Comcast Says It Wants to Charge Broadband Users More For Privacy

[Lady Dragonheart]

Privacy isn't about hiding stuff you shouldn't be doing. It's about have the right to keep private what you want kept private. It's a bit of a strange analogy, but it's like saying, "Taking a shit is natural so all toilets should be in public." I don't want someone in the restroom with me, not even my SO, regardless of if I'm showering, shitting or brushing my teeth and similarly, anything I don't offer publicly should be assumed to be private.

Well, those are your issues then. If you have such issues, they it is your sort of problem, then, wouldn't it be?

[May90]

I find the internet services appalling the in US. Here, I can choose from so many companies and packages and rates and so much more... Fuck ComCast.

Ironically, it seems that this is the case because affordable Internet services appeared in the US earlier than in other countries. As such, the laws that were made in this regard were based on outdated (and wrong) assumptions about the costs on infrastructure in the future, and effectively only those few ISPs that showed up in early 90-s remained competitive to this day.

In most countries ISPs are required to share their infrastructure (such as lines) with each other, so new ISPs can hop in quickly without having to spend insane amounts of resources on building everything from scratch. In the US, it is not so, and the major providers aren't eager to help competitors by voluntarily sharing the infrastructure with them.

It is a usual monopoly/oligopoly. Sadly, no one is doing anything about it, because of the telecommunication act from 90-s partially excluding TC companies from anti-monopoly law targets.

---

Indeed, even in the countries like Russia or China there are ISPs in major cities offering very fast Internet for negligible prices. The US is reeeeeally backwards here.

[Poopymonster]

---

Indeed, even in the countries like Russia or China there are ISPs in major cities offering very fast Internet for negligible prices. The US is reeeeeally backwards here.

For kicks, read this in the voice of the Heavy from TF2:

Comrade May90, you are finding problem with glorious capitalist country?

Soon, other countries, in dark ages of economics, will be boomed with money and corporations as soon as they cast aside outdated ideas. Like "Unions" and "Living Wages" and join glorious United States ideals.

[Noradin]

Well, those are your issues then. If you have such issues, they it is your sort of problem, then, wouldn't it be?

Excuse me, but could you repeat that in other words, please?
That post seems to have gotten a bit jumbled.

[Lady Dragonheart]

Excuse me, but could you repeat that in other words, please?
That post seems to have gotten a bit jumbled.

Allow me to rephrase:

"Deal with it."

[Adam Jensen]

I think that isn't really a fair representation of their arguments. Government control over economy can cause just as much harm as a free market, in fact, why would one be less corrupt than the other? Isn't a crony capitalist government just as dangerous, even more so perhaps, than a completely free market?

How is it that Comcast is unaffected by competition? Is it not the fault of government intervention allowing them to be without competition?

Maybe, but the fact that they have no competition and can get away with all of this bullshit is why it would take government regulation to get them to stop acting like assholes. Of course, we then have to argue which parts of Comcast's assholery is actually bad enough to be worthy of regulation.

[Deleted]

Since it is just an option and not a requirement, I do not understand what the fuzz is about... I am no fan of Comcast, but this really isn't something to bash them for. What they should be criticized for is their atrocious customer service, undisclosed download cap and high prices.

You don't seem to realize that what you listed are symptoms of the same underlying problem.

Comcast can get away with almost anything because of their effective monopoly on local services. In a society as laissez-faire capitalistic as the US, this is a horrific combination. Comcast CEO can literally wake up every morning and think of a way to screw his customers in any way that is not outright easily discoverable fraud, and he'll almost certainly be able to get away with it, at least long enough to make a lot of money.

So, Comcast effecting policies where it is THEY who have automatic rights to your privacy, directly against the US Constitution and intent of laws, is just "business as normal" for them.

That's the issue. You can put whatever personal weight to how relevant a problem is from any of their ridiculous policies, but it does not change the core problem. When one of these policies get squished somehow, they'll just wake up the following morning and think of another way to screw you ...

[Tackhisis]

who have automatic rights to your privacy, directly against the US Constitution and intent of laws

No definition of privacy covers other people's property that they allow you to transfer messages with.

[Deleted]

No definition of privacy covers other people's property that they allow you to transfer messages with.

Wrong. Privacy of correspondence is stated by the Supreme Court to be backed by the Fourth Amendment. In short, anything that deals with a reasonable expectation to privacy. Yes, this includes physical mail too.

There is also the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 and Electronic Communications Privacy Act which make such privacy explicit.

On top of that, is the legal requirement for permission to Wire Tap. If there were no privacy rights or expectation of privacy, such permission would not be needed ...

[Tackhisis]

Yes, this includes physical mail too.

Physical mail is a private property. Electronic communications are not.

Safe Streets Act of 1968 and Electronic Communications Privacy Act which make such privacy explicit.

Those are not applicable to ISPs, only to the 3rd parties.

[Paranoid Android]

"What we need is less government meddling so that the economy can grow!!"

You said it. These damn regulations are killing my freedom!!!

[Slant]

I think there's the difference.
The TV-cables belong to Ziggo and they don't have to share it.
Personally I am glad with that, since it puts all the responsibility in the hands of a single company.
It also pushes KPN to invest in fiber and vDSL to compete with the cable network.

On tv-cable I have a 200/20; which since this summer has a max subscription of 300/30.
DSL tops at 34/3 here.
And in my small town we don't have fiber in the neighbourhood.
Not that I care about fiber, since the hardware in most nodes allow a maximum of 100/100 even though ISP's advertise that they have the "fastest" connection.
It's basically my main peeve with fiber.
Advertising about the great speeds and possibilities of fiber is useless when your hardware only supports a speed that is 33% of coax.

Oh no, those TV-cables belong to one company here, too. I meant they were used also, in addition to those copper cables and fibre.

[May90]

I just want to highlight this, because people are 'complaining' about the free market, but it's actually a government regulation that is allowing Comcast to be a shitty but very profitable internet provider.

Free market, just like any kind of freedom, needs to be protected by the government, I think. If it isn't, then a powerful group can bend a market under them, and it will cease to be free. Which is exactly what happened here, when the government didn't stand up to monopolists.

Telecommunication/Internet market is arguably much more free in most European countries than in the US, for this reason - even though, in general, those countries are less capitalist and more socialist than the States.

[Slant]

Free market, just like any kind of freedom, needs to be protected by the government, I think. If it isn't, then a powerful group can bend a market under them, and it will cease to be free. Which is exactly what happened here, when the government didn't stand up to monopolists.

Telecommunication/Internet market is arguably much more free in most European countries than in the US, for this reason - even though, in general, those countries are less capitalist and more socialist than the States.

Which practically makes us communists. And therefore nothing is ever really free in Europe. :P

[Gemini Soul]

Well I was upset that I wasn't with them. Now I am glad I am not.

Screw that noise. And what would be the point since we all know that once the FBI rolls up they will hand over all your personal info in a heartbeat. They would basically be charging you more for nothing.

It's not so they can't turn that info over, its basically $5 we track your browsing and sell that info to make money off you $10 we track your info but we don't sell it so we are charging you more to make money off you.

[Noradin]

Allow me to rephrase:

"Deal with it."

Ah so that is what you meant to say.
I do not think that defeatist attitude is the ideal stance to take in such things.

- - - Updated - - -

Physical mail is a private property. Electronic communications are not.

Depends on where you are...

[Lady Dragonheart]

Ah so that is what you meant to say.
I do not think that defeatist attitude is the ideal stance to take in such things.

What exactly is "defeatist" about making money to you, I wonder?

[nextormento]

What exactly is "defeatist" about making money to you, I wonder?

Giving away private data, which is essentially failing to properly capitalize on it to make even more money.

[Lady Dragonheart]

Giving away private data, which is essentially failing to properly capitalize on it to make even more money.

If such privacy were eliminated in such a dramatic manner, I would certainly be investing in such tech as well as how it would turn the dynamic of the market. So, yes, I would be making money off of it.

[Narwal]

Hey guys capitalism is great because when companies have monopolies like comcast they can do shit like this!

Capitalism does suck when there is a monopoly. It's better when you have a government monopoly.

What I'm pointing out is that a monopoly will always create a bad situation, doesn't matter who is in charge of it. Unfortunately the only monopolies that exist in America are those created or allowed by the government.