Net neutrality is in jeopardy again • Hacker News Board

Re: Net neutrality is in jeopardy again

#81

Post by panglott » Mon, May 08, 2017, 2:50 PM UTC

jfaucett wrote: post #16

Does anyone else find the internet market odd? Up until now net neutrality and other policies have given us the following: 1. Massive monopolies which essentially control 95% of all tech (google, facebook, amazon, microsoft, apple, etc) 2. An internet where every consumer assumes everything should be free. 3. An internet where there's only enough room for a handfull of players in each market globally i.e. if you have…

When all the capital flows to small companies that strive to become monopolies, it's no surprise that a market dominated by near-monopolies is what you get. Some of these are natural monopolies, or just large companies with a moat of network effects. It has little to do with net neutrality.

Re: Net neutrality is in jeopardy again

#82

Post by cygx » Mon, May 08, 2017, 2:50 PM UTC

marknutter wrote: post #63

shallot_router wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ISPs and utility companies are natural monopolies. When you move to a new location, you're stuck with the ISPs that service that location; often just 1 ISP. By giving them the power to selectively control what they're sending down the pipe, the monopoly problem will grow far far worse. Net neutrality is not the cause of the problems you listed, and removing it won't solve any of them.

> ISPs and utility companies are natural monopolies. When you move to a new location, you're stuck with the ISPs that service that location; often just 1 ISP. This is simply not true. With the wide availability of cellular service that provides broadband speeds pretty much everyone in the country has multiple choices of ISP.

How competitive are they with regard to latency, speed and pricing?

Re: Net neutrality is in jeopardy again

#83

Post by KZeillmann » Mon, May 08, 2017, 2:50 PM UTC

bkeroack wrote: post #72

I've written it before and I'll write it again (despite the massive downvotes from those who want to silence dissent): Title II regulation of the Internet is not the net neutrality panacea that many people think it is. That is the same kind of heavy-handed regulation that gave us the sorry copper POTS network we are stuck with today. The free market is the solution, and must be defended against those who want Europea…

Sure -- let's say free market is a solution? Free market only works if I have choice. Right now, my only choice for internet service is Comcast. Free market won't do a thing until I have actual choices here.

Re: Net neutrality is in jeopardy again

#84

Post by pikzen » Mon, May 08, 2017, 2:50 PM UTC

marknutter wrote: post #63

shallot_router wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ISPs and utility companies are natural monopolies. When you move to a new location, you're stuck with the ISPs that service that location; often just 1 ISP. By giving them the power to selectively control what they're sending down the pipe, the monopoly problem will grow far far worse. Net neutrality is not the cause of the problems you listed, and removing it won't solve any of them.

> ISPs and utility companies are natural monopolies. When you move to a new location, you're stuck with the ISPs that service that location; often just 1 ISP. This is simply not true. With the wide availability of cellular service that provides broadband speeds pretty much everyone in the country has multiple choices of ISP.

If I used the same amount of data on my cellular service than I do on my land line, I would be kicked out of every single provider in the country.

And I live in a country where data is cheap.

Re: Net neutrality is in jeopardy again

#85

Post by Bartweiss » Mon, May 08, 2017, 2:51 PM UTC

MichaelBurge wrote: post #29

> The order meant individuals were free to say, watch and make what they want online, without meddling or interference from Internet service providers. > Without net neutrality, big companies could censor your voice and make it harder to speak up online. Hmm, was it ever prohibited for e.g. some Twitter user to write your ISP an angry letter calling you a Nazi, so they shut your internet off to avoid the headache? I'…

This is an interesting question, actually. I don't know of that being prohibited, but I've also never heard of it actually happening to anyone.

Does anyone know of an example or a regulation against it?

Re: Net neutrality is in jeopardy again

#86

Post by throwaway2048 » Mon, May 08, 2017, 2:52 PM UTC

woah wrote: post #36

ajross wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the same reason the "free market" doesn't afford you competitive choice in power or gas delivery, sewer service, trash pickup, road paving outside your driveway... Physical residential networks are, like all other civil infrastructure, natural monopolies. They don't work in a "free market" and never have. The insistence on the part of glibertarians that somehow this "regulation-free" mode will work for data when…

You can get 540mbps wifi gear for like $50 now. Radio internet is not a natural monopoly.

those speeds are not achievable anywhere outside of a perfect test condition lab. With a lot of other wifi radios in the area, you are lucky to get a usable signal at all.

Re: Net neutrality is in jeopardy again

#87

Post by pikzen » Mon, May 08, 2017, 2:52 PM UTC

bkeroack wrote: post #72

I've written it before and I'll write it again (despite the massive downvotes from those who want to silence dissent): Title II regulation of the Internet is not the net neutrality panacea that many people think it is. That is the same kind of heavy-handed regulation that gave us the sorry copper POTS network we are stuck with today. The free market is the solution, and must be defended against those who want Europea…

Hi, European here. Do you want to compare access to broadband in ANY of our countries to the US so I can have a laugh?

Re: Net neutrality is in jeopardy again

#88

Post by cnnsucks » Mon, May 08, 2017, 2:52 PM UTC

marknutter wrote: post #63

shallot_router wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ISPs and utility companies are natural monopolies. When you move to a new location, you're stuck with the ISPs that service that location; often just 1 ISP. By giving them the power to selectively control what they're sending down the pipe, the monopoly problem will grow far far worse. Net neutrality is not the cause of the problems you listed, and removing it won't solve any of them.

> ISPs and utility companies are natural monopolies. When you move to a new location, you're stuck with the ISPs that service that location; often just 1 ISP. This is simply not true. With the wide availability of cellular service that provides broadband speeds pretty much everyone in the country has multiple choices of ISP.

Is that actually the case? The cell services I know of have very low caps, one or two orders of magnitude higher cost and suffer congestion problems.

Re: Net neutrality is in jeopardy again

#89

Post by super_mario » Mon, May 08, 2017, 2:52 PM UTC

weberc2 wrote: post #23

I wasn't impressed with this article; it reads like fear mongering. More importantly, I don't think the fix is regulation, I think it's better privacy tech + increased competition via elimination of local monopolies. Do we really want to depend on government to enforce privacy on the Internet?

This is not about government enforcing privacy on the internet. That is false analogy, but even if it were good analogy, it would still fail. Do you want government enforcing your personal security (also known as policing)? Would it not be better if guys who are richer and can afford more bullies, intimidate you and ask for money while you are trying to walk by their house/business etc?

Net neutrality is about each ISP, carrier etc treating each packet flowing through the network equally and not discriminating between its origin or destination.

If net neutrality is gone, ISPs and back bone operators can start asking for money for packets routed though their network based on who the packet is going to. You want to watch Youtube? Well, your ISP thinks its unfair that you are using the internet connection you paid for already to do that, they would rather you watch their own service. So, they throttle your connection to youtube, and ask money from both you and Google, to make it fast again.

The danger here is that Internet will be turned exactly what cable TV is now.

And if you do want physical world analogy, this is a better one: Imagine that starting next Monday the Yellow Cab Company begins charging all business to which a fare is delivered, since it is unreasonable for businesses to receive the benefit of customers and employees arriving at their sites in a safe and timely manner and for them to pay nothing. After all Yellow Cab Company spends time, gas, and quite frankly, expects them to pay their fair share of the fare. They may also begin billing all businesses passed on the way to a destination, as these business receive "free marketing".

If presumably technical people visiting this site have such a hard problem with net neutrality, I'd say the battle to keep internet free is lost.

Re: Net neutrality is in jeopardy again

#90

Post by Shivetya » Mon, May 08, 2017, 2:53 PM UTC

an_account wrote: post #40

jfaucett wrote: post #16

Does anyone else find the internet market odd? Up until now net neutrality and other policies have given us the following: 1. Massive monopolies which essentially control 95% of all tech (google, facebook, amazon, microsoft, apple, etc) 2. An internet where every consumer assumes everything should be free. 3. An internet where there's only enough room for a handfull of players in each market globally i.e. if you have…

1) happens naturally in most markets. Without net-neutrality I believe that it would be harder for these companies to be dethroned if something better came along. 2) I think will only continue to be true for a short period of time. With products like Netflix and amazon, and with traditional television channels like HBO and ESPN starting to charge for streaming online, I think consumer attitude will shift as they real…

The issue I take with Net Neutrality is that regulation is just a likely to enshrine the existing players so firmly no one can break in because regulation protects it.

Net Neutrality is not a magic cure all and it isn't neutral when only one side has to change. both providers of bandwidth and providers of services would need to adhere to specific rules for it to not stagnate and recreate AT&T/etc we suffered through in the early days (remember Long Distance where it was all protected ... yeah, no thank you