26 U.S. states ban or restrict local broadband initiatives

[gamerk2]

Funny thing though, when war erupted in 1939, the Kingdom of Romania was considered pro-British and had an alliance with the Poles. A lot of the problems Romania had at the time where staving off attacks and annexations of its regions from the Germans and the Soviet Union. Then Romania got itself into bed with the Germans and joined the effort to try to invade other countries or, in some cases, taking back land that was theirs to begin with. It wasn't until Romania, along with Germany, having conquered territory in Russia some time later, and then having met with major losses in Stalingrad, that Romania started to secretly negotiate peace with the Allies. Romania was apparently switching sides between the Germans, Russia, and the Allies. In fact, Romania and the US have been allies and strong supporters of each other for decades. You need to get your facts straight.

You got your history wrong.

Firstly, Romania was more or less forced to give up territory, and later control of the country to pro-Soviet interests following the Treaty of Munich, as Romania realized England/France wouldn't protect it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_occupation_of_Bessarabia_and_Northern_Bukovina

In that respects, it's no surprise that Romania made it bed with the Nazi's, given how the Allies gave it up and the Soviets took a large swath of it's territory. The Allies gave it up a second time after Yalta Conference, in order to maintain Soviet support.

So Romania did not "switch sides", it was outright abandoned by the Allies, invaded by the Soviets, and after the Germans were pushed back out of EE, surrendered to the Soviets and became a satellite state following Allied concessions at Yalta. What you are pushing is a bias American point of view that totally distorts history to make EE look like the bad guys.

 

[jpuroila]

LOL !!!

they voted for Trump, why are you surprised? they want to pay 100 $ for low speed internet.
In Romania 1GB/s Fiber Optic it's less than 8Eur/month ...

You're comparing a country the size of Idaho to the United States? It's a little more challenging interconnecting the US than it is Romania.

That maybe so, but it is a fact that all electronic infrastructure in US is on average 30% cheaper than anywhere else in the World with the exception of China, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan - places where it is manufactured in the first place.

It is also no secret that US is oligarchic kleptocracy state, where any kind of independent endeavor is quickly stifled if it is against corporate interests. This is classic example. Why 26 states outright ban small scale development if it WILL benefit overall broadband infrastructure country-wide? It's utter nonsense.

For the record I pay about 15 Euros for 200Mb/Static IP FTTH from tiny local company (8 employees), miles (rather kilometers) from big cities - I can purchase even 5000Mb plan, but there is no point, 200 is more than enough for my needs. No caps, no filtering. It's unheard of in the EU for example for any government banning small scale, local network development because it will hurt corporations. Quite the opposite actually!

Being history/geography buff, I fully comprehend the size of US of A. I really do, but AT&T, Verizon or Comcast or any other of these crocks are not interested in providing good infrastructure. They want to invest as little as possible and earn as much as possible for what little they offer. Read plenty of horror stories about throttling network traffic when watching services like Netflix. How the F are they allowed to do that? You pay for the network and infrastructure required, yet corpo can extort more $ from users if they want 'uncapped' network. WTF is going there?! Land of the free? You kidding right.

It's called capitalism, and it's what allows us to be the most powerful country in the world. We fund a huge amount of NATO and the UN while still being the best country in the world (love walking out my back porch for some AR15/P99/AK47 plinking and never paying VAT for anything). You really do not understand the size of the United States if you think ISPs are just going to start laying fiber where it is not profitable for them to do so. I live about 4 miles from the nearest town of 3,000, 20 miles from the nearest town of 7,000 and 50 miles from the nearest town of 50,000; my nearest neighbor is about 1 mile away. Options are DSL @300 KB/s for $100 (cost of replacing old infrastructure is too much for ISP to consider it), Satellite internet @3 MB/s for $150 with a 50GB data cap ($75 for each additional 25GB after that or you are throttled to ~125 KB/s) and Verizon for $195 for 15GB of 4G (~3-4 MB/s where I am). Satellite can charge this much where I am because the local ISP does not want to invest in its infrastructure due to the demographics precluding profit. The good thing is that it opens the door for someone to undercut them. As to this article, it's somewhat over-sensationalizing as there are still new ISPs that can move in, it just requires a bit of know-how. And the implied relation to NN is nonsense; this really got going during the Obama administration https://www.govtech.com/network/Will-the-FCC-Vacate-State-Broadband-Restrictions.html ; https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/02/south-carolina-internet-laws-broadband_n_1644579.html
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/south-carolina-internet-laws-broadband_n_1644579
https://www.citylab.com/life/2011/11/telecom-lobby-killing-municipal-broadband/420/

A quick google search shows that at least since 2010 this has been a thing.

No, it's called corruption, bribery and cronyism. If it were capitalism, there would be no legal barriers that exist for the sole purpose of preventing competition.

 

[Puiu]

Here's the deal. If you don't live in America, you have no say in it, nor worry about it. You don't like it, fine. Voice that opinion, but be sure to offer thanks for all that it has done for your own country. As it stands, we wouldn't be able to see your opinion here if it wasn't for America.

I've lived in both countries and can tell you that at least most places in America don't have all of this pounding a household like the UK does:

- Car tax
- Road tax
- Council tax
- Income tax
- TV tax (even with commercials)
- VAT

and the list goes on. You can compare all day, but you can't hold a candle. Don't get me wrong, I like both countries, but the opinion only goes so far.

"we wouldn't be able to see your opinion here if it wasn't for America" - Seriously dude? America allows me to post here? pfff hahahahaha

 

[Someone8MyPosts]

Are you an American?

Because you shure sound like one writing things like "You wouldn't have electricity, refrigerators, microwaves, computers, internet, cars, and the list goes on"

That's plain elitist talk. Many of the things you listed wrere not even invented in america.

As for EE holding it's own I seriously hope you're joking. USSR had many times more men and hardware to invade and occupy EE countries. Realistlicly the choice was either surrender and try and survive under occupation or resist and be entirely decimated. Guess which one EE people chose.

Not everyone has the luxury of two oceans protecting from both sides and atomic weapons like america does. Learn your history and and stop making elitist uneducated remarks.

It's not elitist to state facts, and aside from you being correct about the computer (swap that for planes, if you like), what has your country done to contribute positively to the world? I was just addressing that while there are commenters on here dumping on Americans, they might want to fact-check and self-check. I stand corrected on the computer part, so I corrected that.

Are you suggesting America is to blame for being in a better geological position than you? Seriously?

 

[Someone8MyPosts]

You got your history wrong.

Firstly, Romania was more or less forced to give up territory, and later control of the country to pro-Soviet interests following the Treaty of Munich, as Romania realized England/France wouldn't protect it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_occupation_of_Bessarabia_and_Northern_Bukovina

In that respects, it's no surprise that Romania made it bed with the Nazi's, given how the Allies gave it up and the Soviets took a large swath of it's territory. The Allies gave it up a second time after Yalta Conference, in order to maintain Soviet support.

So Romania did not "switch sides", it was outright abandoned by the Allies, invaded by the Soviets, and after the Germans were pushed back out of EE, surrendered to the Soviets and became a satellite state following Allied concessions at Yalta. What you are pushing is a bias American point of view that totally distorts history to make EE look like the bad guys.

Regardless of what your source is, the history is there, the choices to side with one ally or another was made by Romanian leadership, and as you stated, it got in bed with Germany. You reap what you sow. Btw, nothing in anything you mentioned has anything to do with Americans having any sort of influence over your first comment. You might want to address that. The fact that we're even having this completely unrelated discussion for this article shows your bias against Americans, and since we're referencing Wikipedia of all things, here's one for you: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romania–United_States_relations, which indicates you're in the minority in Romania about how you feel about the US.

 

[Poor Illinoisan]

It's called capitalism, and it's what allows us to be the most powerful country in the world. We fund a huge amount of NATO and the UN while still being the best country in the world (love walking out my back porch for some AR15/P99/AK47 plinking and never paying VAT for anything). You really do not understand the size of the United States if you think ISPs are just going to start laying fiber where it is not profitable for them to do so. I live about 4 miles from the nearest town of 3,000, 20 miles from the nearest town of 7,000 and 50 miles from the nearest town of 50,000; my nearest neighbor is about 1 mile away. Options are DSL @300 KB/s for $100 (cost of replacing old infrastructure is too much for ISP to consider it), Satellite internet @3 MB/s for $150 with a 50GB data cap ($75 for each additional 25GB after that or you are throttled to ~125 KB/s) and Verizon for $195 for 15GB of 4G (~3-4 MB/s where I am). Satellite can charge this much where I am because the local ISP does not want to invest in its infrastructure due to the demographics precluding profit. The good thing is that it opens the door for someone to undercut them. As to this article, it's somewhat over-sensationalizing as there are still new ISPs that can move in, it just requires a bit of know-how. And the implied relation to NN is nonsense; this really got going during the Obama administration https://www.govtech.com/network/Will-the-FCC-Vacate-State-Broadband-Restrictions.html ; https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/02/south-carolina-internet-laws-broadband_n_1644579.html
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/south-carolina-internet-laws-broadband_n_1644579
https://www.citylab.com/life/2011/11/telecom-lobby-killing-municipal-broadband/420/

A quick google search shows that at least since 2010 this has been a thing.

Finally someone who knows what they are talking about, everyone likes to jump on the "Blame the Trump bandwagon, gets so boring" sometimes things have to be done that is good for most of the people and as soon as that is done we start crying that it is not fair, well nothing is, you want to proof just look at my state, or Cal where big urban areas decide for everyone. As for having limits on some businesses, it has been going on forever, read your history.

 

[andy K]

LOL !!!

they voted for Trump, why are you surprised? they want to pay 100 $ for low speed internet.
In Romania 1GB/s Fiber Optic it's less than 8Eur/month ...

You're comparing a country the size of Idaho to the United States? It's a little more challenging interconnecting the US than it is Romania.

LOL, exactly. People should get their basic geography down before going for a statement like that.

And the US is composed of "smaller countries/states" that can generally self-govern themselves. How is that any different from what Romania can do? The biggest difference is that in Romania you have multiple choices for 1Gbps.

If it was one monolithic state then Trump would have lost the elections based on the popularity vote.

The US is just stuck with anti-competitive practices that inhibit any real development. The UK has the same problem with BT basically having a monopoly and refusing to upgrade. You are forced to buy slow sub 100Mbps connections on unreliable networks and expensive plans.

I don't even know how IT companies are even able to work properly in London. But anyway, the current trend is that they are moving business because of Brexit to France, Germany and Romania. More work and a better salary for me

Totally untrue.BT is one of many providers in the UK. We have a Virgin package including TV channels, land line and get 2gig unlimited
for about £35/month.