharma and telco companies. She spent half of the last debate ripping on pharma companies.

[thwythwy]

She put out her broadband plan last week. The lack of competition in your area of the U.S. must have prevented you from loading this webpage: https://www.wired.com/story/elizabeth-warren-unveils-plan-ex...

[TuringNYC]

I read the entire wired article, the article is about expanding broadband access to areas which dont have broadband. A worthy exercise...but that is different from:

1. Applying her [awesome] CFPB approach to telco where you cant just spring mystery charges post-hoc and hang customers on a contract they didn't agree to.

2. Allowing multiple broadband providers to compete

[thwythwy]

She also proposes to strike down state laws that prohibit municipal broadband options, and I'm shocked at this point that you're standing by your original comment that she's only regulating Big Tech. https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/mbmjja/elizabeth-warren-p...

[ceejayoz]

1. The CFPB already tackles that. https://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/newsroom/cfpb-takes...

2. A number of items that would help with that are included in the article. Changes to utility pole ownership, encouraging municipal broadband alternatives, etc.

[ionforce]

Does anyone care about intellectual dishonesty? I mean look what has happened to this country.