SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Presidential candidate and Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders yesterday released a plan to overhaul the US broadband market by breaking up giant providers, outlawing data caps, regulating broadband prices, and providing $150 billion to build publicly owned networks.
[...]Sanders said he would "eliminate data caps and ban throttling" and "instruct the FCC to regulate broadband Internet rates so households and small businesses are connected affordably." This would include a requirement "that all Internet service providers offer a Basic Internet Plan that provides quality broadband speeds at an affordable price."
[...]Sanders' $150 billion proposal includes a Department of Agriculture Rural Utility Service program "to provide capital funding to connect all remote rural households and businesses and upgrade outdated technology and infrastructure, prioritizing funding for existing co-ops and small rural utilities." Sanders said that $7.5 billion should be set aside for tribal areas and that all public housing should provide free broadband to residents.
[...]Sanders also wants the FCC to define broadband as a minimum of 100Mbps download speeds and 10Mbps uploads, instead of the current 25Mbps down and 3Mbps up. Sanders would also "reinstate and expand privacy protection rules," reversing the Trump-era decision to eliminate broadband-privacy rules.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 09 2019, @11:01PM (5 children)
Like most other utilities, they work in rest of the world just fine.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday December 09 2019, @11:46PM
"Working fine" does not mean "working efficiently".
To be more precise, the "efficiency" term is used in its "growth r..."... ummm, sorry, let's call it properly... "profit extraction rate" meaning ('cause what other meaning you think it makes sense in late capitalism?)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 4, Insightful) by HiThere on Tuesday December 10 2019, @12:15AM (3 children)
The worked fine in the US until the idiots stripped the post office out of the government, and then laded it with lots of special rules. Like it, alone, must have a fully funded retirement package. (A fully funded retirement package is actually a good idea, but not if the competition doesn't carry equal baggage.)
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 10 2019, @12:11PM
The US Postal Service has always been an inefficient mess, long before they had to actually make sure their pensions could be actually be paid out. Just ask Lysander Spooner.
(Score: 2) by epitaxial on Tuesday December 10 2019, @07:35PM (1 child)
That happened under a democrat president and majority senate. If you have a pension then it must be funded. Why is this same tired old excuse brought up? At least once a week I get mail for a completely different address. The people who deliver it claim they're not supposed to see if the address is correct or not. Who the fuck thinks that is a good idea? Several times they were off by one house so then the entire street is wrong.
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Tuesday December 10 2019, @08:20PM
I don't know the reason, I know the results. I agree that the post office is not as good as it used to be. Simultaneously the carriers are paid less (in constant dollars).
When I was in college it was considered a desirable temporary job. And not really bad as a permanent job, if you didn't mind being out in all weather (not desirable, but not bad, either). But by the time I was a decade out of college it was no longer considered desirable. My guess is they can't hold on to anyone who can get a job elsewhere. And they make the rules to suit their presumptive job holders.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.