Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: WisconsinRep

I would add that this doesn’t go far enough.

In too many cities, the local administration has entered into agreements with a single provider for Internet service.

For instance, when I lived in Lee’s Summit, MO, my option for cable was Time Warner. No other cable providers were allowed to service my area. And DLS wasn’t an option, as I was too far from the CO, and the city wouldn’t allow AT&T to upgrade their lines to U-Verse.

A friend lives in another suburb of KC, and her only option is Comcast. Again, AT&T isn’t an option.

A problem for both of us is we’re limited to terrestrial Internet. Satellite isn’t an option with most VPNs, due to latency.

The feds also need to extend “net-neutrality” all the way to the customer, due to the government mandated monopoly.

Mark


9 posted on 12/15/2017 12:22:21 PM PST by MarkL (Do I really look like a guy with a plan?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: MarkL

The problem is that telecom services are a natural monopoly. It makes no economic sense to have competing fiber builds or whatever.


14 posted on 12/15/2017 12:32:22 PM PST by socalgop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson