-
Subscribe -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
-
Recent Comments
- Dude, I'm just joking with you Applebees. Chill. And yes, the stylus is soooo 1994. But some things from the past are worth preserving.
- Steve: Great comment, to which I would add just a couple of points. First, to the extent that a corporation that may provide the "pipes" is separate from one that provides the content,...
- My top 5: 1. <a href="http://ww.autohotkey.com/">AutoHotKey</a> - This is a simple yet powerful macro scripting program for Windows. I created a simple one-line script...
- "Don’t understand how you iPhone zombies get along without one." It does not help your argument any when you insist on insulting users of another device. You arguments come off as...
- I haven't seen the actual lawsuit so I'll take your word for it. The letters speak vaguely of "proprietary material" which I assumed includes the photographs. It's possible...
DISQUS
Returning? Login
1 year ago
Two years = one Congress. This is about giving lawmakers time to adopt industry-wide rules, as opposed to singling out one network operator.
As for the distinction between AT&T;'s new TV service and the rest of its offerings, look at it from the standpoint of the consumer. If you're buying Internet access service, you're buying a pipe that doesn't prioritize -- it's the status quo ante merger. If you're buying AT&T;'s video service, you're getting something that plays by different rules, but that's what you expect. After all, this is EXACTLY what cable does. One wire carries prioritized traffic (video channels) and non-prioritized traffic (cable-modem data). The difference is the frequency at which the traffic is transmitted.