LOUNGE all new asksnapzu ideasforsnapzu newtribes interesting pics videos funny technology science technews gaming health history worldnews business web research entertainment food living internet socialmedia mobile space sports photography nature animals movies culture travel television finance music celebrities gadgets environment usa crime politics law money justice psychology security cars wtf art google books lifetips bigbrother women apple kids recipes whoa military privacy education facebook medicine computing wildlife design war drugs middleeast diet toplists economy fail violence humor africa microsoft parenting dogs canada neuroscience architecture religion advertising infographics sex journalism disaster software aviation relationships energy booze life japan ukraine newmovies nsa cannabis name Name of the tribe humanrights nasa cute weather gifs discoveries cops futurism football earth dataviz pets guns entrepreneurship fitness android extremeweather fashion insects india northamerica
+38 38 0
Published 2 years ago with 1 Comments

Join the Discussion

  • Auto Tier
  • All
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Post Comment
  • Kalysta
    +3

    To play devil's advocate, is AT&T really being hypocritical? Alone, they didn't have the ability to bring cable TV to Americans. And without AT&T, DirecTV's internet options were laughable, or non existent. Satellite internet is currently terrible; expensive, slow speeds and poor connectivity. So technically merging these two just added a new cable, internet, phone company onto the market. And isn't that exactly what AT&T is arguing for?

    Though, what should really happen is all the cable/internet services in the country right now be allowed to offer their services countrywide, not in their own regional monopolies. I was actually a little excited about this merger, until I realized that UVerse is not available in my area, and if Time Warner merges with Charter, I'm stuck using their terrible, expensive, throttled service.

Here are some other snaps you may like...