« prev   random   next »

1
1

Bernie unveils "high-speed internet for all" plan...

By SunnyvaleCA follow SunnyvaleCA   2019 Dec 6, 10:54am 914 views   17 comments   watch   nsfw   quote   share    


https://berniesanders.com/issues/high-speed-internet-all/

Article starts off with fairly reasonable-sounding and noble goals. Maybe similar to programs that pushed electricity, water, and telephone service to under-served / poor communities.
High-speed internet service must be treated as the new electricity — a public utility that everyone deserves as a basic human right. And getting online at home, at school, or at work shouldn’t involve long waits, frustrating phone calls, and complex contracts and fees meant to trap and trick consumers. It should just work.


And then we get some details...
It’s time to take this critical 21st century utility out of the hands of monopolies and conglomerates and bring it to the people while creating good-paying, union jobs at the same time.
...
Condition grants on strong labor, wage and sourcing standards to ensure that federal funding goes toward creating good-paying union jobs. Ensure all funded projects cannot subcontract work to evade labor law through the Workplace Democracy Plan.
So it's a "jobs program" for unions and work is conditioned of being only for special people who have special labor rules.


The situation is even worse for under-resourced groups, communities of color, Native Americans, and people with disabilities.
...
Set aside $7.5 billion of this funding to expand high-speed broadband in Indian Country and fully resource the FCC’s Office of Native Affairs and Policy.
Isn't the whole idea of setting aside parts of the country for "native peoples of North America" is that they can continue to live a stone-age lifestyle? If they want to enter the 17th century 21st century, they should integrate with society.


But what will it cost us, Bernie?

Provide $150 billion through the Green New Deal in infrastructure grants and technical assistance for municipalities and/or states to build publicly owned and democratically controlled, co-operative, or open access broadband networks.
This is but an estimate for a single part of his plan. Of course the actual cost will be much higher, the goals will not quite be reached, and there will be other huge additional payments for other aspects.

What, if anything should the federal government's roll in high-speed internet be? I'll grant that the service lends itself to monopolies and anti-competitive behavior. My part of Sunnyvale has only a single provider; there's no fiber or DSL, just Comcast.

Some discussion questions:
• Maybe the federal government should employ some anti-trust action, help to stimulate competition, and let the private companies vie for customers.
• As for lowering costs, perhaps there could be some law that forbids ISPs from writing contracts that don't allow you to share your service with neighbors (especially in apartment buildings). If you pay for service, you can use it any way you want.
1   Ceffer   ignore (4)   2019 Dec 6, 11:13am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

This is wonderful news for drug dealers, pimps, and crowd sourcing criminals! Yay, Bernie!
2   zzyzzx   ignore (2)   2019 Dec 6, 11:37am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

SunnyvaleCA says
while creating good-paying, union jobs


How is that supposed to reduce the cost to the consumer?
3   zzyzzx   ignore (2)   2019 Dec 6, 11:38am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

SunnyvaleCA says
As for lowering costs, perhaps there could be some law that forbids ISPs from writing contracts that don't allow you to share your service with neighbors (especially in apartment buildings). If you pay for service, you can use it any way you want.


What is preventing you from doing that now?
4   zzyzzx   ignore (2)   2019 Dec 6, 12:07pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

Tim Aurora says
Broadband over powerline (BPL) is a internet service type where customers get high-speed internet connections through their standard electrical outlets. Users simply plug a power line modem into any socket and there is no need for additional special wiring.


Is this proven technology in use anywhere?
I doubt it, because the internet signal isn't going to make it past the first transformer (I think).
5   NoCoupForYou   ignore (2)   2019 Dec 6, 12:10pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

Yay! Instagram and Snapchat hos need to stay in touch and be able to stream dildo insertions for tokens at high speeds.

Don't forget to pay taxes on your peep sales!

Da guvermint ought to give me muh freee shit.
Wait, I gotta pay taxes on my can shows? Dat shit ain't right. Dats muh money!

Helpful guide for independent contractors:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/ttlc.intuit.com/community/taxes/discussion/how-do-i-file-taxes-for-independent-webcam-modeling-in-which-i-did-not-work-for-a-website-no-1099-or/00/518610/amp
6   Goran_K   ignore (3)   2019 Dec 6, 12:16pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

I wish Bernie got helped at a socialized healthcare hospital in Venezuela when he had his heart attack. I really do.
7   APOCALYPSEFUCKisShostakovitch   ignore (55)   2019 Dec 6, 12:32pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

You don't need a plan

You just need to outlaw monopoly deals like Comcast manipulates cities into establishing totally fucking the locals and eliminating competition.

That gone, most cities are in good shape.

Rural areas? Sure, let's put some beer and pencils in the hands of the Army Corps of Engineers and figure it out.
8   SunnyvaleCA   ignore (1)   2019 Dec 6, 2:00pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

zzyzzx says
SunnyvaleCA says
As for lowering costs, perhaps there could be some law that forbids ISPs from writing contracts that don't allow you to share your service with neighbors (especially in apartment buildings). If you pay for service, you can use it any way you want.


What is preventing you from doing that now?
I do, but it's a violation of the terms of service.
9   FuckCCP89   ignore (6)   2019 Dec 6, 2:03pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

zzyzzx says
SunnyvaleCA says
As for lowering costs, perhaps there could be some law that forbids ISPs from writing contracts that don't allow you to share your service with neighbors (especially in apartment buildings). If you pay for service, you can use it any way you want.


What is preventing you from doing that now?


The last thing I would want is to be involved into FBI investigation when somebody downloads (or uploads) some pedo shit over the connection with my name on the account.
10   SunnyvaleCA   ignore (1)   2019 Dec 6, 2:05pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

OccasionalCortex says
zzyzzx says
Is this proven technology in use anywhere?
I doubt it, because the internet signal isn't going to make it past the first transformer (I think).


It has its issues and will require major investment to do. Plus, the power company will be in control of the entire thing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadband_over_power_lines
I think fiber optic would be the way to go. It should be pretty easy to string up on existing power lines in residential areas. You could probably also take down and recycle all the 20th-century phone lines and copper cable TV lines as you go.
11   WookieMan   ignore (5)   2019 Dec 6, 3:15pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

Liberal_in_blackface says
The last thing I would want is to be involved into FBI investigation when somebody downloads (or uploads) some pedo shit over the connection with my name on the account.

Yup X10. I don't even like having a guest network and allowing people on it. My former employer would incentive potential tenants with free internet all the time. I'm not sure the damages, but he got fucked by one of his tenant stealing movies. Didn't cause long term harm, but it was one of those ISP attorneys that get the info on what was stolen and send the letter to the account holder. Basically settle for $1k or go to court and lose and pay $20k. It's a scam, but totally legal. Fuck attorneys. (although my old boss deserved it, lol).
12   Shaman   ignore (2)   2019 Dec 6, 4:12pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

Liberal_in_blackface says
The last thing I would want is to be involved into FBI investigation when somebody downloads (or uploads) some pedo shit over the connection with my name on the account.


And not just that! A far more likely and infinitely more pesky problem will arise when someone uses your ISP to pirate some music or movies and your cable company cancels your account.
13   theoakman   ignore (0)   2019 Dec 6, 4:55pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

WookieMan says
Liberal_in_blackface says
The last thing I would want is to be involved into FBI investigation when somebody downloads (or uploads) some pedo shit over the connection with my name on the account.

Yup X10. I don't even like having a guest network and allowing people on it. My former employer would incentive potential tenants with free internet all the time. I'm not sure the damages, but he got fucked by one of his tenant stealing movies. Didn't cause long term harm, but it was one of those ISP attorneys that get the info on what was stolen and send the letter to the account holder. Basically settle for $1k or go to court and lose and pay $20k. It's a scam, but totally legal. Fuck attorneys. (although my old boss deserved it, lol).


Decades ago, we had a descrambler to get all the PPV movies and events for free. At one point, the company most have sold their list to the cable company and the cable company was threatening us with a lawsuit. They said we could settle out for $10k. We told them to go F themselves. They never followed through with their threats.
14   Karloff   ignore (0)   2019 Dec 6, 5:17pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

Buying votes with other people's money. Doesn't this maneuver ever get old?

It's come to the point where I believe people who have a negative financial balance with the system (meaning they receive more in government aid than they put in) should be ineligible to vote. That's the only way we'll ever put a stop to people voting for more handouts that others are forced to pay for with the threat of violence.

The only problem with such a system is that it encourages the establishment to put as many people into poverty situations as possible to take them out of the voting pool which means there are fewer voters to pander to.
15   Onvacation   ignore (6)   2019 Dec 6, 5:33pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

Karloff says

It's come to the point where I believe people who have a negative financial balance with the system (meaning they receive more in government aid than they put in) should be ineligible to vote. That's the only way we'll ever put a stop to people voting for more handouts that others are forced to pay for with the threat of violence.

Agreed!

"When the people find that they can vote themselves money that will herald the end of the republic."
Benjamin Franklin

I fear we are almost there.
16   TrumpingTits   ignore (4)   2019 Dec 6, 7:27pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

Karloff says
It's come to the point where I believe people who have a negative financial balance with the system (meaning they receive more in government aid than they put in) should be ineligible to vote


That's how it was when the Republic was formed. In order to vote you either had to own property or a business with a certain net worth.

It was property/business owners who paid the taxes, see. The direct ones, that is.
17   SunnyvaleCA   ignore (1)   2019 Dec 6, 10:53pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag      

Liberal_in_blackface says
zzyzzx says
SunnyvaleCA says
As for lowering costs, perhaps there could be some law that forbids ISPs from writing contracts that don't allow you to share your service with neighbors (especially in apartment buildings). If you pay for service, you can use it any way you want.


What is preventing you from doing that now?


The last thing I would want is to be involved into FBI investigation when somebody downloads (or uploads) some pedo shit over the connection with my name on the account.

Maybe fixing that should be part of legislative changes: IP owners have to prove, specifically, the person that is sharing content; they can't just go after the provider.

about   best comments   contact   one year ago   suggestions