This issue could well turn out to be Trump's Achilles heal. If they go too far, the engineers that actually make the Internet work can easily bring the whole shebang down in protest -- and the world is so addicted to the Internet at this point the outrage would be deafening. And if Trump is too proud to back down...
FCC weakens net neutrality rule in a prelude to larger rollbacks
231–240 of 322 posts
Re: FCC weakens net neutrality rule in a prelude to larger rollbacks
#232Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are pros and cons to gun ownership; it both contributes to and harms the public good. Net neutrality is a more lopsided issue—the arguments against net neutrality are all about legalizing extortion and promoting a tragedy of the commons, or else they're non-specific arguments against regulation of any kind. Taken on its own and rationally, the net neutrality issue is much less amenable to producing a permanent…
To be fair, your "arguments against net neutrality are all about legalizing extortion" already sounds a bit "ultra biased". What if someone wants to start an ISP, and charge less for a lower QoS band? Is that legalized extortion? (Not to say it would be a good idea, I agree that it is a slippery slope)
Charging more for something that costs more to the ISP isn't a net neutrality issue. Net neutrality is about charging for things that cost nothing to the ISP, but are worth more to the consumer.
Re: FCC weakens net neutrality rule in a prelude to larger rollbacks
#233Undersandly, the conversation in here revolves around the technicalities and semantics of net neutrality. But this isn't an issue of technology. It's a political issue, or worse, an ideological issue. It's not about the empirical truths of net neutrality, or the collective intent of those who created, and those who continue to develop the technology that has woven itself into the fabric of humanity. It's about idealo…
I think the tech industry and HN crowd are waking up too late, and this might be because of the previous HN cultural wave. Initially HN was like the slashdot crows, in that it was geeky and making money of being entrepreneurial was an ideal, and not a way of life.
Eventually that changed as the culture shifted to enabling and succeeding in startups. A lot of the meta culture and crowd is now many steps away from the old hacker roots and far closer to the entrepreneur /wanterpreneur group.
This latter group really isn't in it to get into a political battle, and it makes no sense to get involved in a waste of time. As a result achieving critical mass, or uniting people under political oriented architectures won't happen soon enough.
Maybe it's time to head back to /. ?
Re: FCC weakens net neutrality rule in a prelude to larger rollbacks
#234Earlier quoted context omitted.
That article shows Google wanting new regulations imposed in some areas (forcing local governments and utilities to accommodate Google), but not wanting relief from net neutrality regulations.
> That article shows Google wanting new regulations imposed in some areas Where did you get that? Kevin Lo from Google is quoted as saying "Regulations tied to physical infrastructure sometimes defer the investment altogether". Are you saying that in reference to something else?
Google's wanting federal regulations enacted to cut the local red tape, some of which is from local governments and some is from incumbent utilities.
Re: FCC weakens net neutrality rule in a prelude to larger rollbacks
#235Earlier quoted context omitted.
To be fair, your "arguments against net neutrality are all about legalizing extortion" already sounds a bit "ultra biased". What if someone wants to start an ISP, and charge less for a lower QoS band? Is that legalized extortion? (Not to say it would be a good idea, I agree that it is a slippery slope)
Charging more for something that costs more to the ISP isn't a net neutrality issue. Net neutrality is about charging for things that cost nothing to the ISP, but are worth more to the consumer.
>Net neutrality is about charging for things that cost nothing to the ISP, but are worth more to the consumer.
That's certainly not what it's about. Business charge people all of the time based on what they think the customer will pay, regardless of what it costs them (see most "limited edition" versions of games, DVDs, etc).
The reason net neutrality is important is because many ISPs are effectively monopolies so there is no competition to keep them in check.
Re: FCC weakens net neutrality rule in a prelude to larger rollbacks
#236Earlier quoted context omitted.
Eisenach wrote some papers on using existing antitrust laws rather than NN laws to punish anticompetitive behavior, which I think is reasonable. Apply the laws we already have, don't make new laws that prevent reasonable behavior.
Antitrust laws may not prevent bundling and other anti-competitive behavior. For example, Apple has so far been allowed to bundle Apple apps with phones, forbid any competing apps, and require developers to distribute apps through the App Store.
I see the main difference here being you don't need to buy an Apple phone
Re: FCC weakens net neutrality rule in a prelude to larger rollbacks
#237Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are describing a content lock-in dystopia. Yes, this would be anticompetitive (and appropriately addressed by the FTC or DOJ, not the FCC) and it is among the more unlikely scenarios.
Sure, I'm painting a picture to illustrate the point. But reductio ad absurdum can be a useful way to explore the problem. I don't think there's anything in my scenario that's beyond the pale. We could get there by degrees in an aggressively unfettered market.
>We could get there by degrees in an aggressively unfettered market.
Don't you mean the heavily regulated market we have now that prevents new ISPs from easily servicing customers? The entire reason ISPs can behave like this is because customers realistically have no alternatives.
Look at how Comcast behaved in markets where Google Fiber showed up. They often increased bandwidth and reduced prices effective immediately to try to keep customers. An 'unfettered market' would be one where an ISP doesn't have to spend years negotiating with city councils just to get the privilege to put fiber in utility tunnels where local cable companies already have it.
Re: FCC weakens net neutrality rule in a prelude to larger rollbacks
#238Earlier quoted context omitted.
Antitrust laws may not prevent bundling and other anti-competitive behavior. For example, Apple has so far been allowed to bundle Apple apps with phones, forbid any competing apps, and require developers to distribute apps through the App Store.
I see the main difference here being you don't need to buy an Apple phone
The same argument would be made in areas where you can choose between DSL and cable Internet.
Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if satellite and wireless Internet were offered as evidence of sufficient competition in the market.
Re: FCC weakens net neutrality rule in a prelude to larger rollbacks
#239Let me put my hat in the ring here.
Deregulation of access to consumers will result in cheaper internet and most likely faster internet speeds. However, it will concentrate power to those who already have it. Large ISPs will charge heavy bandwidth companies and only the largest heavy bandwidth companies will be able to afford the fees.
Those heavy bandwidth companies paying the fees will recoup the money through advertising. Remember newspapers and large TV media companies make the majority of their money through advertising. When companies rely on advertising, the users are no longer the customers. They are the product.
Further protecting the companies which rely on advertising will allow those companies to focus less on the customers and more on the advertisers. Companies relying on the allegiance of advertising will naturally shape their political standing to views of the advertisers. Remember also that advertisers are not paying for just eyeballs, but they are all paying for control. If a company starts moving away from their advertisers' political ideology they will lose revenue. Net Neutrality will ultimately give more control to companies that already hold power.
Just my two cents...
Re: FCC weakens net neutrality rule in a prelude to larger rollbacks
#240Let me put my hat in the ring here.
Deregulation of access to consumers will result in cheaper internet and most likely faster internet speeds. However, it will concentrate power to those who already have it. Large ISPs will charge heavy bandwidth companies and only the largest heavy bandwidth companies will be able to afford the fees.
Those heavy bandwidth companies paying the fees will recoup the money through advertising. Remember newspapers and large TV media companies make the majority of their money through advertising. When companies rely on advertising, the users are no longer the customers. They are the product.
Further protecting the companies which rely on advertising will allow those companies to focus less on the customers and more on the advertisers. Companies relying on the allegiance of advertising will naturally shape their political standing to views of the advertisers. Remember also that advertisers are not paying for just eyeballs, but they are all paying for control. If a company starts moving away from their advertisers' political ideology they will lose revenue. Net Neutrality will ultimately give more control to companies that already hold power.
Just my two cents...