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

Join the Battle for Net Neutrality

battleforthenet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 388 posts

Re: Join the Battle for Net Neutrality

#11

Post by y2bd »

RIMR wrote: post #4

I am firmly in support of net neutrality, but I am also sick and tired of all the ridiculous misinformation about what it actually is. At least on Reddit, people would have you believe that the Internet is about to become Cable TV. Net Neutrality is very important to a free and open Internet, but the kind of scaremongering I see going on is absolutely insane. We won't win this fight with scary lies. Do your part and…

When SOPA was going on so-and-so years ago, there was a similar bout of over-exaggerated hysteria to get people in action. I was against it back then, but I think the last couple of years have shown that panic and outrage is what actually gets people motivated to do anything, rather than straight, boring facts. Why not harness it for something good then?

Re: Join the Battle for Net Neutrality

#13

Post by _m8fo »

caburlingame wrote: post #6

Is anyone actually against net neutrality? I don't think I've ever seen a con argument.

One could argue that without net neutrality, internet providers could provide substantially cheaper internet services -- e.g. just Facebook for $1 a month.

However that breaks down once you consider the fact that it's not practical at all. Not to mention that providers would have no reason to offer such cheap offerings, either.

Re: Join the Battle for Net Neutrality

#15

Post by martin1975 »

caburlingame wrote: post #6

Is anyone actually against net neutrality? I don't think I've ever seen a con argument.

Well, Ajit Pai says it stifles investments. Apparently investments fell by 5% or so over a period of time since the Title II classification. While I love NN, I also hate no viable competition to cable/ISP monopolies. I don't think NN would be an issue if everyone had at least 3 viable choices of broadband providers. That's the right (tm) way to address it, or should I say market-based, by fostering competition via policy.

Re: Join the Battle for Net Neutrality

#16

Post by foota »

KaoruAoiShiho wrote: post #14
caburlingame wrote: post #6

Is anyone actually against net neutrality? I don't think I've ever seen a con argument.

I'm against net neutrality. It's essentially a wealth transfer from the infrastructure industry to the ad industry. It's pretty dumb imo.

How?

Re: Join the Battle for Net Neutrality

#17

Post by tony101 »

KaoruAoiShiho wrote: post #14
caburlingame wrote: post #6

Is anyone actually against net neutrality? I don't think I've ever seen a con argument.

I'm against net neutrality. It's essentially a wealth transfer from the infrastructure industry to the ad industry. It's pretty dumb imo.

ISPs are free to compete with Google, Facebook, etc by offering competitive web services.

Instead, ISPs want to leverage their almost-exclusive control of Internet access to unfairly crush competition.

Users can choose not the use Facebook. Many users cannot choose not to use Comcast, because Comcast is the only ISP in the area.

Lack of competition among ISPs make them different from web companies.

Re: Join the Battle for Net Neutrality

#18

Post by zackelan »

mlamat wrote: post #12
caburlingame wrote: post #6

Is anyone actually against net neutrality? I don't think I've ever seen a con argument.

I'm not convinced. Why am I supposed to take sides in a fight between two industries?

If you're unconvinced, you should default to supporting net neutrality. It's the status quo, the null hypothesis. The burden of proof is on the people wishing to make this fundamental change to the structure of the internet.

Re: Join the Battle for Net Neutrality

#19

Post by rory096 »

y2bd wrote: post #11
RIMR wrote: post #4

I am firmly in support of net neutrality, but I am also sick and tired of all the ridiculous misinformation about what it actually is. At least on Reddit, people would have you believe that the Internet is about to become Cable TV. Net Neutrality is very important to a free and open Internet, but the kind of scaremongering I see going on is absolutely insane. We won't win this fight with scary lies. Do your part and…

When SOPA was going on so-and-so years ago, there was a similar bout of over-exaggerated hysteria to get people in action. I was against it back then, but I think the last couple of years have shown that panic and outrage is what actually gets people motivated to do anything, rather than straight, boring facts. Why not harness it for something good then?

I'm sorry, what? The lesson of the last couple years is that we should act more like extremists drumming up outrage with misinformation?

Re: Join the Battle for Net Neutrality

#20

Post by adventured »

_m8fo wrote: post #13
caburlingame wrote: post #6

Is anyone actually against net neutrality? I don't think I've ever seen a con argument.

One could argue that without net neutrality, internet providers could provide substantially cheaper internet services -- e.g. just Facebook for $1 a month. However that breaks down once you consider the fact that it's not practical at all. Not to mention that providers would have no reason to offer such cheap offerings, either.

> Not to mention that providers would have no reason to offer such cheap offerings, either.

Sure they might. Large companies with deep pockets subsidize the premise to their own benefit (whatever that happens to be). In your example, let's say instead it's $3 per month for just Facebook services (FB, Instagram, WhatsApp, etc). Comcast partners with Facebook on the effort, in which Facebook pays a few dollars per month to subsidize the user plan.

Facebook currently derives something close to $9 per month from US & Canadian members. They hit 45.6% net income margins last quarter, which is extraordinary. They're set to become the greatest pound for pound profit machine in world history, they can afford to use some of that margin to further lock in their monopoly by purchasing preferential access treatment in numerous ways.

Post reply on HN