this post was submitted on 07 Aug 2025
61 points (100.0% liked)

Canada

10307 readers
726 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
top 7 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Fiivemacs@lemmy.ca 18 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Bell had argued against the policy, saying it discourages the major providers from investing in their own infrastructure

fuck off, you steal tax payers money to build that shit. it's not even yours bell. none of 'your' infrastructure is

[–] lemonySplit@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 week ago

I forget who but I just saw a thread last week about how Rogers (?) took billions in taxpayer money to build out coverage for a highway in BC and then just abandoned it without delivering. While keeping the money! Wtf

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 week ago

Lol, large Internet providers are known for taking government money to build infrastructure and then get rich off the proceedings

They're not known for investing much of their own money

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 15 points 1 week ago (2 children)

In June, the regulator issued its final decision on the contentious matter, which has pitted Telus Corp. against rivals Bell Canada and Rogers Communications Inc., and many smaller providers that opposed the framework.

Now this is odd. No further detail to clarify who those were and what their objections were. Perhaps those were the smaller providers now owned by Rogers and Bell?

[–] ValueSubtracted@startrek.website 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Yeah, there's a single line that says, "some independent carriers raised concerns that it would make it more difficult for them to compete against larger players," which is vague.

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 week ago

I recall Tek had a problem with a court decision upholding some rule by the CRTC but I think it was about rates (too high) and I think it was older than this.

[–] Mongostein@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 week ago

You can find out what some of the small providers think at https://openmedia.org/

I know TekSavvy is part of the group, not sure who else.