|
quote:CRTC will rescind ‘unlimited use’ Internet decision – or Ottawa will overturn it http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/crtc-will-rescind-unlimited-use-internet-decision-or-ottawa-will-overturn-it/article1892522/
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 05:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 07:43 |
|
|
This was really refreshing to watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYizoh_r6D0&t=304s
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 05:39
|
|
|
Not everyone at the Post is a ridiculous old fuddieduddie, i.e. Jameson Berkow seems to have a clue. But Andrew Coyne sure doesn't know when to call it a day, sheesh. edit: ^^ holy gently caress the "shareholder" in that video was an ignorant assclown. Unbelievable. teethgrinder fucked around with this message at 05:46 on Feb 3, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 05:39
|
|
|
About loving time. I guess the Tories didn't want to have something like UBB loving over Canadians hanging over their heads going into this *wink wink* election season *wink wink*. Maybe now we can get fair use for 3rd parties, so that someday I can look forward to Teksavvy DSL higher than 5mbit? Oh, and burn Bell corporate to the ground. Still want that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 05:45
|
|
|
You can switch to TekSavvy Cable when it's offered in your area for higher than 5mbit. I still think the speed is reasonable, but whatever. But yeah, if the Tories had supported the CRTC decision, they'd have lost the entire next generation of voters.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 05:47
|
|
|
Suniikaa posted:This was really refreshing to watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYizoh_r6D0&t=304s Yeah Burger handled that extremely well, responded in a very even tone despite facing the whiny nasal accusations of being "parasitic". I like that he hammered home the actual cost of delivery finally, I get so tired of hearing the bandwidth freeloader argument. quote:But yeah, if the Tories had supported the CRTC decision, they'd have lost the entire next generation of voters. What's really frustrating is that this puts things in an awkward spot because the CRTC is needed so that telecoms and cablecos can't run wild but at the same time they need to be held in check because of how thoroughly penetrated they are by corporate interests. I think we simply need a new regulatory body to manage it but that's a really complex issue.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 05:48
|
|
|
Suniikaa posted:This was really refreshing to watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYizoh_r6D0&t=304s  I love that that shareholder was just cut off at the end. He sounded like a tremendous rear end in a top hat and it was obvious the only thing he cared about was his wallet and that he gave no gently caress about anyone. It's easy to say you're for this and that when you're so rich you can probably download any amount of anything you want every month and it still wouldn't make a dent on your bank account.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 05:49
|
|
|
Suniikaa posted:This was really refreshing to watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYizoh_r6D0&t=304s Saving this here since Rogers will never approve it: quote:Nice try, Rogers, but you aren’t going to legislate you competitors out of business. Either compete fairly (and that includes licensing content to Netflix) or get out of the market. They are getting worked harder than the National Post editorial board. Shumagorath fucked around with this message at 06:04 on Feb 3, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 05:49
|
|
|
Burger is a very well spoken man and dished it out like a champ. He owns. I hope Teksavvy cable comes to my area sooner than later.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 05:58
|
|
|
Parachute Underwear posted:
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 06:26
|
|
|
Shumagorath posted:Kevin O'Leary is a tremendous rear end in a top hat and would likely back UBB imposition on resellers even if he understood how the Internet worked, as shown by his continued use of the word "parasite". I also have it on good authority that he regularly crank-calls his cell provider's customer retention line to get a better deal, so he must enjoy overpriced telecom services on a perverse level. I find O'Leary amusing because he is literally a caricature of the evil, greedy capitalist that would sell his own mother into slavery for a nickel.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 06:39
|
|
|
Isizzlehorn posted:Maybe now we can get fair use for 3rd parties, so that someday I can look forward to Teksavvy DSL higher than 5mbit? Oh, and burn Bell corporate to the ground. Still want that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 06:42
|
|
|
Suniikaa posted:This was really refreshing to watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYizoh_r6D0&t=304s That was so amazing I'm speechless. The second Teksavvy cable is ready in my area I'm signing up and driving over and giving George a lil sum sum 
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 06:50
|
|
|
I agree. I'm definitely switching to Teksavvy once I stop getting these sweet student deals from Shaw. $24/mo for 100GB @ 15Mbits is a great deal (for Canada) any way you slice it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 06:58
|
|
|
Shumagorath posted:Wasn't TekSavvy supposed to be granted access to the new fibre networks independent of other lovely rulings? Not like it matters though; Bell has advertisements for it all over my neighbourhood (including on loving phone booths) while we're limited to their 6/1 Mbit DSL that's 4/0.5 in practise. That's not even mentioning the deliberate throttling of torrents. I hardly ever see full use of my line, it's usually at the deep dark of night. But hey, it's all about the wall, not how fast you get there. As for Teksavvy cable, I'll definitely be all over that.. when they get it over here. Their track record for their cable roll out is abysmal right now. The most recent location they just got coverage in was... North York or something? Based upon their original estimates of roll out, I can look forward to the Durham Region getting service... sometime in 2013. Don't get me wrong, I love their service so far. But I've been pretty pissed off with the slow rollout and UBB rearing it's ugly head without any options. Now, it's pretty much gone, so no more worries. Clement better not re-neg on his twitter promise, or else myself and thousands more will flip.their.poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 07:01
|
|
|
Shumagorath posted:(including on loving phone booths)  I don't think I've seen a payphone in 5 years.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 07:24
|
|
|
Suniikaa posted:
We used to have Telus phone booths everywhere. Then they dissapeared. Now we have Bell phone booths.  I'm not sure if they charge Bell's 50c, or the more common 25c. Bell hasn't been as big of jerks out west as they do in the east, probably because they're not the incumbent.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 07:50
|
|
|
Isizzlehorn posted:As for Teksavvy cable, I'll definitely be all over that.. when they get it over here. Their track record for their cable roll out is abysmal right now. The most recent location they just got coverage in was... North York or something? Based upon their original estimates of roll out, I can look forward to the Durham Region getting service... sometime in 2013. I'm in Ingersoll Ontario. Cable internet will likely be eclipsed by wireless technologies before Teksavvy rolls it out here. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 08:22
|
|
|
Haha George Berger is awesome. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=ZYizoh_r6D0#t=481s Comparison between Bell charging $2 a gig and the CRTC regulating Money For Nothing. I wish TekSavvy was in my area.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 08:35
|
|
|
ZShakespeare posted:I agree. I'm definitely switching to Teksavvy once I stop getting these sweet student deals from Shaw. $24/mo for 100GB @ 15Mbits is a great deal (for Canada) any way you slice it. please elaborate on how you got this Shaw deal my good man Shaw is always superduper unwilling to bend on their rates whenever I give them a call to see if they will match or beat MTS (their only competitor in MB). Pweller fucked around with this message at 08:56 on Feb 3, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 08:53
|
|
|
Pweller posted:please elaborate on how you got this Shaw deal my good man You generally pay for it all at once and it usually requires Cable TV as well, but I've heard of such a deal. You need proof of student ID as well and the Cable TV package is limited.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 09:01
|
|
|
Godinster posted:Great news. It's somewhat gratifying to know that our marketeers are such utter dipshits, since it makes it easier to knock them down. But holy hell, it makes me embarrassed to share a country with this guy. Edit: Here's a quote: quote:So yet AGAIN govt caves to loudest squawks. We'll all wind up paying more, for slower service, so a few bandwidth hogs can pay less..
Nomenklatura fucked around with this message at 09:12 on Feb 3, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 09:10
|
|
|
Nomenklatura posted:I eagerly scoured his twitter feed to discover how monthly bills prevent evening-hour congestion, since not a soul has explained that to this day. No joy. People should suggest expensive road tolls to prevent rush hour congestion every time somebody tries that line. It's the same flawed concept, but it'd probably make more sense to people who don't really get this whole "internet" thing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 09:20
|
|
|
It was nice to see that they picked the slimiest investor they could find to go up against George Berger. I really hope this generates the usage-based backlash I've been looking forward to for the past few years.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 14:03
|
|
|
Isn't that guy one of the show's hosts? He must be feeling so butthurt this morning.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 14:25
|
|
TO UNDERAGE GYMNASTS
|
The good thing about this is Teksavvy should get an increase in subscriptions, especially when all the reports are now saying it in basic laymen terms of Bell = not unlimited, Teksavvy/Other Resellers = unlimited for the same price or less. Why wouldn't you switch if you knew this (and aren't locked in a contract or don't want to deal with the hassle of switching for a few bucks saved/gigs more)
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 14:53
|
|
|
Dudebro posted:Isn't that guy one of the show's hosts? He must be feeling so butthurt this morning. Yeah it is the host. It could not have played out better. He came off as the whiny corporate dickhead who is only motivated by greed and that's exactly what people needed to see. "MY CAPITAL!!! ". Yep, exactly what this whole exercise has been about. edit: missed this last page "also, The Gunslinger, a fellow niagara-West-Glanbrookian/ gunslinger fan? city/town? Pelham here" - Grimsby 
The Gunslinger fucked around with this message at 17:39 on Feb 3, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 14:58
|
|
|
This is really good news, maybe I can actually get Netflix now. I'm currently on Shaw in Red Deer, and I'm loathe to drop from the 15/1 plan, but it's still going to have the 100GB cap right? I checked out TekSavvy and all they have is DSL packages out here. I'm not a big DSL fan. Any other central Alberta goons know of a better deal, or am I stuck with scummy Shaw until TekSavvy Cable or some form of fibre?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 16:41
|
|
|
The Gunslinger posted:Yeah it is the host. It could not have played out better. He came off as the whiny corporate dickhead who is only motivated by greed and that's exactly what people needed to see. "MY CAPITAL!!! ". Yep, exactly what this whole exercise has been about. Isn't that guy that Burger was arguing with one of the "Dragons" on that Dragon's Den show? All of those people are super greedy capitalists so his attitude should come as no surprise.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 17:43
|
|
|
Ughhhh, I'm getting interviewed for a CBC piece on the UBB issue. Anyone have any soundbites that wouldn't make me sound like an idiot on  National Television.... 
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 18:19
|
|
|
Moist von Lipwig posted:Ughhhh, I'm getting interviewed for a CBC piece on the UBB issue. Anyone have any soundbites that wouldn't make me sound like an idiot on What's your involvement with it? Very cool either way. Emphasize on the fact that it costs a fraction of a penny to provide bandwidth and that Canadian costs to provide are actually less than American counterparts, despite our market being far less saturated. Also the fact that major telecom companies in Canada already have the highest profit margins in the world and the fact that the UBB is conveniently coming out as Netflix gains in popularity, lowering the likelihood people are going to use Shaw or Bell or Rogers on demand, especially when the price of one movie is often the same as an entire month of Netflix. There's a million points to be made, none of which benefit UBB. Nairbo fucked around with this message at 18:51 on Feb 3, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 18:29
|
|
|
Moist von Lipwig posted:Ughhhh, I'm getting interviewed for a CBC piece on the UBB issue. Anyone have any soundbites that wouldn't make me sound like an idiot on You could repeat that image too just explaining that it would now be cheaper and faster to courier hard drives around the country.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 18:31
|
|
|
Moist von Lipwig posted:Ughhhh, I'm getting interviewed for a CBC piece on the UBB issue. Anyone have any soundbites that wouldn't make me sound like an idiot on Seriously, make a comparison to charging tolls on roads ostensibly to clear congestion at rush hour.  , I know, but it's not going to do a drat thing there either and it's something people will understand is bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 18:36
|
|
|
Godinster posted:What's your involvement with it? Very cool either way. I'm one of the starters of the facebook protest group, this has kind of blown up moreso than I expected but I'm excited, regardless This is all good stuff that I already knew but reading it is going to reinforce it in my mind so thank you. teethgrinder posted:You should make it clear that they greatly exaggerated their costs, and this policy would have given Canada the most expensive internet access in the entire world. Anyone have the recent numbers/charts handy? This is really good too! Part of what I'm worried about is that my job involves transferring multi-gigabyte files and I don't want to sound like "That Guy Who Uses All The Bandwidth" versus Average Joe.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 18:36
|
|
|
Personally I'd mention the fact that these providers are using caps to stifle innovation and competition with their products. The CTV example is a recent hot button issue you can refer to. VOD is another one. In most cases its consumers seeking a superior product and instead of trying to legitimately compete the companies are trying to force you to use their more expensive, less desirable options. This might be fine if the CRTC would fulfill its mandate and protect the public from natural monopolistic practices but instead something like UBB just gives them a legalized method of stamping out competition. Avoid the bandwidth hog thing, it has nothing to do with bandwidth hogs and any time its brought up is a negative because people will often choose the simplest ideas to relate to if they don't understand the topic material. The Gunslinger fucked around with this message at 18:40 on Feb 3, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 18:38
|
|
|
The Gunslinger posted:Personally I'd mention the fact that these providers are using caps to stifle innovation and competition with their products. The CTV example is a recent hot button issue you can refer to. VOD is another one. In most cases its consumers seeking a superior product and instead of trying to legitimately compete the companies are trying to force you to use their more expensive, less desirable options. This might be fine if the CRTC would fulfill its mandate and protect the public from natural monopolistic practices but instead something like UBB just gives them a legalized method of stamping out competition. Sorry can you clarify the CTV part? And you are right about the bandwidth hog thing, it detracts from the issue every time.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 18:43
|
|
|
Moist von Lipwig posted:Ughhhh, I'm getting interviewed for a CBC piece on the UBB issue. Anyone have any soundbites that wouldn't make me sound like an idiot on Say what everyone's been telling you so far, but don't expect them to air anything you say. It was my impression that when less than three was interviewed that they barely used anything he said and just decided to run with the "lol he uses too much! back to you, Peter!"
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 18:50
|
|
|
Moist von Lipwig posted:Sorry can you clarify the CTV part? And you are right about the bandwidth hog thing, it detracts from the issue every time. Bell bought CTV and also provides their own television delivery service. Rogers provides a video on demand service and traditional broadcast cable. Their internet products have a direct conflict of interest with their own core offerings, particularly with regards to streaming video. It is in their own best interest to force caps on the consumer, both their own and the reseller. They are using caps and overages to effectively bounce you from one service to another but keep you within reach. If you don't like large overages which are profitable to them then your only recourse is their alternate product which has similar problems. None of this would be a big deal if you could just switch to a reseller but of course they are using the CRTC to force the resellers to adopt their business model. Consumers seeking an alternative should be able to find one, they shouldn't be forced to deal with a natural monopoly by their own government. It's especially glaring because this is the kind of thing that the CRTC is ironically supposed to prevent. Anyway that's the background, I would just use a broadstrokes "They want you to pay for expensive cable packages and stop you from watching youtube/netflix!" approach.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 18:51
|
|
|
Moist von Lipwig posted:Sorry can you clarify the CTV part? And you are right about the bandwidth hog thing, it detracts from the issue every time. Bell owns or is slated to own CTVglobemedia and would rather push you to watch its own content rather than Netflix or buying TV episodes from iTunes or something. efb
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 19:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 07:43 |
|
|
Maybe try throwing something like this in: "Americans just received assurances that their internet access would be fair and open, where providers can't give preferred access to certain content delivery sources over others. Here in Canada, corporations like Bell and Rogers who own video on demand services have the option of delivering their content without penalty to your bandwidth cap, effectively giving preferential treatment to their own service while making competitors like Netflix a less viable option for consumers." Also if you can find some actual numbers to back this up: "How can providers in America offer service with much higher, if not unmetered, bandwidth caps with a much larger population, while Canadians in urban areas still have to deal with archaic limitations? A family of four, netflix, 60gb cap, etc etc." in addition to the "cents per gigabyte" UBB thing. If you hit the "Well Americans have this and this, why are we so behind?", maybe it'll be sensationalist enough to give birth to a soundbite or something. If nothing else, it might just hit some nationalistic pride nerve.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2011 19:04
|
|
