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

151–160 of 223 posts

Re: One Step Closer to a Closed Internet

#151

Post by pishpash »

vec wrote: post #113
jbuhl wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What were the Comcast shills' arguments? It seems like a local politician could run on internet as a utility and win if publicized correctly.

"Mayor #{city_official} wants to raise YOUR TAXES to line the pockets of their friends at #{local_construction_firm}. Call your alderman and tell him to vote NO on Proposition #{proposition_id}!" "Mayor #{city_official} wants to pass JOB KILLING REGULATIONS that could put #{comcast_employees.count} of your neighbors out of work! Sign this petition opposing Proposition #{proposition_id}!" "Mayor #{city_official} wants…

Until Americans get over the unnatural and hypocritical loathing of socialism, these ads will work. It's all very visceral and no rational education will counter it.

Re: One Step Closer to a Closed Internet

#152

Post by girvo »

arcticbull wrote: post #118
natemeier wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great to see that these projects are popping up all over --- I'm also in a town in the US with municipal fiber. I get bidirectional gigabit for $50/month (early adopter --- the normal rate is $100/month). Our ISP is also vocally pro-net neutrality.

Similar in SF with Monkeybrains -- for a one-time setup fee of $2500 about two years ago, I've been paying $35/mth for 600/600 microwave internet. They're also super pro-net neutrality. They even peer with SFMIX, a not-for-profit hipster internet exchange. The normal rate is $35/mth for 50/50.

What's latency like for microwave?

Re: One Step Closer to a Closed Internet

#153

Post by pishpash »

Jtsummers wrote: post #82
orthecreedence wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Comcast HATES this one US city! (Sorry, had to) What area do you live in? I've heard of cities trying to do things like this and ISPs clamping down and suing the city to stop any sort of public infrastructure. I'd be interested to read about if/how the people in your area had to deal with this.

For a time I lived in Wilson, NC which was like this. Time Warner did hate that city, eventually sponsoring legislation (via donations to legislators) to bar municipal broadband. The jackasses had the gall to do this, when the primary reason the municipal broadband was established was because Time Warner refused to build out their network in Wilson. I suppose they thought there was no business for them there, until t…

Sounds like your legislators hated the city. And the voters who put them in hated themselves.

Re: One Step Closer to a Closed Internet

#154

Post by s73ver »

weberc2 wrote: post #101
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…

> Until then, let's all just agree the net neutrality is a common-good consumer protection, and there's absolutely no reason, at all, to get rid of it until we either have a viable marketplace or we don't need ISPs.. On the other hand, we likely won't ever get either until it becomes sufficiently inconvenient for a huge swath of the first world. Necessity being the mother of invention and whatnot. Personally, I would…

And I absolutely can not live with ISPs having control over content and it's speed.

Re: One Step Closer to a Closed Internet

#155

Post by s73ver »

thomastjeffery wrote: post #129
pitaj wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The "let the market decide" shills don't seem to understand there's no market. Oh, trust me, we understand that very well. What we want to do is expand competition by making it easier to compete. This largest barrier to competition at this time is local municipalities, which is a good place for the FCC to step in and tell them to back off and let the ISPs install their fiber. I support the FCC regulating government…

Thank you for at least trying to enter the discussion. I hope those who read this don't downvote because they, like me, disagree with you. Voting on comments is about pushing productive conversation to the top. I, for one, would like to open the doors in this echo chamber. With that in mind, let me politely explain why you are wrong. > What we want to do is expand competition by making it easier to compete. I have no…

"I hope those who read this don't downvote because they, like me, disagree with you. Voting on comments is about pushing productive conversation to the top. I, for one, would like to open the doors in this echo chamber."

I'm sorry, but when the same poor arguments are used time and again, it stops being productive.

Re: One Step Closer to a Closed Internet

#156

Post by [deleted] »

rayiner wrote: post #139
kpil wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Edit: I ranted about publicly operated trains in Sweden on a post regarding US . Sorry for that. Since I spent 10 minutes ranting on the subject, I will keep the rest of the rant... The only subway in Sweden that I am aware of is operated by some company from Hong Kong. Or was that last week and we have now someone else? The "free market" muppets have had free reins for 30 years, and they are still claiming that an i…

I mean subways and trains in the US are publicly owned and operated.

[deleted]

Re: One Step Closer to a Closed Internet

#157

Post by matt4077 »

rayiner wrote: post #142
amq wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hard to believe, but in a certain Eastern European country, ISPs are competing to lay fiber to private houses, for about $10/month. That's a symmetric 100mbit to Frankfurt.

Rich European countries like Germany and France meanwhile have even less fiber than the US. I suspect much cheaper labor and less anti-development regulation is the big factor in the low cost of fiber in Eastern Europe.

There may be technical reasons, as well. I remember that, after the Berlin Wall came down, large swaths of former East Germany got fibre lines (for telephony, mostly).

Then, a decade or so later, DSL became the new standard. Which, as it happens, didn't work over fibre. I'm assuming they spent more on research into making copper faster because it was much wider deployed). For a long time, your best option for your fibre line was 128kbit/s analog-modem over digital-line.

Eastern Europe's infrastructure may date from around the same time, which may make it easier to improve now. It's a second-mover advantage. Compare NTSC vs. PAL, or (maybe, not completely sure) 230V vs 110V mains.

Also, in terms of "Government regulation" there really isn't anything stopping Deutsche Telekom from improving its network. They operate on a system where they just send a notice, and it's considered to be approved if not replied to within two weeks. I'd say it's mostly a curse of not enough competition (cable isn't much faster), and a network that's currently good enough for most people.

Re: One Step Closer to a Closed Internet

#158

Post by doctorshady »

The FCC under Pai has become an absolute joke. Unless a piano happens to fall on his and Trump's heads in some sort of freak accident, this crap is just going to keep happening. For whatever it's worth, there's a group of people trying to raise money to sue the FCC as sort of an alternate approach: http://www.irregulators.org

Re: One Step Closer to a Closed Internet

#159

Post by quicklyfrozen »

girvo wrote: post #152
arcticbull wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Similar in SF with Monkeybrains -- for a one-time setup fee of $2500 about two years ago, I've been paying $35/mth for 600/600 microwave internet. They're also super pro-net neutrality. They even peer with SFMIX, a not-for-profit hipster internet exchange. The normal rate is $35/mth for 50/50.

What's latency like for microwave?

I doubt you'd notice a difference. Over a long distance it should be faster then fiber (hence the private networks set up by HFTs). Had an office in Boston with a microwave link; it normally worked great, but could be disrupted by extreme weather (like heavy snow).

Re: One Step Closer to a Closed Internet

#160

Post by state_less »

pishpash wrote: post #153
Jtsummers wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For a time I lived in Wilson, NC which was like this. Time Warner did hate that city, eventually sponsoring legislation (via donations to legislators) to bar municipal broadband. The jackasses had the gall to do this, when the primary reason the municipal broadband was established was because Time Warner refused to build out their network in Wilson. I suppose they thought there was no business for them there, until t…

Sounds like your legislators hated the city. And the voters who put them in hated themselves.

The legislators probably liked the money, rubbing elbows with rich folks and cracking jokes about the proles. Behind their back of course.

It's gotten so bad they'll joke right on the face. "I could shoot someone on 5th ave. and they'd still love me (Trump supporters)." Did supporters not realize how insulting that was? He is essentially making fun of their servile devotion right on the face and still it didn't break the spell.

Post reply on HN