181–190 of 452 posts
http://gofccyourself.com (redirect) Edit: If it stays blank after redirect it's because it (FCC's site) can't handle the load, or [conspiracy theory].
Edit: and maybe kill the parent comment to slow things down a little.
Net neutrality is fundamental to free speech. Without net neutrality, big companies could censor your voice and make it harder to speak up online. Net neutrality has been called the “First Amendment of the Internet.” Not just harder. Infinitely more dangerous. Probably the scariest implications for NN being gutted are those around loss of anonymity through the Internet. ISPs who are allowed to sell users' browsing hi…
"NN being gutted are those around loss of anonymity through the Internet." How is that by necessity a bad thing? People aren't anonymous in every day life and their internet anonymity is mostly an illusion anyway. Big brother can almost always find out who did what if they want to. " These "rollbacks" of regulations make it orders of magnitude easier for any entity in a corporation or organization to track down peopl…
http://gofccyourself.com (redirect) Edit: If it stays blank after redirect it's because it (FCC's site) can't handle the load, or [conspiracy theory].
Net neutrality is fundamental to free speech. Without net neutrality, big companies could censor your voice and make it harder to speak up online. Net neutrality has been called the “First Amendment of the Internet.” Not just harder. Infinitely more dangerous. Probably the scariest implications for NN being gutted are those around loss of anonymity through the Internet. ISPs who are allowed to sell users' browsing hi…
"NN being gutted are those around loss of anonymity through the Internet." How is that by necessity a bad thing? People aren't anonymous in every day life and their internet anonymity is mostly an illusion anyway. Big brother can almost always find out who did what if they want to. " These "rollbacks" of regulations make it orders of magnitude easier for any entity in a corporation or organization to track down peopl…
Not the same scenario being discussed, but worth noting that the consequences of a loss of anonymity through the internet have the potential to be a lot farther-reaching and more sinister than they are in any analogous loss of anonymity in everyday life. I'd be interested to hear if you find the linked argument persuasive.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
and why do you only have comcast as a choice? Government granted monopolies. Void all local contracts with ISPs (cable or telco), and you will have choices.
To entice them to invest in their area because nobody else would.
Infrastructure isn't software development. It requires billions of dollars of capital investment. That investment isn't going to go to many areas unless it's nearly guaranteed a return, hence the labyrinth of monopolistic guarantees bestowed upon ISPs.
It's not clear to me that consumer options would flourish if you were to roll back all ISP related regulations and void existing contracts. I suspect the current system would just become more entrenched.
Honest question, but is Net Neutrality the answer to these problems? A few weeks ago on HN, someone made an analogy to water: someone filling their swimming pool should pay more for water than someone showering or cooking with it. This seems to make sense to me, water is a scarce resource and it should be prioritized. Is the same true of the Internet? I absolutely agree that ISPs that are also in the entertainment bu…
Net neutrality is fundamental to free speech. Without net neutrality, big companies could censor your voice and make it harder to speak up online. Net neutrality has been called the “First Amendment of the Internet.” Not just harder. Infinitely more dangerous. Probably the scariest implications for NN being gutted are those around loss of anonymity through the Internet. ISPs who are allowed to sell users' browsing hi…
I'm not American, so please correct me if I'm wrong but I have yet to see any proof of this whole 'sell your internet history' complaint that seems to be blatently copied by everyone without any research. The way I understand it is that ISPs can sell anonymized data from groups of users. Like: people who visit news.ycombinator.com generally also visit stackoverflow. I also don't know how an ISP would get your actual…
The regulations being overturned here are ones that have only recently taken effect, and non-anonymized, non-aggregate selling of ISP data is still outlawed by the Cable Communications Act of 1984, which protects subscriber privacy is 47USC § 551[1].
Put simply, neither the most recent executive order, nor a reversal on Net Neutrality overturns that law on the federal register.
Of course, if Congress were to draft a bill that does so, the current fears would be well justified.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Facebook isn't an ISP. Facebook -- though big! -- is one site on the internet and if you feel like you're not receiving news about things that are important to you there, you hop onto another site. If enough people stop using Facebook, Facebook will be compelled to make changes. Breaking net neutrality laws makes it harder for you to find alternatives. Imagine you're stuck with whatever news sources your ISP picks fo…
> Comcast -- though big! -- is one ISP on the internet and if you feel like you're not receiving news about things that are important to you there, you hop onto another ISP. If enough people stop using Comcast, Comcast will be compelled to make changes. [...] Imagine you're stuck with whatever news sources your social network picks for you. "Huffington Post, Reddit, and Twitter have decided not to pay us, so we no lo…
Unfortunately, for the majority of people in the US, there would only be one other choice. For me, that's AT&T. The big companies will payoff both or one isp for fast lanes, the ISP's will definitely put there service in the fast lane, if your service competes with either of them, get to pay not only the normal infrastructure costs, you now have to bribe the isp's not to throttle your service.
Facebook in the same class of monopoly as there are many other niche social networking apps built around oarticular interests. I only have two ways to connect to the Internet.
I lament that my ISP choices are limited, but not enough people even understand tech issues to care about them and certainly no one in Congress, save for a few.
Net neutrality is fundamental to free speech. Without net neutrality, big companies could censor your voice and make it harder to speak up online. Net neutrality has been called the “First Amendment of the Internet.” Not just harder. Infinitely more dangerous. Probably the scariest implications for NN being gutted are those around loss of anonymity through the Internet. ISPs who are allowed to sell users' browsing hi…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, but you could create a better note taking app than Google Keep, or a better email client than Gmail, or a better chat platform than Hangouts, etc... Sure, not everything is that easy, but an open internet does allow for a massive leg up that many other industries could only dream of. Imagine being able to take on Honda's lawnmower division competitively with less than $100 and a few months!
The hallways of VC offices are littered with corpses of startup founders who did have a better app than Google, but were shown the door, because: you don't want to compete with Google. I should know - I am one of those corpses :-)
If not net neutrality helped you.