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

FCC plan would give Internet providers power to choose the sites customers see

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

501–510 of 674 posts

Re: FCC plan would give Internet providers power to choose the sites customers see

#501

Post by vim_wannabe »

marsrover wrote: post #494

The other day I was sitting at home with my family. My parents, two siblings and my grandma, who moved from Germany after WW2. My parents and siblings are sitting around talking about how Trump is going to save America. My brother mentions how a guy in town (also a Trump supporter) said he's a fascist. I'm sitting on the other side of the table and my grandma is looking down at her plate not saying anything. She's ab…

So a lad knows a guy who says he is a fascist and also a Trump supporter, which means Trump is a fascist.

But what does that have to do with the FCC saying they will not use their authority on Internet service providers?

Re: FCC plan would give Internet providers power to choose the sites customers see

#502

Post by learc83 »

dmix wrote: post #468
collinmanderson wrote: post #443

Earlier quoted context omitted.

90% have at least two providers of 10Mbps+ speed, but only 20% have at least two providers of 25Mbps+ speed. https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/08/us-br... That could change though as more providers are rolling out fiber. (AT&T just rolled out Fiber to the Home in my neighborhood, and Comcast says they will do the same soon.)

> That could change though as more providers are rolling out fiber. And Google's competition heavily incentivized that rolling out fiber. Imagine what the threat of a new entrant offering unthrottled internet would do to these hypothetical plans?

Google was a huge company that lost a lot of money trying to improve internet access through competition. Last I heard they decided to stop expanding, and access to anything comparable to Google Fiber is extremely limited.

Re: FCC plan would give Internet providers power to choose the sites customers see

#503

Post by awj »

niftich wrote: post #137

Repealing net neutrality would only make sense if the layer underneath (the PHY consisting of fiber/copper/coax/wireless/whatever infrastucture including last-mile connections between every node) were subject to net neutrality instead [1], such that "anyone" could start an ISP that offers differentiated services on top of the same infra. Of course, today the last-mile infra and the ISP on top are tightly coupled, and…

> It's difficult to accept that they truly have the best interest of their constituents in mind.

Then ... don't. If someone's actions contradict their words, don't believe their words.

Re: FCC plan would give Internet providers power to choose the sites customers see

#504

Post by Fnoord »

username223 wrote: post #265
Fnoord wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really like your idea, but it has legal implications (accountability) because your neighbours would end up doing things on the internet on your account or vice versa. I would suggest to do this in combination with a VPN but 1) even with OpenVPN those are often insecure 2) they cost additional money 3) with these new FCC rules their bandwidth might get limited.

If your ISP cracks down, you can always go to the local Starbucks or library to torrent movies. And since the few people who share the WAP all know each other, they can talk things out.

WAP, Now that's a term I've not heard in a long time, a long time [1].

I don't know about Starbucks or the USA but many places here with open WiFi have, well, open WiFi (no encryption on connection) and they have abysmal speed. I mean we are talking about multiple customers, on 2,4 GHz WiFi, in the neighborhood (city) with dense 2,4 GHz coverage. What could possibly go wrong?

Plus, indeed here that type of business is just on cable or DSL themselves. Who'd be under the scrutiny of the same QoS shenanigans. Then again, we got net neutrality. For the time being. I really hope the USA keeps net neutrality. The feeling that such a civilized, rich, advanced country would lose such an important right fills my eyes with tears.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_Application_Protocol

Re: FCC plan would give Internet providers power to choose the sites customers see

#505

Post by FourPostWonder »

vim_wannabe wrote: post #501
marsrover wrote: post #494

The other day I was sitting at home with my family. My parents, two siblings and my grandma, who moved from Germany after WW2. My parents and siblings are sitting around talking about how Trump is going to save America. My brother mentions how a guy in town (also a Trump supporter) said he's a fascist. I'm sitting on the other side of the table and my grandma is looking down at her plate not saying anything. She's ab…

So a lad knows a guy who says he is a fascist and also a Trump supporter, which means Trump is a fascist. But what does that have to do with the FCC saying they will not use their authority on Internet service providers?

And Dang was nowhere to be found.

Re: FCC plan would give Internet providers power to choose the sites customers see

#506

Post by azernik »

ams6110 wrote: post #34
fokinsean wrote: post #18

Tweet in article: >On December 14, the FCC will vote on Chairman Pai's plan to repeal President Obama's heavy-handed Internet regulations and restore Internet freedom. I love how these laws are veiled with patriotic sentiments, e.g. "Internet Freedom". Just like the "Patriot Act", it is reasonable to assume anything with these sort of labels will likely be an encroachment on your freedoms. Also >"The job of the FCC i…

People are dropping cable due to the heavy-handed control and lack of choice. Why would ISPs want emulate that failing model? If Comcast is going to try to charge me more to be able to access Netflix, I'm gone.

Because ISPs are cable companies, and are the ones who are practicing that failing model, and are working very hard to prop it up and extend it.

Re: FCC plan would give Internet providers power to choose the sites customers see

#507

Post by crtqt3 »

marsrover wrote: post #494

The other day I was sitting at home with my family. My parents, two siblings and my grandma, who moved from Germany after WW2. My parents and siblings are sitting around talking about how Trump is going to save America. My brother mentions how a guy in town (also a Trump supporter) said he's a fascist. I'm sitting on the other side of the table and my grandma is looking down at her plate not saying anything. She's ab…

could you make a more worthless, over-dramatic comment?

le trump is le hitler

Re: FCC plan would give Internet providers power to choose the sites customers see

#508

Post by artursapek »

Dirlewanger wrote: post #447
artursapek wrote: post #416

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://twitter.com/Sinius1/status/923982728424513536

That guy is getting too worked up over a small misattribution. Does he think the world works in a vacuum and other companies aren't taking note? Doesn't matter if it's phone or residential service, the fact that it's been enacted is absolutely egregious.

It's a pretty big misattribution. Throttling traffic makes a lot more sense on a cellular network.

Re: FCC plan would give Internet providers power to choose the sites customers see

#509

Post by wmeredith »

awj wrote: post #503
niftich wrote: post #137

Repealing net neutrality would only make sense if the layer underneath (the PHY consisting of fiber/copper/coax/wireless/whatever infrastucture including last-mile connections between every node) were subject to net neutrality instead [1], such that "anyone" could start an ISP that offers differentiated services on top of the same infra. Of course, today the last-mile infra and the ISP on top are tightly coupled, and…

> It's difficult to accept that they truly have the best interest of their constituents in mind. Then ... don't. If someone's actions contradict their words, don't believe their words.

To expand on this a little bit, they have their own interests in mind. Which go getting re-elected > getting rich. They'll take the bribe money as long as they think they can get re-elected. Sometimes because they can't get re-elected without it.

Call your reps and let them know how you feel. If they think they won't get re-elected all the bribe money in the world doesn't really matter.

Re: FCC plan would give Internet providers power to choose the sites customers see

#510

Post by learc83 »

dmix wrote: post #392
skywhopper wrote: post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're assuming that most people have access to more than one ISP (they don't), or that statements by ISPs about what they intend to do or not do are truthful (they aren't). Specifically statements promising they would never do anything that would break net neutrality rules, while arguing against the imposition of net neutrality rules, would not make sense. Why oppose something you have no intention of doing?

My counter point does not depend entirely on competition. That is merely one counter-balance available to much of the country who have more than one ISP available, of the many I mentioned (technical, marketing, business model). Why not create regulation in response to real scenarios that have actually happened instead of hypothetical ones that are already have plenty of other drawbacks?

>real scenarios

Comcast didn't count movies streamed through there service against the monthly cap. They did count movies streamed through netflix.

Post reply on HN