Keep Being A Little Bitch
- Oct 15, 2004
ah yesWhy don't you just not bother posting to me at all? It's obvious you are trying to prove a point by coming at me with anger in almost every reply you make to my posts.
is so full of rage and anger. you can see the frothiness steaming forth upon the backs of hell hounds with souls as black as nightwell, yes. that's the whole point of being a consumer. you pay for things and you get things in return.
That doesn't apply to mobile data services..
I hate to sound like a corporate shill, because I am far from one, but wireless will never compete with wired connections. Wireless is such a huge pain in the ass to get working, as well as setup that it is just too expensive of an option. Trying to get wireless speeds above T1 speeds out in the middle of nowhere is nigh impossible.
Burying cables into the ground is still the cheapest most cost effective solution period.
Still very unlikely. I'll believe it when I see the outcome of the L3 v Comcast case. My guess is Comcast is going to lose big on that one, however it may impact peering agreements in the future.
back to the OP. I think the internet service providers should not be able to decide what sites are available/more available based on site package costs.
Access is Access. The end.
Now, if some company wants to buy a bunch of video sites & make them pay sites, fine. Competition can keep it fair. but it that should not be coupled with your internet access agreement. I'm not