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

I'm on the FCC. Please stop us from killing net neutrality

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 423 posts

Re: I'm on the FCC. Please stop us from killing net neutrality

#161

Post by extra88 »

jquery wrote: post #113
rectang wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the beneficiaries of your "net freedom" are a handful of regional monopoly ISPs who are protected by regulations that realistically won't ever be rolled back.

Pre-2015 - keep the govt out of our internet! 2017 - save us government we need your kind regulations! No thanks. It’s amazing what a little bit of polishing a turd and renaming it will do.

Wrong. Net neutrality proponents have been advocating for the FCC's pro-NN actions long before 2015, the problem was courts kept shooting them down because they said (probably correctly) that they didn't use their authority the right way.

Re: I'm on the FCC. Please stop us from killing net neutrality

#162

Post by RandomInteger4 »

windowshopping wrote: post #153

CSS / JavaScript challenge: remove whatever is blocking you from scrolling on that page. I could not figure it out for the life of me after 20 min messing with the it in the dev tools. Deleting the paywall is easy enough, but what is stopping the scrolling?

Try ublock origin. I didn't get either a paywall or scroll-blocking. Must be one of the ads?

Re: I'm on the FCC. Please stop us from killing net neutrality

#163

Post by jquery »

aerotwelve wrote: post #156
jquery wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The FTC won't stop ISPs from slowing access to content they don't own. ISPs are communications services and rightly monitored by the Federal Communications Commission. ISPs are communications services just like trucks are communications services because they carry mail and shipments. No. The internet is far more complicated than postage, and the FCC is not equipped to handle it. > China most definitely does not. Ev…

The FCC is absolutely equipped to regulate the internet (or, interstate communications by radio, television, wire, satellite, and cable). Believe it or not, that's exactly its congressional mandate!

An increasing amount of trade is happening over the internet. It's disingenuous to suggest the FCC's internet mandate is at all similar to radio or tv. I also think the FCC has done a particularly poor job of managing those resources, as well. (This comment is subject to an obscenity fine, thank you for reporting)

Re: I'm on the FCC. Please stop us from killing net neutrality

#164

Post by ep103 »

jquery wrote: post #157
ep103 wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand how you read my comment, and came to the exact opposite conclusion to what I was saying. What I literally just said was that we have had NN for the last 20 years. The exact legal definition for how the FCC enforces NN changed 2 years ago, but the fact that they continued enforcing NN did not. If Ajit Pai gets his way with this vote, the FCC will no longer be allowed to enforce NN. This would be the…

Good thing we have elections and laws and if the bad behavior you predict happens (which I doubt) we can fix the situation.

I agree, the current Alabama election, and the 2018 elections are going to be very important.

I'm not sure why you think the bad behavior wouldn't happen. [This reddit link](https://np.reddit.com/r/KeepOurNetFree/comments/7ej1nd/fcc_u...) compiled a number of times the FCC has had to step in to enforce NN.

And if the ISPs weren't planning on behaving against NN, why spend the money fighting against it?

But at least we're on the same page now : )

Re: I'm on the FCC. Please stop us from killing net neutrality

#166

Post by awirth »

windowshopping wrote: post #153

CSS / JavaScript challenge: remove whatever is blocking you from scrolling on that page. I could not figure it out for the life of me after 20 min messing with the it in the dev tools. Deleting the paywall is easy enough, but what is stopping the scrolling?

body gets a class ".bx-client-overlay" that has "overflow: hidden!important" which hides the scrollbar

Re: I'm on the FCC. Please stop us from killing net neutrality

#167

Post by jquery »

dragonwriter wrote: post #160
jquery wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China has net neutrality. You are quite naive if you think NN is a solution to censorship. Browse eff.org for more than a few minutes to see that NN doesn't even scratch the surface of underlying issues. I don't want NN because then everyone will think the internet is just fine, when NN is a joke of a solution that doesn't even cover anything more than the FTC already covers.

> NN is a joke of a solution that doesn't even cover anything more than the FTC already covers. The FTC covers nothing in this domain, and there is recent appellate case law which suggests that they could not act in it without significant change to the statutes governing their authority.

In what domain? The FTC certain covers situations where ISPs use anticompetitive practices against potential competitors. The FTC does not cover voluntary capitalist behavior that benefits the consumer, such as ISPs preferring to reduce gaming latency over website or email latency. Good.

Re: I'm on the FCC. Please stop us from killing net neutrality

#168

Post by jquery »

charleslmunger wrote: post #159
jquery wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The FTC won't stop ISPs from slowing access to content they don't own. ISPs are communications services and rightly monitored by the Federal Communications Commission. ISPs are communications services just like trucks are communications services because they carry mail and shipments. No. The internet is far more complicated than postage, and the FCC is not equipped to handle it. > China most definitely does not. Ev…

> You aren't going to lose access to your favorite polemic website or torrenting because of NN or lack-thereof. That would be immediately met by FTC lawsuits. This already happened. Comcast was injecting forged RST packets into BitTorrent connections - and after lying about it for a while they were stopped by the FCC, who cited network neutrality rules in their decision. https://www.wired.com/2008/09/comcast-disclos-…

Your link didn't claim what you claimed, and what Comcast did sounds eminently reasonable (coming from someone who hates them so much as to use Sonic.net as reduced speeds just to avoid Comcast).

Re: I'm on the FCC. Please stop us from killing net neutrality

#169

Post by dragonwriter »

jquery wrote: post #140
unityByFreedom wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> China has net neutrality. China most definitely does not. Even if they did, it'd be unenforced. State-run tech services would get preferential treatment. Actually, that's how it works now. > I don't want NN because then everyone will think the internet is just fine, when NN is a joke of a solution that doesn't even cover anything more than the FTC already covers. The FTC won't stop ISPs from slowing access to conte…

> The FTC won't stop ISPs from slowing access to content they don't own. ISPs are communications services and rightly monitored by the Federal Communications Commission. ISPs are communications services just like trucks are communications services because they carry mail and shipments. No. The internet is far more complicated than postage, and the FCC is not equipped to handle it. > China most definitely does not. Ev…

> The internet is far more complicated than postage, and the FCC is not equipped to handle it.

The FCC is both equipped and specifically Congressionally authorized to regulate broadband, and has been doing so for years even outside of the ”network freedom”/“open internet” regs.

The FTC, on the other hand, is not equipped to handle it, and (at least per the recent FTC v. AT&T ruling) is statutorily barred from regulating it to the extent that major ISPs happen to also be common carrier telcos, as the prohibition on FTC regulating common carriers applies to the whole org, not just its common carrier operations.

> You aren't going to lose access to your favorite polemic website or torrenting because of NN or lack-thereof. That would be immediately met by FTC lawsuits.

No, it wouldn't. There is neither evidence nor reasoning supporting this suggestion, just wishful thinking. In fact we know it is false, because (aside from the recent case suggesting that they are barred from acting in this area) they have in fact not done so (instantly or otherwise) in any of the instances of blocking which have occurred.

Re: I'm on the FCC. Please stop us from killing net neutrality

#170

Post by jquery »

extra88 wrote: post #161
jquery wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pre-2015 - keep the govt out of our internet! 2017 - save us government we need your kind regulations! No thanks. It’s amazing what a little bit of polishing a turd and renaming it will do.

Wrong. Net neutrality proponents have been advocating for the FCC's pro-NN actions long before 2015, the problem was courts kept shooting them down because they said (probably correctly) that they didn't use their authority the right way.

Most people want NN, when it comes to censorship (this is why I use Sonic.net). They don't want NN when it comes to gaming latency vs. email latency. There's a big difference, but NN lumps them in as the same thing. This is why we should punt to Congress that ensures NN applies to the First Amendment but not to voluntary trade.
Post reply on HN