I really think that's the wrong lesson to glean. In the case of telephones and railroads, the government didn't just offer a fingernail, they offered everything. It is very rare that a monopoly forms without some type of government interference and it often arises because of the "oversight" you seek.

The solution is to advocate for a limited government that doesn't subsidize anything or create regulation/licenses/permits that create winners and losers.

How ironic that you link to an explanation of how GOVERNMENT created a monopoly. The government subsidized the railroad and telegraph lines.

Apart from the state and local fees that are almost certain to come if this stands, I agree with you. But negative consequences of peering were almost purely speculative as well. And not worth reclassifying the internet as a utility over. Can anyone honestly say they were affected by them other then traffic-sucking…

Well, you could try reading it and judging for yourself whether or not it's credible. But Bell was not the only game in town after the patents expired. In fact, a year after they had expired in 1893 almost 80 new companies had sprung up grabbing 5% of market share and by 1907, 51% of the market was controlled by…

But not ostensibly because now we have the services. And it's all changed and improved very rapidly. All I will say is that the value I get out of my internet service, cell phone, and cell service is very high and the cost is relatively low for how much I use it and get out of it. And from observing everyone around me…

That's simply not true at all. The government sanctioned the monopoly and actually made it easier for Bell to assume total control until they changed their tune. At one point the government even said telephone companies were a "natural monopoly."

I never said that specifically but how do you think we got from dial-up, to DSL, to cable, to fiber optics? How do you think we got to 4G and FiOS? These companies invest their profits all the time to improve their networks.

The monopoly problem exists because local governments have exclusivity deals and subsidy agreements.

I never said it was a perfect free market system. But the reason it's not is because the current landscape arose from a previously overregulated telephone and broadcast network regime. In addition, many local governments give companies exclusivity deals or subsidize infrastructure — which I also don't support. But…

The internet was specifically made separate from Title II in 1996 for a reason. And that separation led to the biggest most successful gamechanging industry of our lifetime. I don't know where you get the idea that regulating it under a law devised in the 30's has somehow made more sense all along. The proof is in the…

For now. But it opens up the internet to a lot more control in the future like pricing restrictions. And there could be state and local taxes/fees.

Because private corporations come and go. Because I can rid myself of a private corporation rather easily. Because I'm generally very satisfied with my internet and cell service! Because anytime a private corporation gains something nearing monopolistic control, it's because government secured it for them.

I continue to be astounded that people are so afraid of abuses and control by ISPs —the actual builders and providers of service that have to win your business — and yet have no fear of governmental control of the internet. Even if you believe fast lanes would create major problems in the future or that there should…

That's why I said I understood the comment. However, I think there's some crossover between mythologizing lone heroes killing a dictator and lone snipers/war heroes winning battles.

I understand why Rogen made the comparison, but but he just made a historical fantasy movie where a dictator is killed — a la "Inglorious Basterds."

This article is off base. The film is quite a faithful adaptation of the book. Yes, Nick is a misogynist. Yes, he doesn't react emotionally the way most people would in a similar situation. But there's no doubt that Amy is more capable of evil. Margo's shifting sympathies line up with just about anyone's. "But he…

I enjoyed a lot about this movie — the production design, performances, score, and a lot of the scenes were great. But as it moved toward the conclusion, the weight of its own logic took a toll.