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

Net Neutrality Day of Action: Help Preserve the Open Internet

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 469 posts

Re: Net Neutrality Day of Action: Help Preserve the Open Internet

#301

Post by bdamm »

briandear wrote: post #220
seiferteric wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There would be no time. He literally has a phone on the desk that he can launch all the nukes in a few minutes notice, and NOBODY can stop him without illegally refusing to follow orders (hope to god they would obviously) but assuming everything works as designed the world would end.

Not exactly true. There is a two man rule to launch. On paper the president has the power, but there are extensive safeguards in place.

Not so. The nodes in the command chain have little if any ability to question the order they've been given. Officers are even selected based on their ability to carry out orders unthinkingly. In the US military, an order from POTUS is the ultimate command. The only part of the chain that matters is at the very top, specifically, the armed individuals who surround the President. They can choose to stage a coup or declare the President medically unfit.

Re: Net Neutrality Day of Action: Help Preserve the Open Internet

#302

Post by archgoon »

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #212
Bakary wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Technically, the US President holds the power to end life on Earth should he so desire. To the best of my knowledge, there is no safeguard in place that could prevent such a course of action if it were attempted. Even Comcast's power seems rather pitiful in comparison.

To the best of my knowledge, there is no safeguard in place that could prevent such a course of action if it were attempted I can tell you for certain that there are dozens of safeguards. That scenario not only isn't possible, it's not plausible. Yes the President has the "codes" but those codes don't launch the missiles [1]. The scenario described is one in which there are literally nuclear warheads on a ballistic t…

I'm afraid that you have misunderstood the Bloomberg article. Nothing in it is about checking the power of the president (it says itself the president determines when to end the meetings and whether to ignore advice). It is all about verifying that The President has issued the order, and then ensuring that order is carried out. The President is contacted in this scenario simply because he's the only one who can actually authorize retaliation. He is enabled to do that independently, which is what the nuclear football is for.

Alex Wellerstein is a academic researcher on the history of nuclear weapons, and he describes the situation thus:

http://blog.nuclearsecrecy.com/2016/11/18/the-president-and-...

"""

>>Are there any checks in place to keep the US President from starting a nuclear war?

What's amazing about this question, really, is how seriously it misunderstands the logic of the US command and control system. It gets it exactly backwards.

The entire point of the US command and control system is to guarantee that the President and _only_ the President is capable of authorizing nuclear war whenever he needs to. It is about enabling the President's power, not checking or restricting him.

"""

Re: Net Neutrality Day of Action: Help Preserve the Open Internet

#304

Post by valuearb »

I have never understood the need for net neutrality. That doesn't mean we don't need it, it means that no one has ever explained the need to me in a way that makes sense. Give me real world examples. What has any ISP done that would violate Net Neutrality that I would object to?

Re: Net Neutrality Day of Action: Help Preserve the Open Internet

#305

Post by PhasmaFelis »

colejohnson66 wrote: post #275
mr_spothawk wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I love this idea because I read too much cyberpunk "go on..." > What if Musk's first ship to Mars had a hidden Railgun on it? "oh god... don't stop!" > ... the secret passcode of another person ... brilliant. yeah... we (in the US) gave AI/meta-cognative-entities/"corporations" a type of inalienable right with the Citizens United ruling. and now the gov't is going to find out what happens when those entities start…

> yeah... we (in the US) gave AI/meta-cognative-entities/"corporations" a type of inalienable right with the Citizens United ruling. Except that's not true. Corporations have always had personhood. See 1 U.S.C. §1 [0]: > In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, unless the context indicates otherwise— > ... > the words "person" and "whoever" include corporations, companies, associations, firms, partnerships,…

Note that corporate personhood also allows them to be sued. Used to be that, if someone ran a train into your house, you could sue the driver (if he survived) and maybe his immediate boss. Personhood makes the corporation as a unit responsible for the actions of its employees.

Re: Net Neutrality Day of Action: Help Preserve the Open Internet

#306

Post by hoorayimhelping »

mabbo wrote: post #19

If Google were actually serious about Net Neutrality, they would use their insane market power to protect it. How? Well, a simple statement saying "any ISP who abuses net neutrality will have their customers cut off from Google products". No Google search, no YouTube, no Gmail. Have those requests instead redirect to a website telling the customer what their ISP is doing, why Google won't work with them, and how to c…

Workflow:

1. I pay an ISP to provide me with internet service

2. Google cuts off services from my ISP I've already paid.

3. I call my ISP and say "google told me to complain to you," they say, "thank you for your feedback."

4. I look for a competitor. There aren't any, or the competitors don't suit my needs. Which is why this problem happens in the first place. If I could go to a competitor, I would. This is the key assumption that the whole scheme is based on and from what I understand, for most Americans, it is flat wrong.

5. I don't use my ISP's bandwidth cause Google is blocking it. I've paid them money. My continual complaints tie up a cheap call center which inconveniences them very slightly, if at all. They still have my money, plus the costs for the services they're offering me just plummeted cause I'm not using any bandwidth cause I can't access the internet. They win, I lose.

Re: Net Neutrality Day of Action: Help Preserve the Open Internet

#307

Post by valuearb »

seiferteric wrote: post #187
nothrabannosir wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He would have to avoid triggering the 25th: Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice Pre…

There would be no time. He literally has a phone on the desk that he can launch all the nukes in a few minutes notice, and NOBODY can stop him without illegally refusing to follow orders (hope to god they would obviously) but assuming everything works as designed the world would end.

For the US military its not illegal to refuse to follow an illegal order. The US Marines have this drilled into them, not sure about the other services.

Re: Net Neutrality Day of Action: Help Preserve the Open Internet

#308

Post by HearMeRoar »

valuearb wrote: post #304

I have never understood the need for net neutrality. That doesn't mean we don't need it, it means that no one has ever explained the need to me in a way that makes sense. Give me real world examples. What has any ISP done that would violate Net Neutrality that I would object to?

Why would no good real world example mean that nothing will happen if they win? Why do you think they're pushing it so hard? For fun?

Re: Net Neutrality Day of Action: Help Preserve the Open Internet

#309

Post by Zarath »

FRex wrote: post #175

I can't even enter the USA without a visa that is expensive, hard to get and doesn't guarantee entry but I'm getting all these net neutrality PSAs today telling me to send letters to FCC and Congress... I'm supportive of the idea itself but it's a bit funny and stupid, the Americano-centrism.

Are you seeing this on any non-American sites?

Re: Net Neutrality Day of Action: Help Preserve the Open Internet

#310

Post by unityByFreedom »

mabbo wrote: post #19

If Google were actually serious about Net Neutrality, they would use their insane market power to protect it. How? Well, a simple statement saying "any ISP who abuses net neutrality will have their customers cut off from Google products". No Google search, no YouTube, no Gmail. Have those requests instead redirect to a website telling the customer what their ISP is doing, why Google won't work with them, and how to c…

You can't turn off Google. You'd risk lives. People Google for "Poison control" and other emergency services.

They could change their banner, though, and I'm sad they aren't serious enough about this issue to do that.

Post reply on HN