Video Of The Week: Colbert On Net Neutrality

I got a chuckle out of this:


Comments (Archived):

  1. William Mougayar

    Sad indeed. I think the real horror stories are yet to come.

    1. awaldstein

      We are living a horror story with this ass in charge.

      1. jason wright

        under Clinton there would have been body bags by now. war is the greater horror.

        1. awaldstein

          not with you on the thought or the sentiment.

          1. jason wright

            we each have our own POV. Clinton was very clearly a proxy for Citi, Goldman, Morgan, the Saudis, Israel, et al. they are an axis of power. losing the election was their collective horror. people are alive today because she lost. that is my sentiment.

          2. JLM

            .Clan Clinton — HRC & WJC & Chelsea, through the Clinton Foundation, was a bizarre Persian bazaar able to deliver whatever you could describe if you had a big enough checkbook. They also sold insurance for future needs.They were gracious — preferring to be rented rather than bought and paid for. With a rental relationship, the recurring revenue is more generous and you can evict and install new tenants as one’s needs change.I heard something remarkable the other day — contributions to the Clinton Foundation have dried up. WTF?JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

        2. JLM

          .With simple changes in the ROE (rules of engagement), Pres Trump delivered on his promise to “bomb the shit out of ISIS” and to eliminate them.Lots more work to be done in those zip codes, but he accomplished something in 8 months which years of Obama dithering failed to.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          1. scottythebody

            They are not eliminated. But I see your point. Also: wasn’t just Trump. Had a little help on the Syrian side of the border for sure.

          2. JLM

            .Holy smokes!No, it was the Trump admin which changed the ROE which drove ISIS from the big Iraqi cities, which unleashed the Peshmerga, which took out the ISIS oil refinery cash flows, which took out the truckage of the oil, which took out their command & control.Trump bombed the shit out of them, decapitated their leadership, and broke their bank.This was a redux of the special ops war in the beginning of A’stan with the Northern Alliance.A lot of this was Marine artillery — which can only fire about 20 miles — which, literally, wore out their guns firing in support of the guys with rifles. I cannot imagine how many rounds it takes to wear out an 8″ howitzer, but they claim to have gone through 4 sets in a year. That is a lot of steel down range.I point this little list out because they were specifically things the Obama Pentagon and White House failed to consider. Too busy focusing on transgender Rangers and what name to call infantryMEN.The Syria situation is simple — Assad and the Russians won. Period. The Russians continue to have a warm water port and airfields in the middle of the Middle East, their objective since the 1973 war when Henry Kissinger pried the Egyptians out of the hands of the Russians.The US took an excellent position when they took out 20% of the Syrian air force and an airfield when the Syrians used poison gas. A threat which Pres Obama failed to act upon after redlining the crap out of it.As to ISIS, militarily, we want them to be in a little enclave in a river valley because otherwise they metastasize and spread around the world. In their little lakehouse enclave, we can listen to them, watch them, and kill off anyone who comes to see them or talks to them.We want ISIS to run their Internet war from a place we can listen, and watch.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

        3. cavepainting

          You are wrong on this. Where is the evidence beyond rumor mongering?

          1. pointsnfigures

            Agree. No body bags.

      2. JLM

        .There should be a viagra-like warning out there somewhere: “If you are still disoriented a year after the election in which your candidate lost, go see a doctor.”Is there truly anything truly visiting horror upon you, Arnold? I doubt it.There are a great number of good things such as the Canadian Softwoods Lumber Tariff — this one’s for you @wmoug:disqus (still want to further the merger talks).JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

        1. William Mougayar


        2. cavepainting

          Shills for Trump after the last year are not exactly smelling like roses either.Shame is that you will be so much more credible by not being tribal. Have you ever said.”This is where I completely disagree with Trump and why”?If you are all tribal and all-in on your guy without any discrimination, do not be surprised if others exhibit the same behavior on the other side.

          1. JLM

            .As I have told you many times, I give not a whit about the guy. I like his policies.He has delivered on virtually every policy he promised. I love that.The guy continues to own the agenda, to set the convo, and to befuddle the collective establishment, the media, the pundits. This is an interesting time.So, color me as a guy who is still smelling the roses and they smell even better today than they did back in November 2016.There is nothing wrong with being tribal.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

      3. sigmaalgebra

        What “horror story”?I’ve tried to pay attention to Trump: A huge fraction of the media have been bashing Trump 24 x 7 since he announced his candidacy. From so much effort at bashing, I conclude that, if there were anything at all wrong with Trump, then I would have heard it by now. So far the worst I’ve heard with any credibility is something about two scoops of ice cream.Your argument is a strange case of being self-reinforcing because it has no facts, evidence, or rationality and, thus, doesn’t really persuade anyone or lead anywhere so must just be repeated over and over and, thus, is “self-reinforcing”.So, your statement is not really an argument but just a variety of a vote, a statement of devotion to a group, one that for whatever reasons doesn’t like Trump.I like Trump a lot: Actually, I conclude I have little choice because I paid a lot of attention to the alternatives. For the Republicans we had Rubio, !Jeb, and more.Rubio, I can’t see that he is actually able to have a coherent thought about reality or do anything. Instead, he has one issue, immigration, he’s for it in nearly all forms. He has one political technique — occasionally get a headline.For !Jeb he’s the weaker brother of W who was a weak son of his father who had some good qualities but, really, was elitist in attitude and action and didn’t care enough about the economy and the working US citizens.For the other Republican candidates, I’d have to look them up!For the Democrats, it was Hillary — crooked, nasty, liar, US national security disaster, selling out the US for cash.There was good old Joe, and I’ve heard some good ideas from him, and I like him, but he needed and was to be too willing to get along by going along.So, with those choices, it was/is Trump.But, to me, by now, Trump is much better than just the least bad. Instead he’s a gift to the US, much better than just the best of the candidates.So, why like Trump?(1) Well, for one, he doesn’t need this job and appears to be doing it for the good of the country he wants to leave his descendants and everyone else.(2) He can’t be bought.(3) He seems to be driven a lot by some high standards of character.(4) He’s no pushover. Some Member of Congress who gives him too much trouble can expect some push back, including maybe in front of the Member’s constituents some Trump rallies, endorsements, etc.(5) He doesn’t go all hysterical. Instead, he is prudent and looks for opportunities he can follow. So, he could have gotten into pissing matches with China and Russia, gotten shooting started in North Korea, and really dumped on McConnell and Ryan for having fun being pains in the back side.But Trump didn’t do those things. He got Putin to call him and thank him. He got Xi to agree in public that there should be no nukes in either Korea and to be, maybe, effective enough in essentially a blockade. He has a lot of the Arabs listening to him if only so that they can be more secure against Iran. He has North Korea on notice and, in particular, suggesting that if they launch another missile then we will shoot it down within a few seconds of launch.I like his ideas:So, I like his ideas on the economy, national security, immigration, foreign policy.For more detail, I like his ideas on North Korea, Iran, energy, the Paris Accords, trade, taxes, health care, judicial appointments, NATO funding, defeating radical Islamic terrorism.I really like his work on wars: He’s pretty well ended the ISIS Caliphate and is chasing ISIS around the world; he has done a lot to stabilize Iraq; he is making good progress in the Akrapistan war with some strong words for highly relevant Pukistan; he did well telling 50+ Arab leaders that it was time to stop radical Islamic terrorism and join the civilized world; and so far he has yet to start a war. GOOD.I like his support of Israel (and I’m not Jewish) and his good relations with England, Poland, Japan, …, Saudi Arabia.I like his emphasis on Christmas. I like Melania, how she helps the US image around the world, and the White House Christmas decorations.I believe that he has been smart, prudent, and effective in herding the cats in Congress.For more I like his appointments to Defense, State, and more, his ideas on infrastructure, training and job programs in the poor parts of the central cities, regulations (from what little I know or just believe from JLM but I’ve heard that more information on the work on regulations is on the way), how energetic and effective he has been on natural disasters, and how sympathetic he has been on the plight of suffering US citizens.From the stock market, apparently a lot of serious money thinks that soon it will be the case “Good times are here again.”.I like his speeches, from early in his campaign to the present, and have kept transcripts and video files of many of them. He seems to be trying hard to keep his campaign promises. Soooo, he can build some things missing in politics, a respected personal brand with credibility.My guess is that Trump is well on the way to being the best POTUS since Lincoln.I’m not seeing a “horror story”.Do you have some details on the horror story?Maybe it’s a “double secret” horror story that only certain insiders can see?

    2. jason wright

      it will spur innovation. I have no doubt about that. be careful what you wish for has never been more relevant. these last mile monopolies will wish that they had never lobbied for this change in a just a few short years from now.

      1. Alex Murphy

        Pretty much every monopoly in history has enjoyed being a monopoly, it will be interesting to see how this comment ages.

        1. jason wright


  2. jason wright

    is ‘neutrality’ a synonym of/ for ‘equality’?

  3. Joseph K Antony

    In India, we won the Net Neutrality battle against Facebook and a government -which at least initially, gave Facebook its tacit backing.The furor was large enough forcing the government’s hand. On the other hand , one doesn’t know if it was the hand of powerful local players, acting behind the scenes, preventing the entry of a one tonne gorilla like Facebook . We don’t know.

  4. PhilipSugar

    As I wrote before I know of one country that has this policy: ChinaI can tell you firsthand China telecom is very effective at throttling web trafficI just do not see what people can be thinking. Netflix doesn’t use your ISPs capacity you doIf you don’t have Netflix your ISP doesn’t have any trafficIf you don’t think they will throttle connections to get paid you are crazyAnd please don’t tell me that you have so many choices. Lucky you but the majority of us don’t

    1. JLM

      .Comparing the US to China falls into that “Hitler” basket.The US has never had tanks in Lafayette Square (Park).Content is going to get to the consumer because it is consumer $$$$$$$$$$$ which pays for everything. Everything.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

      1. PhilipSugar

        China has made more middle class workers than the US population in the last 20 yearsHardly a good comparisonThey have good things and bad things. Their middle class is much happier than ours. Their internet regulation is notIt is about the $$$$$ for Verizon

        1. JLM

          .China is a brutal, despotic Communist nation.To suggest an apt comparison between the American middle class and China is to confuse water and ice — same elemental composition, very different properties.China has 1,400,000,000 people.The US has 323,000,000 people.So, it is hardly remarkable that China has more of anything.What is important is that America is a free country, the largest marketplace in the world, and the most powerful force for good on the planet.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          1. LE

            Agree and would like to see how many people from China try to get educated by colleges in France, Spain, Germany, Canada as opposed to the US. (Once again I don’t have facts to back this up but I suspect that is largely true).Actually here are some ‘facts’ (note quotes):http://nordic.businessinsid

          2. sigmaalgebra

            Spain has some good things, but in education at least France and Canada have some comparatively good stuff. One of my favorite math authors is J. Neveu in France. One of my favorite profs was W. Cunningham, from Canada, and since I knew him back there and Chair of the department at Waterloo. IIRC, Germany has one of the gravitational wave observatories that make three and let us triangulate to determine where the two black holes merged.

          3. jason wright

            Well, my city is now awash with Chinese students. Both local universities have pivoted their business models to capture a slice of that market. Even Kaplan opened up here get a piece of the action. Education has never been so economic in the UK.

          4. PhilipSugar

            Ok that is your belief and we are implementing the same rules as them…….hmmmmHow does that jive?

          5. JLM

            .”We” are not a despotic regime in which the state controls everything?In the US, individuals control the product offerings.It does not “jive.” We are different.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          6. SubstrateUndertow

            “In the US, individuals control the product offerings.”Good point but that said lets not risk that historical “individuals control” by ignoring the fact that under emerging network-effect conditions, first mover can very effectively monopolize the new abstract social-media product offerings as Twain-Twain’s insightful link above points out

          7. JLM

            .Sometimes it is winner take all.Google, AmazonThat’s why the FTC is so critical.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          8. sigmaalgebra

            Google? Bing is at least about as good.Amazon? Sometimes I buy from Wal-Mart.Let’s see: In my current shopping for parts for my new computer, my candidate shopping list has parts fromAmazon 19Best Buy 1Microcenter 1WalMart 1But the last three, especially WalMart, can get off their long rested back sides and at least do what Bezos has been doing. He has no real advantages — Buffett moats — at all.Besides, now Amazon is often no longer so often a source of big bargains. Instead, they’ve been raising prices. So, we might have expected that.Uh, last summer my SUV needed a new sealed beam Halogen headlight. Okay, my local auto parts store beat the Amazon price by a few cents, and I got the item right away with no shipping costs.Amazon isn’t really in line to be winner take all.

          9. Twain Twain

            I’m with @philipsugar:disqus on this. There is good and there is bad. There are things happening wrt data biases in AI that aren’t good for the States.The different culture (political and linguistic) means that Chinese data sets and algorithms don’t have the same issues.https://www.theatlantic.comhttps://uploads.disquscdn.c…And I’m drinking GREEN Kool-Aid made of kale, cucumber, spinach and apples.

          10. SubstrateUndertow

            Thanks for your healthy nationalistic introspective window of doubt.It is that healthy sense of epistemological scepticism regarding our most sacrosanct working conclusions that keeps us all safe from being blindsided by massive historical social/technological transformations.I read you on this form as a very smart and generally logical heavy weight accepting certain ideological leg-hold traps of unquestioned assumption.Not having people like yourself more proactively on the WINDOW-OF-DOUBT-TEAM is a serious team USA loss !

          11. JLM

            .Please translate.Compliment?Insult?I could go either way. Fair play to you, friend.One thing I do have is a bit of age. I have seen so many imagined crises in my lifetime which have failed to deliver, I have a skepticism born of reality.The only immutable force I have ever encountered is gravity. Even gravitas is not as powerful.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          12. SubstrateUndertow

            Compliment !Just a friendly nudge to remind that we all need to continue questioning our most sacramental working conclusions in light of emerging monumental contextual social/technological changes.

          13. Girish Mehta

            Re- “I have seen so many imagined crises in my lifetime which have failed to deliver…”Crises that can be imagined are less likely to be delivered.”What can no longer be imagined will happen, for if one could imagine it, it would not happen” – Karl Kraus (I think).

          14. PhilipSugar

            I like your quotes. Now I don’t think it is going to down that they censor sites. Too much blowback. But it will be a war, leaving players out just giving examples.My prediction first:Verizon will slow Facebook down (just using an example not specific).Facebook will block access to Facebook on Verizon by putting up a page saying they are blocking us, call them the FCC and get another provider.This will really piss Verizon off because we know how much people love their cable company versus how much they use Facebook.Then you might get a block and all hell will break loose.Verizon, Comcast think without my last mile Google, Facebook, Netflix don’t exist. True but so what? You get paid for the last mile.Without Cisco, Intel, Qualcomm, they don’t either.They covet those revenues and market cap. So what do they do try and compete. They tried to compete on every example and lost (of course)So now what they want to do is throttle those companies, and get a revenue share. (Don’t tell me this is about them investing more in fiber, they invested in QoS (Quality of Service which means you can prioritize packets and speed people (you) up by slowing others down.

          15. JLM

            .Somebody will file a lawsuit under the FTC. People will drop Verizon and pick up another ISP. Verizon board will have a fit.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          16. PhilipSugar

            What ISP would that be Jeff? We talk about echo chambers. Yes in the suburbs of Austin where houses are worth 7 figures, yes.But for 90% of the U.S. two or less:…I just shake my head. Democrats are saying they have the power back from the Alabama Senator election.People were willing to vote for a pedophile rather than vote Democratic. That is no victory. It is a huge loss. You barely beat a pedophile?

          17. JamesHRH

            Jeff doesn’t live in the ‘burbs Phil.;-)

          18. Girish Mehta

            I have avoided comment on this topic, but familiar with the subject. I worked for some time at a telco a few years back.A lot of the discussion here is US-specific about a specific Title. Net non-neutrality can manifest in other ways. I am surprised nobody discussed the FaceBook FreeBasics example in India…it is the biggest, most recent case study on this subject in the second largest internet market in the world. Zuckerberg met the Prime Minister of India, Facebook blanketed the country with ads to garner support. The people gave their feedback directly to the regulator and the regulator upheld net neutrality. But again, I realize the discussion here seems to be specific to the US.

          19. PhilipSugar

            This is a great example. Was that productive or just a waste of money

          20. sigmaalgebra

            Jeff, for maybe 90+% of the residences and small businesses in the US, each of them has just one physical connection to the Internet with data rate high enough for common Internet usage. Just one. The owner of that connection has a monopoly.As is well known, we regulate such monopolies. Why? Because otherwise the owner is highly motivated to make more money by raising prices and, yes, putting up with fewer customers. But for something as important as the Internet, nearly all customers will just pay up.We understand the need for regulation of such last mile physical connections and do that for electrical power, voice telephone, natural gas, water, and sewer and maybe also cable TV.The owner of that one physical connection needs regulation. As I understand the situation, “network neutrality” is a good version of that regulation; sure, I’d love to see the details, but I got tired of screaming about details long ago. If I scream about details again, I may blow Mars out of the solar system or at least blow the rings off Saturn. So, I put up without the details.Okay, maybe the regulation belongs in the FTC instead of the FCC. But just why the FCC is so eager to scare people about network neutrality for no good reason is highly suspicious. This is a pissing match with no good outcome for anyone except maybe some newsies, lawyers, lobbyists, and campaign donations to politicians — maybe call it politicians shaking down business.This thing has the odor of two day old skunk roadkill.How can this be an issue worth debate?

        2. LE

          Their middle class is much happier than ours.Who has vetted or normalized this fact? The Chinese (or Asian) culture is different than the US in so many ways. [1] Would also add that it could a bit of ‘a new broom sweeps clean’. They haven’t been middle class long enough to get lazy and complacent and not appreciate what they have. [2][1] My goodness they are bigger gamblers and many think that the number 8 is lucky. God knows how much money I have made after discovering that simple fact.[2] I am not even saying this is true or the reason. (I can’t back it up in any solid way.) But like similar when you are comparing cultures there are so many things at play who the f knows why something is so.

          1. PhilipSugar

            I go there and yes “the snowman” is lucky

          2. PhilipSugar

            Yup. They are going one way and us the other. Remember I sell there. Today that street has more luxury cars than you can imagine. More than London

          3. LE

            us the otherMy wife’s nephew (the one that lives in Delaware). Graduating high school this year and going to try to become a musician. He really thinks he will make the big time. Not going to college. Planning on living in Rehoboth for the summer and then moving to Boston for the music scene. And this is a smart kid who has actual potential. And parents do nothing to stop him from his folly.

          4. JamesHRH

            Did you see this? Holy Toledo some civil servants are competent. Velshi is getting a big head and McDowell puts the boots to him.

        3. ☞ Digital PR

          that is an assigning priority and assertion.Nazis were great at creating jobs too. That is not, nor should it be, the priority objective.Its a fools logic.The last 20 years the US political structure has been hostile to small free market industries as it has become more and more socialistic.

    2. Lawrence Brass

      There is a disqus bug showing in my duplicated upvote, if anyone is watching from disqus and cares.

      1. jason wright

        Zeta’s new growth strategy.

        1. Lawrence Brass

          Premium account!

      2. JLM

        .I am pretty sure you get double vote rights. Respect.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

        1. Lawrence Brass

          You are very kind Jeff. Respect is mutual.

    3. jason wright

      You mean internally, or is this a GFW reference?

    1. awaldstein

      he captured it well in a way that many will understand.i read your post. erudite as you are.99.9% of the world couldn’t understand nor really cares about it in that detail.all communications is what is heard not what is said.

      1. pointsnfigures

        Pretty clear from the debate on net neut that it’s not about economics.

        1. awaldstein

          pretty clear that the administration is an aberration.patience and focus on getting them out and undoing their crap is on my list, has been and will be.

          1. JLM

            .Bit of a stretch to suggest that the “administration” has fingerprints on this issue.Ajit Pai has been saying the same things for his entire tenure on the FCC. He did not take orders from a Trump admin potentate. He has been saying the same thing for years. He was suited up long before Trump was elected.In the waning days of the Obama admin, Tom Wheeler, Chmn FCC, implemented the rulings which we are today describing as “net neutrality.” They did not come down from the Mount with Moses. No burning bushes.Some will say, with a bit of evidence, that this was the result of Eric Google Schmidt whispering into those big, flapping Obama ears. Fair play to that.What is happening today is the FCC is returning to the policies which drove the growth of the Internet up until the Wheeler changes. If you love the Internet, if you love the growth of the Internet — rest easy, the Internet is going to be regulated just as it was during its salad days.The Internet did fine in those days.In the hysteria that exists today, people overlook the simple fact that much of what is feared is currently illegal under other statutes and rules. Much of it runs afoul of anti-trust guard rails.Y2K. It’s going to be fine. Remember, Pres Trump doesn’t even use email.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          2. Tom Labus

            You drinkin’ the red or purple Kool-Aid?

          3. JLM

            .Red, it’s more Christmassy.Merry Christmas, Tom.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          4. Rick Mason

            Watch a former FCC commissioner school an MSNBC host on net neutrality. Bet you he won’t get invited back!

          5. JamesHRH

            ‘That’s why it didn’t happen before.’

          6. Lawrence Brass

            Network neutrality rules are (were, in the case of the US) preventive, anti trust engages usually once the damage is done and through complex an long processes.One thing where I agree with you is that today the public, through social media, is more willing to take care of themselves and defend their rights.Let’s hope the anti-trust guard rails don’t rust under Trump.

          7. JLM

            .Bit from the weeds:The FCC’s rules were not even implemented. What they replaced was the framework under which the Internet blossomed.The FTC (Federal Trade Commission) is a beast. They can go after a person, company for anti-trust (we think of that as classic M & A “combination” law, Sherman Act, the Clayton Act, the FTC Act) but also competition, restraint of competition, and pricing.The FTC has a battalion of lawyers who try cases. The DOJ Anti-trust Div also.Here is the big one: The FTC can allege criminal charges. Hello, America.The normal criminal charges are price fixing, bid rigging, customer allocation, unfair competition, fraud, but also: false statements to investigators, perjury, obstruction of justice, conspiracy to defraud anyone including the United States, mail fraud, wire fraud.Send an untrue email to the FTC = mail/wire fraud.This is a powerful body of criminal charges.Further, an individual can initiate a FTC complaint and file a lawsuit. There is the potential for punitive damages.Think about all the litigation between Apple and Samsung. It cost billions. Anybody who colors outside the lines, is going to have someone watching.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          8. PhilipSugar

            Again agree Ajit appointment under Obama. Why not get rid of the Obama “shill”. Problem both sides have is they make moves based on the belief they will always be in power. I give you the patriot act. Then the ass kicking boot switches feet and tears happen. I don’t know when but it will happen again

          9. JLM

            .Are you trying to trick the rube from Austin?The FCC is made up of 5 members with no more than 3 members from a single political party.The other 2 members can be from any “other” or “no” political affiliation.The terms are for definitive lengths with special rules as to when they must leave given appointments.Ajit Pai was appointed by Pres Obama — having had a 2-year stint at Verizon amongst 7 other government legal positions including working for two different Senate committees and the DOJ — as an “other.”Pres Obama went to Majority Leader McConnell and asked him, “Pai OK with you guys?”As a known Senate legal staff member, McConnell said, “Bueno.”The word is that Ajit Pai had never been registered to vote with either party and had to register as a Republican. Hardly a political idealogue.When Tom Wheeler resigned, Pres Trump appointed a replacement.Pai has been saying the same thing at FCC meetings that he has since the Obama administration, but he is not a “shill.”JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

  5. Frank W. Miller

    I’m sorry, I guess I just don’t understand. Is he making the joke that his Etsy shop will be shut down because some Republican will be able to tell Verizon to block his site because of his politics? That’s nuts, its not going to happen. There’s plenty of free speech laws to prevent that.I have a hard time listening to all this. It obviously just self serving (our previous video bandwidth discussion) and/or more liberal group think. The Internet did just fine before these rules took affect (only two short years ago) and it will be fine now again now that Title II has been lifted.

    1. aminTorres

      Yes, you don’t understand.

  6. awaldstein

    As did I.

  7. JLM

    .We essentially have four bodies politic in the US — Trump, Republicans, Democrats, and the Internet.The Founding Fathers overlooked the Internet when cobbling together the Constitution though they left a good road map on how to deal with things. Forgive them, they hadn’t even figured out electricity by then.Of the four bodies politic, the Internet crowd is the most powerful.They will get what they want — perhaps, after trying everything else first.The Internet crowd doesn’t care about the same things the Trump, Rep, Dem care about. They care about the Internet.The Internet crowd will win. And, it won’t be in the Electoral College.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

    1. Tom Labus

      The let’s see trump’s taxes and see if there is another player in the game.

      1. JLM

        .No policy on the Internet should ever be contemplated without a good look at Pres Trump’s taxes. The logic is unassailable.I admire Pres Trump for not showing his taxes.I think it is a good policy not to expose your taxes or genitals.On a serious note, the amount of info one has to report to the FEC before running for office is incredible. It dwarfs the intelligence take of a tax return.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

        1. sigmaalgebra

          No sense in working to provide information to a dedicated, devoted Democrat: Such an effort just wastes your time and irritates the Democrat! (after Mark Twain).How can this be? Conjecture: Group loyalty is more persuasive than rationality.

      2. pointsnfigures

        would have liked to see them go a lot further. why does the AMT still exist?

  8. Tom Labus

    Trump’s first instinct is always to defraud. That’s his only motivation

    1. JLM

      .The sexual harasser crowd is not going to send you a Christmas card, Tom.Tom, the guy doesn’t even use email, for God’s sake.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

      1. Tom Labus

        He doesn’t know anything about foreign policy or the economy but that doesn’t stop him from screwing those up too

        1. JLM

          .Are we talking actual results or style points? Cause the US economy today based on objective factors is looking mightily improved from when he got the whip hand, Tom.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          1. Tom Labus

            This is called being in the right place at the right time or in trump’s case blind luck

          2. JLM

            .Consistency. You.Naughty.Merry Christmas.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

        2. JamesHRH

          How’s things for ISIS since he said ‘ Not going to tell generals what to do, just going to let them do what they believe should be done.’If there was ever a damning example of Obama’s arrogance, it would be that he thought he knew more about how to run the military than the experts.

          1. Tom Labus

            and the generals are still using the O strategy, the winning one.

          2. JLM

            .It is about 50% true that the Generals are using the Obama strategy, but what is also true is that Trump, more Mattis, took off the handcuffs and went back to making violent, fierce war.When you ratchet up the violence, the enemy cannot recover. When they cannot recover, they can’t make up casualties, cannot re-supply ammunition, cannot distribute water and food, cannot rebuild command & control.When the enemy cannot recover, they slowly begin to melt until you can destroy them in detail.When that happens, the enemy cannot recruit replacements, cannot train them, cannot move them, cannot insert them into the battle. When inserted, they are untrained, vulnerable, and dead.Like the cycle of life, a winning army visits a cycle of death on their enemy. That is what happened to ISIS.And, yes, it took Trump to make the change.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

          3. sigmaalgebra

            Wrong! Wrong! Wrong! Totally wrong!!! You missed out on the bigger picture. Just stand back a little and look at the overall picture. Right Obozo wasn’t very bright. And, right, he didn’t know much about the military. But he knew enough, knew that if he let the US military do their job, then ISIS would soon be gone. Same for the Taliban in Akrapistan.The bigger picture? Obozo was and is on the side of the Muslims.E.g., look at the current info on the Hezbollah stuff: He told State, DEA, the whole DC alphabet soup to go easy on Hezbollah. His excuse this time? Iran was supporting Hezbollah, and he wanted the Iran deal.BS excuse: ISIS, Taliban, Hezbollah, Iran — he was good to all of them.Israel? England? He insulted both of those. On his “apology tour”, he insulted the US, bowed to the Saudis and Chinese, etc.Are you getting the picture?The US? Obozo deeply, profoundly, bitterly hates and despises the US and does everything he can get away with to hurt the US.

          4. JamesHRH

            You are wrong.Obama is a patriot. Just not a leader of people nor someone comfortable with the use of force.

  9. LE

    The video embed does not work above. You have to view it on the twitter page.Will ISP’s ‘block’ websites? It depends on what you define as a website and how much bandwidth that website takes up. Well known now that you can’t stream on most airplanes or cruise ships. Is that ‘blocking’? In hotels you often get free internet which is slow but can upgrade for in theory a better connection. What’s wrong with that?Does anyone seriously think that an ISP is going to block their nominal shit website with ordinary and typical usage as a result of this? That is so stupid and it’s simply fear mongering.Sure I am a netflix user and if Netflix has to pay a vig and charge me more for the service so be it. Why shouldn’t they? And let’s say wikipedia has to start to take advertising to pay for same vig instead of begging for money ala pbs (who sort of does in a way as well). To bad so sell advertising. I hate those Jimmy Wales we are holier than thou pop ups.Will ISP’s block ETSY? Maybe. So then it becomes another cost of doing business, right? Welcome to the world of large companies with money that have an advantage over your shit small operation with less resources. The good news is all of your competitors are in the same boat.

    1. Michael Elling

      ISPs are government granted monopolies. They already charge exorbitant rates to the end-user adding to a growing digital divide between haves and have nots. Now you want them to charge 2x for the same service???

  10. Kirsten Lambertsen

    Thank God for all the funny people. I’m especially grateful for all the funny people in my Twitter feed.

  11. Salt Shaker

    AMZN Prime sub growth appears to be slowing, while Netflix growth is still strong, allowing the company to continue investing in orig programming while sustaining margins. That won’t last forever. If their sub growth flattens, which it likely will, then companies like Netflix will need to balance its pricing strat against churn and attrition. They can’t wantonly raise sub pricing to maintain profit goals, and they also need to safeguard against throttling, which can drive churn and disconnects. So Netflix has an incentive to insure that doesn’t occur. Market economics will determine sub pricing and the big boys like Netflix, AMZN have incentives to insure throttling doesn’t impede the consumer’s viewing experience. Any access limitations will have a profound effect on their biz. IMO they’ll be held hostage by ISP’s more than consumers. This will be akin to carriage fees in the cable world.

    1. LE

      doesn’t impede the consumer’s viewing experienceI watch Netflix literally every night after my wife goes to bed. (Last: Narcos new season was great). However Netflix is not essential in any way. It’s entertainment. I can either pay extra or find a million other things to do with that time. Charge them more for the bandwidth and let them raise the price of what I pay. If that kills the model (like I say with Wawa and seling cigarettes) so be it. It’s kind of a spoiled american thing anyway. And yes I know the issue is bigger than this. I just don’t like all the fud going around trying to scare people into ‘what if’s’. Meanwhile there are a million other clusterfucks of importance that everyone looks the other way on, ignores or doesn’t ever think about.

      1. Salt Shaker

        Personally, I think Netflix is overrated. I end up seeing most good movies first run, and I’m not interested in watching Simpson and Family Guy re-runs. They do have some good originals, as do other services, so I’m more inclined to subscribe short-term, disconnect, and then re-engage as warranted. As you note, none of this stuff is “must have” entertainment, which is why I think program providers need to insulate their base and guard against 3rd party ISP’s giving consumers even more reasons to disconnect. I also think ISP’s can’t afford to get too piggish as new “I told you so” legislation can easily be resurrected. We also sub to AMZN Prime and think their U/I wrt program streaming is awful.

        1. LE

          Funny thing happened with me and Netflix though. Originally I would use it to watch old movies and was pretty happy. Satisfice. Then I discovered a few originals (or things they bought like Fauda) which I liked. What I found out was that the series provided much more enjoyment (per discovery time) than movies. Why? Because with movies you have to often suffer through 20 minutes or longer to figure out if you like what you are watching before bailing and picking something else. But with a series if you suffer through 20 minutes and decide you like it you have another 10 to 12 episodes in one season and if multi season you have ever more watching. Something you know you will like without having to suffer through discovery. So now my brain deprecates movies simply because I think ‘I will only get 1.5 to 2 hours of entertainment vs. a series where I will get 8 to 12 hours or even more’.This isn’t the only reason Netflix is doing series but certainly a big reason why. It’s not only cost effective but it also delivers a product that makes more sense for the viewer as well if my behavior is anything like other Netflix viewers.By the way I don’t think that any entertainment is ‘must have’. Once you are in a zone you are in a zone. Vacations are often like that as well at least for me.

    2. JLM

      .Amazon Prime members:Q1-2017 80,000,000Q1-2016 58,000,000Prime members spend on average $1300/year while non-Prime members spend $700.Amazon is going into content. Well, Amazon is going into everything.The Internet already has a pricing algorithm in place — the consumer pays more for speed. I pay more, today, for 1gig service than someone does for 100meg service.But, I pay way less today than I did 7 years ago for 100meg service which was the fastest at that time.BTW, at no cost to me, my ISP replaced my coax to fiber optic inside my house. I already had fiber to my house.Not quite Moore’s Curve, but close.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

      1. Salt Shaker

        Not sure where I saw AMZN Prime is slowing, but your stat certainly suggests otherwise. What is def occurring is continued high conversion of AMZN Customers to Prime, which makes sense given the high value and convenience of membership. What a biz model! Next up, and part of a continued vertical integration strategy, is the acquiring of music streaming services, such as Spotify and Soundcloud. Pandora is a comparative dog, but with 80M subs (mostly on a free tier) they have a strong base that I think can arguably be upsold if packaged and bundled with the right entertainment company or telco. Pandora trading just north of $5. (Add-on: Spotify valued at $13B, Pandora’s mkt cap is $1.3B.)

  12. pointsnfigures

    http://www.journals.uchicag… An academic paper worth reading for anyone that agrees with, or disagrees with the FCC action. “Toward a More General Theory on Regulation”

    1. JLM

      .The previous regime piled the regulations on as a proxy for laws they could not get through the Congress.They further picked and chose which laws they felt like enforcing. They didn’t do anything on immigration except stop enforcing existing law.Trump has not done much on immigration except to start enforcing existing law.There are still 500K deportations from the Obama time period, which the Obama guys just left in a closet somewhere. This is after the Trumps have run out more than a million plus thrown criminals out wholesale. Soon, these numbers are going to be felt.The Trump regime has, firstly, been unraveling the prior admin’s rules. They have really not cut regulation, they have removed the shackles from the prior admin only.There is a better place wherein the administration does not feel obligated to enact law which then spawns tons of regulations.There is a pendulum effect and we are still not yet to the middle. We are still enmired in unnecessary regulation.This is a very difficult mindset to stomp out — witness the number of tax brackets remaining in the latest bill. That is not simplification.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

  13. ☞ Digital PR

    Net neutrality is a terrible law. The name is in effect, a lie. It is not neutral and only applied to one portion of the internet industry.But at the foundation, logic alone – Anyone that thinks regulating the Internet with an 80 year old law is an idiot. That is just outright stupid.Leftist techno giants, the “edge” companies (i.e. Google, Twitter, Facebook) brainwashed America. It is sad how stupid Americans can be. Poor;y educated and horribly low critical thinking skills.

  14. PhilipSugar

    I for the life of me cannot understand how this is a “left or right” issue. Makes me sad. Teddy Roosevelt broke up monopolies he didn’t make them strongerI agree the shrill shrieking of they will censor is over the top but it seems that is the world we live in. You have yell with a bombastic message to get noticedBut make no doubt Comcast will prioritize all NBC and video on demand traffic Why wouldn’t they? It would be wrong for their shareholders not to. That is crazy

  15. fredwilson

    i am about me. if that wasn’t clear from day one, then i am sorry. this blog is not about you. it is about me.

  16. Alex Murphy

    FWIW, the posts here are still coming from a unique perspective. They just don’t come from someone that you agree with, at least at a political level.Perhaps, you could show your students how to take in information and try to understand someone else’s point of view even in the face that they have different core beliefs. Isn’t one of the most important parts of teaching to show how to evaluate information from many different sources and to build an argument from “understanding” rather than just consuming what is in the echo chamber?

  17. Bruce Warila

    @disqus_75Q6aw4zbT:disqus if you subscribed via email or RSS, you missed the best part of this blog: the comments. I send a lot of entrepreneurs and kids here to read posts, but I always tell them to read the comments. This is one of the few places on the web where super smart people debate as friends. I’ll give Fred 20% for intellectual contributions, 20% for running the place, but the other 60% is in the comments.

  18. cavepainting

    Please. Politics (i.e. how society is organized and the policies that govern that) is a reflection of life and vice versa. No general blog on tech or society is apolitical and there is nothing wrong about it.

  19. scottythebody

    Literally spent a year or two of my life doing designs for monopoly telco to provide exactly that capability. They weren’t building it to not use it, obviously.

  20. JLM

    .Not to be too simple minded, but the existence of branded news — Fox, MSNBC,CNN, et al — is doing that right now.When one holds their remote control in their hand and pinches the button to “Let’s see what the crazy people are saying about this.” [See what I did there. Y’all get to pick which side is the crazies. Very diplomatic.]In the end, the flows of cash will determine the winners.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

  21. jason wright

    what make of car do you drive Philip, and why?i’m wondering if an analogy can be drawn between the nature of public road access and interweb access.

  22. JLM

    .Very strong volley at the net.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

  23. jason wright

    Narcissist 🙂

  24. Lawrence Brass

    This happens when the bartender owns the bar. 🙂

  25. PhilipSugar

    Yes. I can’t understand how people don’t see this. You don’t have to have ESPN in your cable package because Comcast cares about you over money. This is all about money

  26. PhilipSugar

    Volvo S90 T6 AWD with a six inch stretch. The analogy would be if we all paid for public roads but I was allowed to drive in high speed lanes because Volvo not I paid. But it breaks down. Because under the analogy it would be like GM owned the road because they got paid to build it their cars go free. Volvo pays a ton. When you go to Netflix that is your choice. But if my cable tv provider holds them up for their own service

  27. LE

    I don’t care that comcast cares about me over money. What I do care about in particular with large corporations is that they are arbitrary is how they can do shitty things to you (and other businesses) and there is no way to even get them to be accountable for their actions. (Go try to get a real person by phone or email from a place like Comcast, Verizon and so on….).Here is an example. We do a certain amount of what is known as ’email forwarding’. Comcast (in particular) decides one day that a customer of theirs (that we are forwarding mail for) is getting to much spam. It’s not even a great amount of spam (we have logs) but for whatever reason it’s easier for them to just generate a generic block and then deny all mail from the IP address that that mail came from for all comcast customers (who have mail forwarding).Now of course there are many ways for someone sending mail to get around this but they all take time and effort and money. And of course on a free an open internet this shouldn’t be happening. I am not talking about large amounts of mail either. Certainly things that their robust system can handle. But it’s easier for them to just yank service and then you bang your head against the wall and deal with it. So you see that is the way it works generally in life. It’s called the golden rule. And comcast has the gold. And it’s their customer getting the spam at their @comcast email address.I am not sure the difference between what they are doing (in this case) – not delivering any mail and you are stuck vs. saying ‘pay me and this won’t happen’. To me it is the nearly the same thing.Once again this is not a case where there are actual bad actors and a company is offering a service to block those bad actors. Or a case where there is actual heavy abuse. Just a case of a large corporation with average people working for them (the regular guy) who know they can get away with this type of thing because there is no way to really stop it and customers have no power (nor do their vendors) to change anything.

  28. Lawrence Brass

    nice wheels! and good analogy

  29. cavepainting

    Yeah, but one situation is optimized for the customer, and the other for the ISP. If ISPs can be paid by content owners and publishers who want their content to be prioritized, the internet gets balkanized and works differently for each person depending on the ISP. Or they may even have a vested interest in doing so if they own the content.Just because ISP makes more money does not mean the customer is better served.

  30. JLM

    .On an intellectual level, I agree with you. It is certainly possible. If I were crafting a list of horribles, your concerns would be there, but it is purely speculative.What is real is a burgeoning amount of content, enormous cash flows, this incredible culture changing service we call the Internet. That is real.I vote that the reality continues. Occam’s Razor.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

  31. pointsnfigures

    I think we need to get away from the politics in America and focus on the policy-and the outcomes from it.

  32. cavepainting

    Reality will surely continue. Just that the gatekeepers have more power on who they let in through the door at what speed, and how much they can charge for the privilege?There is a possibility that this whole thing is over hyped and ISPs will not abuse the lack of regulation. But.. corporate and human nature just does not work that way…

  33. cavepainting

    Yeah, but policy is politics and vice versa. They are inextricably intertwined. Yes, you should stay away from the guttural name calling and mudslinging, but policy initiatives have unmistakable political overtones.

  34. JLM

    .Of course they WILL abuse it.Harken back to Wells Fargo bank. It was the biggest, most profitable bank in the US. It was a power to be reckoned with and had a “western” stage coach shtick.Then, some absolute idiot decided to punch the numbers up by creating MILLIONS of fake new retail accounts.Stop for a second — WTF were they thinking? Who thought this idea up? Who thought you could manufacture 2,000,000 fake accounts and not get caught?They killed the company. The CEO was forced to walk the plank. The bank has paid and is still in the crosshairs to pay a huge, huge, huge fine.Most importantly, they ruined their reputation. Their best people are abandoning ship.And, this shop was run by some pretty salty guys. The CEO — John G Stumpf, guy who grew up as one of almost a dozen kids on a chicken farm in Pierz, Minnesota — says he never knew, so he got fired for not knowing.Of course, they gave him a golden parachute which would choke a horse.There is no absolute when it comes to bad behavior except THERE WILL BE BAD BEHAVIOR.Still, it is much ado about nothing of the Y2KXL variety.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

  35. cavepainting

    True. So, why give people the opportunity to abuse? Free-for-all markets lend themselves to greed and bad behavior. Regulations keep people on their best behavior as long as they are not overdone.Since one side thinks all regulation is bad, and the other thinks the market needs to be heavily regulated, we have a pendulum that swings from one extreme to the other.If people are common sensical and not beholden to their donors and party ideologies, these decisions will be of higher quality that strikes a good balance.

  36. JLM

    .”Free-for-all markets lend themselves to greed and bad behavior.”First, there is no way this is a free-for-all market. Let’s be honest, the FCC rolled back some rules which hadn’t even been implemented yet.The prior rules were the ones that oversaw the spectacular success called the Internet. We are hardly looking at a pig in a poke.It is a gross over simplification to suggest that “all regulation is bad.”We are betting on what has already worked. Why not go with something that works for a change?It is a stretch to suggest there are party ideologies at play here. It may be big business v statism v libertarian business thinking, but the Republican or Dem Chair of their Travis County Executive Committees couldn’t tell you what the discussion even pertains to.This is Google, et al, v the big telcos. We are all on the sidelines.JLMwww.themusingofthebigredcar…

  37. PhilipSugar

    No wars are never pretty.Let’s say Comcast throttles google Facebook and NetflixThen they decide to cutoff Comcast customers and put a message outThis is how you get Hatfield and McCoy

  38. JLM

    .Then, the FTC steps in under their “competition” and “pricing” powers and hauls them to court.The FTC has the ability to pursue both civil and criminal charges.Some CEO gets charged with a criminal allegation, his wife stops sleeping with him, the country club asks him to clean out his locker, his kids change their names.The DOJ Anti-trust Department has a similar litigation practice.Stock prices tank. Managements get replaced.The money gets mad. Mad money does crazy things.OTOH, the CEO can do the right thing, collect his stock options, enjoy his wife & a mistress, retire with a nice fat package, and enjoy his grandchildren.Sooner or later, it gets personal.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

  39. JLM

    .Agreed.Conversations with persons who agree with you are boring as shit.When your ideas wrestle with another guy’s ideas, the result is better ideas.If one doesn’t either have ideas or wrestling skills, stay home in front of the fire.JLMwww.themusingsofthebigredca…

  40. sigmaalgebra

    Yes, yes, yes, the FTC to the rescue. And maybe all this really does belong in the FTC. But what the heck was the harm in regulating the last mile via what the FCC did?Okay, okay, okay, maybe the street I live on is not the whole world: I’ve seen no efforts to pull fiber in my neighborhood. Here there is coax in the ground with the residents here at one end and the one ISP at the other end. Just one (1) ISP. For us, no competition or alternatives. Actually, I’m happy with them — their prices keep falling, their data rates keep increasing, and in case of trouble their people answer their phones and are good.But away from my street, there are also gated communities that can form one large customer and cut a deal. There are apartment buildings and complexes that can cut deals, e.g., justify pulling fiber at least to the complex. There are office buildings, shopping centers, office parks, each of which can want and get fiber.Still there’s the problem of my street with just that coax and just one company at the head end.Sure, maybe the FTC will save my neighbors and me, but why take the chance? Why not just leave the FCC thingy in place?