Quoted from ForceFlow:I received something similar.
Nah - they're polar opposites. Comstock is for dismantling it, while Schumer's letter is stating he's for keeping it.
I guess, similar in that they're all form-letters. 
(Topic ID: 189364)
You're currently viewing posts by Pinsider coyote.
Click here to go back to viewing the entire thread.
Yeah - while I like Comstock's stance on Metro and their union, her reply sours that.
And, FTR, railroads are VERY highly regulated - regulations up the wazoo, and attempts for railroads to increase prices to increase revenues have been shot down very often. (Re: many STB filings..) So here, her argument is.. extremely weak.
4 months later
Quoted from Vdrums:While I'm for net neutrality, it does seem worthy of discussion that Netflix uses such a large percentage of traffic. So perhaps while there should be no preferences, speed caps or tiers, massive bandwidth users could be made to contribute something.
That's just it - they would, by having to pay the ISPs more money to not have their bandwidth throttled. And then NetFlix/Hulu/Whatever has to pay more, guess what.. they're gonna raise their subscription prices, so you pay more.
Quoted from pezpunk:the ISPs will feed at both ends -- they will charge Netflix for "priority" use of their networks (read: extortion to make their app actually work) and then they will turn around and charge end users (you) an extra fee for access to Netflix. This is on top of your Netflix subscription, by the way.
Net Neutrality says they can't do this because they have to treat all internet traffic equally. Ajit Pai and the GOP want to scrap that concept.
Oh, I know. I was answering his comment about why the higher-bandwidth companies/users don't pay.
2 weeks later
Quoted from mbaumle:As I understand it, and please correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this decision now has to be run through Congress, and if need be, the Supreme Court. Not that either of those options are at all comforting...
Still. What a disgrace.
Not correct, as far as I know.
Like the FRA (who I am regulated by), there are laws in place, put in years ago, that gives the authority to do the regulating. Those laws in place is like a broad brushstroke for congress to say, 'Make your own regulations, we trust you.' So, they now just publish a regulation change in the Federal Register, and that's it.
With the FRA, at least, they usually post a proposed rule change, and give interested parties a set time to comment - usually 180 days. They then take all the comments, and specifically address them, and makes any changes to the rules that they feel that they agree with, before enacting the regulation. Said regulation usaully has wordings in it saying that 'x' companies have until 'x' date to have this implemented, etc. Here, I don't think that's necessary, since it's undoing something previously done.
Quoted from Pugsley:So hows that PTC coming along?
I know this is a troll post, because of the smilie there, but I'll say this:
I am required by my employer to say it's horrible.
But as a train driver AND a signal maintainer, I have mixed feelings - it has its good points and draws, and it has its bad points. I won't go into it more'n that, since it's off-topic.
You're currently viewing posts by Pinsider coyote.
Click here to go back to viewing the entire thread.
Reply
Wanna join the discussion? Please sign in to reply to this topic.
Hey there! Welcome to Pinside!
Donate to PinsideGreat to see you're enjoying Pinside! Did you know Pinside is able to run without any 3rd-party banners or ads, thanks to the support from our visitors? Please consider a donation to Pinside and get anext to your username to show for it! Or better yet, subscribe to Pinside+!
