Verizon throttles Californian fire departments during wildfires
...
Honestly I hate hardware/networking shit but one of my coworkers claimed that there is literally no physical or technical reason for throttling and it is all just profiteering. Does anyone know if this shit is true?
Maybe if Verizon has a little office fire the local fire department should "throttle" them for extra cash before putting the fire out.
That would be illegal for the fire department to do that.
Shouldn't this be a good reason for an antitrust case? Massive monopolistic corporation uses power against public interest?
Based private corporation sticking it to the publicly-funded SOROScialist firefighters.
American telecoms are largely protected from regulatory action by the federal government in exchange for their cooperation in domestic surveillance activities.
I bet you guys are not even gonna comment on all the mom and pop ISPs that begin popping up and solving this issue once NN is phased out proper?
Government under capitalism exists to reinforce capitalism. Also
lol
Is this a troll attempt or just a burger who doesn't understand capitalism or communism.
When I was in high school I unironically thought that symbiosis between oligopolies and politicians = gommunism :DD God was I retarded back then
Isn't that unironically fascism?
It's Corporatism, not necessarily a Fascist one.
Hello, just your friendly reminder that corporatism is the natural byproduct of capitalism.
Please proceed and have a wonderful evening.
based and redpilled
what do you think?
...
There isn't any reason. We don't have this shit here in my part of Europe and everybody has access to broadband high speeds internet.
It was a shitpost (by me)
But the whole "Mom and Pop ISPs" bit was a legit lolberg / goverment talking point to justify getting rid of NN
Romania?
No, more to the west, but Romania has even lower prices for awesome speeds, yes.
This is similar to how during 9/11 Starbucks charged Rescue Workers $130 for water.
What are you talking about nigger literally no-one is celebrating this, we were against this kind of predatory shit before you even realised you were a pedo
Goddamnit user I replied seriously, Poe's law and all that
California is a liberal hell hole with no revolutionary potential so who cares.
lol
neither is a flyover state where a sizeable chunk of people are functionally illiterate.
Is liberal corporatism any better than a fascist one?
The government isn't going to stop protecting these corrupt corporations now that they're designing more communications policy around the old telecoms' whims. Comcast, Verizon, etc. are highly anti-competitive to criminal extents - and these guys were almost the only ones supporting an end to net neutrality. When the smoke clears, they'll still have monopolies and the money to curbstomp any competitors who put their resources into providing better service.
NATIONALIZE THE INTERNET
this is the brize of fredumb :-DDD
Better than my father, he believes that and he's 60.
It's important expose flaws with the system, and this is one of them.
This, but unironically.
you need a proper, technical solution, that is resistant to censorship and monitoring from both corporations and the government. if you do it incorrectly, you'll fuck everything up and probably make things worse. who wants verizon, at&t, comcast et al. to be simply handed over to the CIA & NSA's direct control?
the government should provide startup loans to municipalities to create decentralized mesh network utility cooperatives to compete with the private ISPs
Companies already hand over data to the gov, no questions asked. And the way the internet as of currently works you need big servers. To have a decentralized network you'd need a radically different type of web akin to torrent programs, which would mean no instant a to b connection. i highly doubt most people would have a use for a internet without instant messaging, live transmissions and increasing the amount of uploading, which is a far heavier process than downloading.
Tell me more.
I've heard some about decentralized networks - as is they would be difficult, but they could be necessary (at least in the immediate). Not really necessary to start from a standpoint of commercial appeal - developing this would be incredibly useful, especially entering into a potentially very dire era for information.
Between network security, speed, and decentralization you can only choose two. You can have security and speed but you need to verify all the members in some way like with a private network, you can have speed and decentralization but your information exposed like with torrents, or you can have decentralization and security at the cost of speed like with Tor.
For secure communications you could sacrifice speed but that means very limited media sharing in a world that's addicted to it.
Like it's not controlled by the NSA and CIA already? Are you living under a rock?
why'd you omit the last part of the quote? attacking a straw man
Oh nevermind then :^)
