CaptainSnotRocket

Hi, and thanks for the AMA. Couple of questions for you. (edit - 3 now)

First #1, Comcast wants to start charging internet usage by selling you a set amount of data, and charging overages if you go over that amount.

That being said. Digital TV, the actual tv signal, is also data. How is it Comcast can charge if we go over on internet data, but not credit us for an underage, if we do not heavily use tv data? Using their model for internet charging. Would it also be fair for them to charge us for TV services when our cable box is on, but not charge us when the box is off?

Another way to ask this is why is tv data allowed to be charged at a flat rate (essentially an unlimited amount, as I can have my cable box on 24/7/365 using all the tv data bandwith I want) but internet data allowed to be charged on a per byte model? Isn't all data, data? Or is the business model simply double dipping?

Also, if this model does go through and is implemented nationwide. What kind of regulatory safeguards are going to be in place to protect consumers from fraudulent charges, or charges beyond their control? A simple scenario is a group of hackers set up a botnet on Comcast customers computers, and the purpose of the bot is to simply have the computer when on to transfer as much data as physically possible. Would it be fair to grandma and grampa to get a 3k dollar bill one month because a virus sent them terabytes over their cap?

Next, #2, Do you think it would be a good idea to break up the cable/internet monopolies in the US. And not allow cable companies to sell internet services, and vice versa, not allow internet service providers also sell tv services? Would that create more or less competition in the US?

---

This AMA is long over, neither of my questions got answered. And I do have 1 more. And I am going to add it here just because I think some people might agree with it, and hopefully it gets a good discussion going.

So #3... Would you support stripping Comcast, and every other cable company of the ISP portion of their business, and selling that off in smaller chunks to smaller independent companies, of whom none of them would offer a cable tv service?

Here is what I mean. As a cable tv provider, as a "tv service" provider. There is competition in the marketplace. You can do Comcast, you could do antenna, you could do satellite, and you can also do internet based tv service with such services such as hulu, Netflix, and a few others.

Here is the problem. Every company wants a monopoly, that is what they want, it is natural for them to want that, having a monopoly is the ultimate way to maximize any companies profits. And because any company has a fiduciary responsibility to maximize shareholder profits. It is natural for any company to try to form a or gravitate towards some type of monopoly. And that is why the US has laws to prevent that type of thing, because we know it is inevitable. Companies like comcast can not do anything about the competition that antenna and satellite services have, but as also ISP's they can do something about internet based tv services, and that is a problem.

The question is would you be for or against a split of ISP's and cable providers for no other reason than a cable company that also owns the only true broadband service in any location is a monopoly in the respect that they can bully out legitimate internet based tv services competition through throttling, data caps, and also lobbying the FCC against net neutrality rules?

Cable companies should not own ISPs, as it is a basic conflict of interest.

At the same time, IPS's should not own nor directly be involved with tv services.

I don't know why somebody smarter than me did not think of this earlier. But here you go Reddit. http://www.reddit.com/r/noncensoredworldnews/

Between you, the driver, or anybody else on the boat. Was booze involved in any way?

I miss aol chat rooms. I used to pick up some decent looking babes back in the day with those.

Time to scrub the poopdeck matey!