TOMapleLaughs Posted November 26, 2015 Author Share Posted November 26, 2015 Just now, LarsEller said: Except in this case most of the smaller ISP's just lease / resell from the big 3 and the big three are not really competing. It's also not profitable for a big business to come and put in the needed infrastructure for higher speeds. With such a low population density here, the costs would be astronomically higher than they are now, and the only people willing to pay those costs already do for special business Internet packages from the isp's. Oh, i'd eliminate 'the big 3' and open it up entirely. Not good news for them, but better for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeefcakeBo Posted November 26, 2015 Share Posted November 26, 2015 Just now, TOMapleLaughs said: Oh, i'd eliminate 'the big 3' and open it up entirely. Not good news for them, but better for us. I don't think you get it. The big 3 own all the infrastructure. If you eliminate them you won't have any Internet connection at all. And eventually when you do again it will be much more expensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted November 26, 2015 Author Share Posted November 26, 2015 22 minutes ago, LarsEller said: I don't think you get it. The big 3 own all the infrastructure. If you eliminate them you won't have any Internet connection at all. And eventually when you do again it will be much more expensive. What I'm proposing is that the infrastructure becomes public so that we're not restrained by the interests of these companies. But at the end of the say superior infrastructure will inevitably be built and make the current infrastructure irrelevant. We shouldn't let these companies get in the way of progress imho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeefcakeBo Posted November 26, 2015 Share Posted November 26, 2015 4 minutes ago, TOMapleLaughs said: What I'm proposing is that the infrastructure becomes public so that we're not restrained by the interests of these companies. But at the end of the say superior infrastructure will inevitably be built and make the current infrastructure irrelevant. We shouldn't let these companies get in the way of progress imho. That infrastructure becoming public will cost the taxpayers a ton of money. Ie much, much higher costs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted November 26, 2015 Author Share Posted November 26, 2015 14 minutes ago, LarsEller said: That infrastructure becoming public will cost the taxpayers a ton of money. Ie much, much higher costs. Nah. Just take it from them. Just make it a public right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DefCon1 Posted November 29, 2015 Share Posted November 29, 2015 On 11/25/2015, 7:40:02, RonMexico said: I meant we don't NEED faster internet. The current speed of internet access is acceptable. yeah, except you would need it down the road for 4K and 8K media and virtual 3D contents or hologram. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qwags Posted November 29, 2015 Share Posted November 29, 2015 On Tue Nov 24 17:27:23, RonMexico said: We don't need it. Why not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kragar Posted November 30, 2015 Share Posted November 30, 2015 On 11/26/2015, 11:45:23, TOMapleLaughs said: This is why it's important to advance Canada's ISP competition imho. I thought you were on a good track here, until... On 11/26/2015, 1:06:17, TOMapleLaughs said: Nah. Just take it from them. Just make it a public right. If the government takes over the infrastructure, then why would any company (big 3 or not) work to improve it? I agree with you that competition improves quality as well as pricing. But if the government owns it all, then there's no reason for an outside company to improve it or control prices. As a result, your posts seem contradictory. Putting aside the complete illegality of your suggested seizure, if the government did this, why would any other company continue to do business in Canada? The government could just up and seize anything a company owns. Even if the companies were compensated, the precedence established would make companies think twice before creating any new tech, since they would know how long they would own the rights to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted November 30, 2015 Share Posted November 30, 2015 2 minutes ago, Kragar said: I thought you were on a good track here, until... If the government takes over the infrastructure, then why would any company (big 3 or not) work to improve it? I agree with you that competition improves quality as well as pricing. But if the government owns it all, then there's no reason for an outside company to improve it or control prices. As a result, your posts seem contradictory. Putting aside the complete illegality of your suggested seizure, if the government did this, why would any other company continue to do business in Canada? The government could just up and seize anything a company owns. Even if the companies were compensated, the precedence established would make companies think twice before creating any new tech, since they would know how long they would own the rights to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlphaHoneyBadger Posted December 2, 2015 Share Posted December 2, 2015 On 24/11/2015, 15:40:02, RonMexico said: I meant we don't NEED faster internet. The current speed of internet access is acceptable. What are you talking about? Canada has some of the slowest speeds on the planet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.