See above. It doesn’t.
Ian Littman
1

You’re right, Ian. My ire at Title II was misplaced, and my argument was in error. The problem with cable co’s I was reflecting on stems from Title IV.

However, misplaced complaints about Title II aside, that doesn’t change the fact that the reason we have such huge internet access problems in the USA is a lack of competition that originated in the Title IV designation in the 80’s that resulted in so many localized monopolies.

So, no, Title II doesn’t exacerbate that, and thank you for correcting me, but it also doesn’t resolve the actual problem, which is lack of competition.

And no, I don’t think people should have to move to get what they want, I think there should be open competition for providing internet access, and there won’t be as long as local and federal regulators continue drafting regulations and laws that disincentivize competing investment in ISPs of all stripes.

You’ve already given several examples of alternative means of access, whether it’s alternative access from existing providers, wireless, community owned internet, or shared last-mile. The means of enabling competition are there, we just need authorities to stop limiting people’s choices.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.