Regarding Comcast Et Al

My nephew beat me to blogging about the Comcast misbehavior, which turned out to have greater implications than merely crippling BitTorrent.  Sitting in my queue of links waiting to become posts I had perhaps the best explanation, Comcast Is Pretending to be You, from Susan Crawford.  More recently I added a link regarding the Comcast lawsuits we can expect as a result of this.

See, here’s an example of how my posting goes sometimes.  My original link gathering started when the Comcast scandal broke.  The above part of this post was written a few days ago.  Now, needing something to post this morning, I attempt to complete my thoughts as best I can recall them.  Actually, I recall them without issue, since I have been saying the same basic thing since cable TV first came into vogue.

First, companies like Comcast should never have been granted town by town monopolies on their original and primary product.  That was one of the most absurd, local tinpot circuses ever.  (Pause to go help Sadie with a potty issue and get new coffee, during which I realized I could simply have posted about peanut butter and/or diapers.)

The thing about that is that the government set things up a certain way and bestowed certain advantages, and therefore gets to poke into how they conduct business from there.  That shouldn’t be, but neither should any of the other regulation or granting of monopoly status in any line of business.

I haven’t been able to confirm it, looking online, but I’m told that in some local towns, including Halifax, the original cable provider (Campbell?) agreement precluded anyone but them from providing broadband.  Now that the company operating under those terms is Comcast, you have a choice of Comcast or dialup.  No DSL.  No FiOS.  Until and unless a pending FCC ruling comes into play and covers whole towns, not just apartments and associations.  Again, I have been told this but not confirmed it.

If that is true, it’s especially wrong, and makes Comcast’s tampering with what should be unadulerated connectivity even worse.

I never quite decided what to think of net neutrality.  To me, a connection is a connection is a connection, and if it’s impeded or tiered, maybe that’s not “the Internet” anymore.  However, given the presence of plenty of competition and alternatives that are easy to switch between, finding and switching to an ISP that doesn’t tier or block, or doesn’t tier or block in a way that bothers you specifically, should be no problem.  The revenue stream from charging for better connectiivity for some things might even help strengthen and encourage competition and robust infrastructure in a commoditized world.

Oh wait!  I was hallucinating that there was a free and unfettered market in internet connectivity.  Silly me.

Since there’s not, one can hardly be blamed for wanting to take government intrusion into the business - with an unusual government genesis, making it at least seem differently meddleworthy - to a new level and demand neutrality and - ahem - no blockage.  Assuming such blockage, at least as implemented by Comcast, doesn’t already violate what it means to be “Internet” in an actionable sort of way.

My point, to cut to it since I need to get in the shower and get on the road so I can be back in time for it to be Halloween, is that the ideal arrangement is for there to be no control.  We aren’t communists.  Let a thousand ISPs bloom.  If Comcast screws with you, then there should be nothing to stop you from going to one of the several other cable or DSL or fiber optic or T-1 providers in your area.  Just as you should have as much freedom of choice in TV as the market will bear, and not just indirect competition between satellite, cable and, if you’re lucky, FiOS.

That should be the real goal.  That should be the default we cry out for in times of craptastic trauma.

However, if we can’t have that, if we’re too deeply under the shadow of government favor and control, then it’s not unreasonable to expect utilitarian purity of the providers to be required and enforced.  Since we are closer to this model as it stands, Comcast should never have dreamed of meddling with network packets to “shape” traffic.

1. AMEN!!!  We only have Comcast (disguised as Adelphia, since they never changed the name after the buyout) in this area, so I’m still on dialup.  Actually, it’s the ISP I used in Missouri, but can still use here in VA.

   Posted by  on  10/31  at  10:58 AM  from 
Page 1 of 1 pages

<< Back to main