Has the sky not fallen yet? I thought we'd all be paying per web site or something now, wasn't that the FUD going around?
You’re not forced to do business with AT&T. You’re free to conduct business with Verizon, Sprint, T-Mobile, Virgin, Cricket, Boost Mobile, or any other wireless carrier.
People and companies do evolve over time and let’s also look at as far as myself as a Consumer if I don’t like the crap that a company is giving me then I can go elsewhere.
So if there are folks still upset over the FaceTime mobile share stuff then why even switch to a mobile share plan? Port your numbers out to a carrier that doesn’t have such a requirement.
However if you choose to put up with it then you put up with it.
Let’s not act like the other carriers are innocent either then. Also there are two masters a company have to serve its customers and it’s shareholders.
So consumer friendly and shareholder return rarely mix and that is where horns are locked.
Has the sky not fallen yet? I thought we'd all be paying per web site or something now, wasn't that the FUD going around?
You do understand that this is about the ISP end right? And in many places you get the choice of AT&T or nothing. Sorry, but until that is resolved, this will continue to be a problem.You’re not forced to do business with AT&T. You’re free to conduct business with Verizon, Sprint, T-Mobile, Virgin, Cricket, Boost Mobile, or any other wireless carrier. The government changes and every 4-8 years (yes it can stay blue or red longer but in recent memory it is more or less back and forth). We all obviously didn’t vote for the same candidate-so why should any of us be forced to toe the line? Or in other words why should every facet of my life be flipped depending on “who’s in power”? A more educated and free populace is more important than just being ignorant, controlled and regulated. If any company wants to hold itself to the net neutrality standards or similarly the Paris Accord, good for them. Use that as a selling/marketing point. Feel free to educate and persuade as opposed to force and ignorance.
For all the hate already in this thread-see if AT&T lives up to it, if they do great, if not you have several other carriers to vote with your wallet.
i don’t have a choice. google gave up bringing fiber to my area because of relentless legal action by at&t. there is no competition here. i have the luxury of having a choice with carriers, but some places aren’t that fortunate
You do understand that this is about the ISP end right? And in many places you get the choice of AT&T or nothing. Sorry, but until that is resolved, this will continue to be a problem.
Yes, open for some and even more open for others. No reason to waste our time scrutinizing the “minimal” differences because AT&T will have our back...kinda.Yes, he agrees with an open internet. You'll just have to pay to get faster access. Still 'open' though.
These are big companies, used to moving slowly. They will raise the temperature gradually until most people don't realize that they're boiling. It starts with zero-rating in-house (or partner) services anti-competitively--or charging competitor services for access to their network--or replacing not-found DNS-searches with sh!tty portal results--or spying on your traffic and selling that data to advertisers. We haven't seen how far the public will let it go before there are political consequences.
I have a t-shirt that says, "If you say 'GULLIBLE' slowly enough, it sounds like ORANGES."If you believe AT&T, then look! 'Gullible' is written on the ceiling...
Would net neutrality change that scenario? Would google fiber sprout up all over? Take over Comcast, and other big ISP’s? Did any of that happen when net neutrality was being enforced?
Net neutrality wasn’t designed to solve the issues you are both describing.
You’re not forced to do business with AT&T. You’re free to conduct business with Verizon, Sprint, T-Mobile, Virgin, Cricket, Boost Mobile, or any other wireless carrier. The government changes and every 4-8 years (yes it can stay blue or red longer but in recent memory it is more or less back and forth). We all obviously didn’t vote for the same candidate-so why should any of us be forced to toe the line? Or in other words why should every facet of my life be flipped depending on “who’s in power”? A more educated and free populace is more important than just being ignorant, controlled and regulated. If any company wants to hold itself to the net neutrality standards or similarly the Paris Accord, good for them. Use that as a selling/marketing point. Feel free to educate and persuade as opposed to force and ignorance.
For all the hate already in this thread-see if AT&T lives up to it, if they do great, if not you have several other carriers to vote with your wallet.
Would net neutrality change that scenario? Would google fiber sprout up all over? Take over Comcast, and other big ISP’s? Did any of that happen when net neutrality was being enforced?
Net neutrality wasn’t designed to solve the issues you are both describing.
That is actually not a violation of net neutrality, so long as they allow ANY service that is willing to meet their terms to be a part of it and so long as the terms are the same for all companies.Well AT&T is the only cell carrier I haven't seen attacking net neutrality. Meanwhile Verizon and T-Mobile have been doing it blatantly with video sites, even when the law was in place.
That is actually not a violation of net neutrality, so long as they allow ANY service that is willing to meet their terms to be a part of it and so long as the terms are the same for all companies.
What net neutrality prohibits is saying Company X must pay $10 per GB of data streamed while Company Y must pay $30 per GB.
They can say that video/music/etc. won't count against a data cap, again as long as the rules are applied uniformly to all.
It's not all video. With T-Mobile, it was specific sites like YouTube that got the special deal. With Verizon, same but with throttling.That is actually not a violation of net neutrality, so long as they allow ANY service that is willing to meet their terms to be a part of it and so long as the terms are the same for all companies.
What net neutrality prohibits is saying Company X must pay $10 per GB of data streamed while Company Y must pay $30 per GB.
They can say that video/music/etc. won't count against a data cap, again as long as the rules are applied uniformly to all.
I am no expert in colors, but I believe it would sound like "I'm Peach"I have a t-shirt that says, "If you say 'GULLIBLE' slowly enough, it sounds like ORANGES."
According to the article, it appears the wolf is saying they have no intention of eating the chickens, but you still need to build a fence cause there are other wolves out there who might not be as friendly.So the wolf is saying they have no intention of eating the chickens, so no need to build a fence.
Riiighhht....
It will stay that way until (1) people start voting in higher proportions and (2) they educate themselves before casting their vote.
No, it will stay that way, period. All you are describing is a different kind of tyranny of the majority.
Read your Spooner, read your de Tocqueville.