Live data from Hacker News

Verizon is killing Tumblr’s fight for net neutrality

theverge.com

31–40 of 178 posts

Re: Verizon is killing Tumblr’s fight for net neutrality

#31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oi, I suppose archiving Tumblr is this weekend's project.

https://github.com/fake-name/xA-Scraper already supports tumblr. Their API has annoying limits, though. Note: It's a project of mine.

I use grab site, which is a spiritual successor to ArchiveTeam's ArchiveBot.

I have to be careful to give my scraping methods away, as I've had digital targets attempt countermeasures.

Re: Verizon is killing Tumblr’s fight for net neutrality

#32
post #15
post #5

Net neutrality makes internet more expensive for everybody so Torrent and Netflix users can be subsidized. It looks right, but it is WRONG to "defend" it using law and force.

There is no basis for your contention that "internet" would be cheaper without NN.

Given that reduced upstream costs typically translate into reduced downstream costs, and that regulation typically increases downstream costs, I think the onus is on NN-proponents to prove why the reverse is true.

Re: Verizon is killing Tumblr’s fight for net neutrality

#34

If you're a founder and looking to sell your company, is there anything you can do to guard yourself against these kinds of situations? I imagine it might be some particular part of a golden handcuff / golden parachute deal, but making it work for everyone involved sounds super hard...

Sure. Don't sell your company. Don't take it public, either. Principled moral stands are not compatible with making as much money as possible.

Re: Verizon is killing Tumblr’s fight for net neutrality

#35
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I want to downvote you because of how intensely I disagree with everything you're saying, but you're saying it nicely so I won't. Instead - The major concern about losing NN is that instead of just paying for volume of data, I'll also be required to pay based on type and/or source of that data, and that the entities providing the data will also be required to pay based on type and/or destination. Do you think this co…

Thank you for not downvoting me. Free market would be part of my answer if I had one. I'm not well-informed enough to say much, but imagine you have a local link in a small rural town that only support some absolute number of packets or whatever: if you have one big consumer that is eating the major part of that every day, making the others miserable, isn't it reasonable to limit that consumer's bandwidth somehow? Th…

The restaurant business is very competitive in any town with more than, say, 1000 people. Not so with Internet access. In Silicon Valley, for example, most cities have 1 or 2 providers of broadband (>25Mbps).

I don't think anyone complains about paying more if they stream a lot of video online. But people ask for NN so they do not have to pay more if they stream from Netflix instead of Hulu.

Re: Verizon is killing Tumblr’s fight for net neutrality

#36

If you're a founder and looking to sell your company, is there anything you can do to guard yourself against these kinds of situations? I imagine it might be some particular part of a golden handcuff / golden parachute deal, but making it work for everyone involved sounds super hard...

This is my biggest qualm with building a company aimed to sell (either to public markets or another company). You are binding yourself to pursue as much profit as possible through whatever legal means possible. Even if those legal means go against everything you stand for, you have to pursue them because you have a fiduciary duty.

Re: Verizon is killing Tumblr’s fight for net neutrality

#37
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I want to downvote you because of how intensely I disagree with everything you're saying, but you're saying it nicely so I won't. Instead - The major concern about losing NN is that instead of just paying for volume of data, I'll also be required to pay based on type and/or source of that data, and that the entities providing the data will also be required to pay based on type and/or destination. Do you think this co…

Thank you for not downvoting me. Free market would be part of my answer if I had one. I'm not well-informed enough to say much, but imagine you have a local link in a small rural town that only support some absolute number of packets or whatever: if you have one big consumer that is eating the major part of that every day, making the others miserable, isn't it reasonable to limit that consumer's bandwidth somehow? Th…

> I'm not well-informed enough to say much, but imagine you have a local link in a small rural town that only support some absolute number of packets or whatever: if you have one big consumer that is eating the major part of that every day, making the others miserable, isn't it reasonable to limit that consumer's bandwidth somehow?

> Then if some law is enacted to prevent you from limiting that consumer, then you'll either make the lives of the others miserable or you'll be forced to spend more on your link and luckily pass the cost down to all your consumers. Right?

Yes but the consumers of the bandwidth are the locals in that small rural town, not netflix. Charge the locals for using more bandwidth because they are the ones requesting it.

Re: Verizon is killing Tumblr’s fight for net neutrality

#38
post #5

Net neutrality makes internet more expensive for everybody so Torrent and Netflix users can be subsidized. It looks right, but it is WRONG to "defend" it using law and force.

I upvoted this vapid opinion because I think it needs to be addressed rather than censored by lazy thinkers.

Making the Internet more expensive today so we can accommodate high traffic use is a smart long term strategy.

The first incentive ISPs should have is to be able to provide a high level of service for bandwidth demanding applications.

Over time these costs will drop as the bandwidth naturally expands because networking technology is subject to similar price/performance trends we see with transistors.

Here's the point: At some future point in time, torrent and video traffic will be negligible faction of the total amount of bandwidth available.

It's better we get there sooner rather than later, right?

So what do you think is the fastest way to get there? Do you want to incentive the mono/duopoly ISPs to nickle and dime over limited service, or do you want to incentive them to compete with each other to provide the best service that connects everybody to the whole internet?

We're going to get to the point where bandwidth is incredibly cheap and available soon enough. The question is are you really going to give up a common carrier network because you falsely believe it's going to get you here marginally faster?

If you believe that, you have no sense of history of the telecommunications industry. They've already pulled the "let me abuse my monopoly status and I'll give you better service" scam time and time again.

Re: Verizon is killing Tumblr’s fight for net neutrality

#39
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Upvoted because we need more diversity of opinion here.

If we need diversity of opinion, perhaps you could up-vote someone that believes that the earth is flat or black is white. There are out there some readily determinable facts, and it is perfectly fine for all of our opinions to be the same as it concerns those facts. For example, almost everyone on earth will be of the opinion that fire is hotter than ice. Do we all suffer from group think? If someone believes that f…

> It is well known and readily verifiable that net neutrality as defined by the previous FCC rules and as defined by the EFF allows for providers to charge more for people using more data. So no net neutrality would not require anyone to subsidize heavy data users.

You're being patronizing. Why do you assume that the OP is referencing this point in his "diversity of opinion" quote? A charitable interpretation would be "the subject of whether or not NN is a social good is a subjective matter, and we need more diversity of opinion on this topic".

Re: Verizon is killing Tumblr’s fight for net neutrality

#40
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you sell your company, you lose control of it; that is kind of the definition of 'selling'. If you maintain control, than you at most have 'an investor', not a new owner.

No, there can be contractual terms which allow for the original owners to regain control under certain contingencies

How often is this pursued by original owners and accepted by the prospective new owners?
Post reply on HN