Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

One Step Closer to a Closed Internet

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 223 posts

Re: One Step Closer to a Closed Internet

#51

Post by guelo »

ianai wrote: post #8
orthecreedence wrote: post #4

I want to say this first: I love net neutrality and I support it 100%. That said, I think this battle will go on forever until either - We have a decentralized network anybody can plug into without ISPs (mesh net) or - Cities build their own fiber infrastructure (or 4G towers for rural areas) and rent it out to companies. Cable/DSL become a thing of the past, and you connect via radio/public wifi/direct fiber. This b…

I, for one, vote for the mesh network.

The lag time, and probably bandwidth, on a mesh, especially a wifi one, makes it unacceptable for many uses.

Re: One Step Closer to a Closed Internet

#52

Post by Kholo »

AndyMcConachie wrote: post #2

"this decision leads to an internet that benefits Internet Service Providers" I would correct this to: "this decision leads to an American internet that benefits Internet Service Providers" The FCC can really only screw up the Internet for Americans. If you're an Internet user not in North America there's very little reason for you to care about the decision the FCC made today.

True. Good to remember the American Internet is not the Internet. It's fascinating how this debate plays out in other countries with a certain class of citizenry that don't have the capacity to think for themselves. Even if the ISP landscape is hyper competitive people who spend their time on American tech sites, actually believe they are under threat. They express it via the media, social media etc. The Americans anti net neutrality activists totally ignorant of local conditions show up in full support. It's like watching cascading exploding ignorance in real time.

Re: One Step Closer to a Closed Internet

#53

Post by orthecreedence »

BinaryIdiot wrote: post #27
orthecreedence wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've yet to see a viable, informed argument against NN given our current market/options.

I agree. While I would prefer a market in which we let competition decide how it goes, as it prevents the government from getting involved, there is no market for the majority of Americans. I moved from MD to PA to now CA and every place I go I have had zero alternatives to Comcast. Zero. AT&T told me they would have to run lines to my house at some insane cost (I think it was like $20k or something? It's been many y…

A year or two ago I would have disagreed and argued that NN is the only way, but recently I've realized that we're just going to keep ping-ponging between regulation and deregulation until the real issue is fixed: ISPs in the US have a stranglehold.

So if we actually get a viable marketplace for internet in most places in the US (internet treated like a public utility rented out to private companies), I would concede NN regulation.

Basically, short of nobody having any internet at all, almost anything is better than our current situation.

Re: One Step Closer to a Closed Internet

#54

Post by jefurii »

theprop wrote: post #24

While I think this is a terrible idea, there's not that much to worry about for us as ordinary internet users. There's not going to be a slow & fast lane, at least not anytime soon. ISPs want net neutrality banned so they can "extort" money from Google, Facebook, YouTube, Netflix (to some extent in place), Amazon, etc. They're going to artificially slow those big, rich sites down unless they pay up. Netflix already i…

What about nonprofit web sites that can't afford to pay the extortion fees?

Re: One Step Closer to a Closed Internet

#55

Post by BinaryIdiot »

jbob2000 wrote: post #46

Where is Apple, Google, and Microsoft on this? What is the point of an app store if I can't use 90% of the apps on it? What the hell do I need a search engine for if there's only a few websites to search? Why would I use a computer at all if it just serves me the same garbage as a TV? Come on, throw your fucking weight around, jesus...

I think my viewpoint here is more devil's advocate because I'm not entire sure I believe it myself. But it seems like a possibility so I wanted to share:

One thing to consider here is the large juggernauts in the tech industry would actually benefit to this type of legislation. Let's say Comcast adds a fee to get priority access. Google, Apple, Microsoft; pretty much all of the existing and large-enough companies would likely be able to pay for it without much issue. While this would cut into their profits to some degree it makes the bar much, much higher for competition to come into their space.

If competition springs up it'll likely not grow as fast in an environment with many paying for special access so the tech companies could buy them at a likely cheaper price if they see them. Alternatively this may help kill existing competition like Spotify who has razor thin (or negative, I can't remember) margins so they wouldn't be able to compete.

Aside from a, likely very small, cut into profits there isn't much down side for any of the big tech companies. Are we sure they will want to band together?

Re: One Step Closer to a Closed Internet

#57

Post by ianai »

guelo wrote: post #51
ianai wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I, for one, vote for the mesh network.

The lag time, and probably bandwidth, on a mesh, especially a wifi one, makes it unacceptable for many uses.

That sounds like an implementation-bound constraint. Many technologies start out unacceptable for certain uses and mature to competency.

Re: One Step Closer to a Closed Internet

#58

Post by BinaryIdiot »

rolodato wrote: post #48
BinaryIdiot wrote: post #43

When I worked in the DoD contracting space there were rules handed down that outlines what browser(s) and version(s) you MUST use due to security concerns. It was always Firefox. This may be an insanely stupid idea, but, as sort of a thought experiment: what would the fallout be if, say, Mozilla changed their license on Firefox to disallow the usage of their browser by government representatives and associated contra…

In that case it would stop being free software, which is likely not something that Mozilla wants to do.

Oh that's a good point. It would be almost free which I guess would go against what they stand for.

Re: One Step Closer to a Closed Internet

#59

Post by a2decrow »

falcolas wrote: post #31
a2decrow wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If this forces non-US Americans to use US IT company services less, there are less angles the US government can use to spy on the rest of the world. Plus, data protection laws in other countries (especially European ones) are far more restrictive. I don't think there's any reason for us non-US-Americans to care at all about the US internet. Just like we don't care about pretty much anything else that's happening in t…

Well, at least at currently, the "US Internet" includes IANA, Google, Amazon, Netflix, Facebook, Verisign and a majority of the root DNS servers... Changes made to the "US Internet" are going to absolutely affect the wider world right now.

I fail to see how this affects IANA or root DNS servers in any way (not to mention that IANA can be replaced by a non-US entity if it really comes down to that).

As for those companies, they'll work the same way as before outside the US internet. Regrettably, because the world would be a better place without them.

Re: One Step Closer to a Closed Internet

#60

Post by Kholo »

MichaelApproved wrote: post #35
Kholo wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you use the bandwidth? Just curious what you do with it.

Not OP but I live in NYC and have 200mb down and 20mb up for $70/month. 200mb down isn't so important. Even with a family of 5 streaming, 100mb would be plenty of bandwidth. For me, the more important part of the connection is the upstream. the larger that number is, the more I can move towards 100% real-time offsite backup. That's important in case of fire, theft or other catastrophic issue happening.

For a family of 5 that sounds like a pretty good deal.
Post reply on HN