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

171–180 of 423 posts

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

#171

Post by lbstr_ftw »

Nokinside wrote: post #142
netsec_burn wrote: post #43

Nick Gillespie: Your plan will, according to a write up in Politico, and I think this is accurate, it quote, "will jettison rules that prohibit internet service providers from blocking or slowing web traffic or creating so called paid internet fast lanes." Question for you, do you think fast lanes will become a thing? What is the value of a internet fast lane? Ajit Pai: The answer to the first is we're not sure. We'v…

The net neutrality laws prohibit anti-competitive blocking and "throttling" of Internet services or discriminating by protocol, ip-adress, application, etc. What should be outside net neutrality laws are protocols that leave the customer and applications in control. There is nothing wrong with using Resource ReSerVation Protocol (RSVP), DSCP and IPv6 flow labels to get QoS that differ from the dumb pipe. Many future…

> Safety-critical applications like, robot cars

As someone who worked on robot cars before it was cool (Urban Challenge, wut up), I can assure you, Net Neutrality has ZERO to do with safety in autonomous cars.

And if you think it has anything to do with it, you need to be kept far, far... very far away from ever working on them.

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

#172

Post by jachee »

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!

@jquery:

Trade happens over the highway system, too. That doesn't take away from the NHTSA's authority to regulate it. Just because trade happens over the Internet doesn't somehow make it magically not-communication.

Y'know... the first C in FCC?

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

#173

Post by aerovistae »

awirth wrote: post #166
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

Yeah I saw that, but even after I removed it and the scrollbar showed back up, I still couldn't scroll with it.

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

#174

Post by aerovistae »

RandomInteger4 wrote: post #162
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?

wow that works great! i had abp but it didnt do that

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

#175

Post by enraged_camel »

maehwasu wrote: post #110
enraged_camel wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, Americans today are weak. Everyone is way too self-obsessed with their own pitiful, pathetic lives (family, jobs, house, creature comforts, etc.) to actually take to the streets and protest like their parents and grandparents did during the 60s to fight for their rights and those of others. The Internet, despite its tremendous potential, has proven to be a massive liability, as it gives people the illu…

Ah yes, the Arab Spring, that beacon of hope and light for the world.

For that part of the world, it certainly was. Not sure what your point is.

Yes, ultimately it failed, but it is difficult to dispute that it was a noble attempt. More will come in time.

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

#176

Post by extortionist »

enraged_camel wrote: post #58
coliveira wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This may be about the Internet, but doing online "protest" will get us nowhere. Real protest means people going to the streets and making the government afraid of real violence. Other than that I don't see any way out.

Unfortunately, Americans today are weak. Everyone is way too self-obsessed with their own pitiful, pathetic lives (family, jobs, house, creature comforts, etc.) to actually take to the streets and protest like their parents and grandparents did during the 60s to fight for their rights and those of others. The Internet, despite its tremendous potential, has proven to be a massive liability, as it gives people the illu…

I'd argue that taking to the street and protesting is also just giving people the illusion that they're doing something useful.

The Iraq War protests were some of the largest in history, and they accomplished exactly nothing (and to your example, look up Malachi Ritscher). Occupy Wall Street was a massive movement and accomplished nothing. The protests against Obamacare repeal were massive and widespread, and seem to have only succeeded in delaying the destruction of Obamacare to the current tax bill. Black Lives Matter is a massive movement that has accomplished meaningful change in a few jurisdictions and nationwide has managed to at least generate conversation, but that conversation has already been largely derailed to the question of whether or not football players need to stand for the national anthem.

Office holders are not beholden to people yelling in the streets but to the people who get them elected. This means the people who show up to vote and, increasingly, the people who finance their campaigns.

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

#177

Post by enraged_camel »

agf wrote: post #75
enraged_camel wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, Americans today are weak. Everyone is way too self-obsessed with their own pitiful, pathetic lives (family, jobs, house, creature comforts, etc.) to actually take to the streets and protest like their parents and grandparents did during the 60s to fight for their rights and those of others. The Internet, despite its tremendous potential, has proven to be a massive liability, as it gives people the illu…

While civil disobedience etc. are useful forms of protest, we haven't exhausted other avenues, like actually showing up to vote. And the parent post is talking about violence, not just civil disobedience. The act you describe at the end of your post happened in a dictatorship where the people truly had no voice. While we may live in a flawed democracy[1] we're not in the same situation -- we do still have nonviolent…

Yes, which is why I said "at this rate, America is going to need equally brave and selfless individuals to make a stand and spark similar movements."

Things haven't reached that point, but will soon.

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

#178

Post by comex »

jquery wrote: post #170
extra88 wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> There's a big difference, but NN lumps them in as the same thing.

No it doesn't. The FCC's net neutrality orders have always included an exception for "reasonable network management", most recently defined as:

> (f) Reasonable network management. A network management practice is a practice that has a primarily technical network management justification, but does not include other business practices. A network management practice is reasonable if it is primarily used for and tailored to achieving a legitimate network management purpose, taking into account the particular network architecture and technology of the broadband Internet access service.

(emphasis mine; source: https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/8.2)

Prioritizing gaming latency is clearly a "primarily technical" concern rather than a matter of "business practices" - at least as long as the ISP didn't try to charge game publishers for the service. So it would be fine.

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

#179

Post by dtech »

Nokinside wrote: post #142
netsec_burn wrote: post #43

Nick Gillespie: Your plan will, according to a write up in Politico, and I think this is accurate, it quote, "will jettison rules that prohibit internet service providers from blocking or slowing web traffic or creating so called paid internet fast lanes." Question for you, do you think fast lanes will become a thing? What is the value of a internet fast lane? Ajit Pai: The answer to the first is we're not sure. We'v…

The net neutrality laws prohibit anti-competitive blocking and "throttling" of Internet services or discriminating by protocol, ip-adress, application, etc. What should be outside net neutrality laws are protocols that leave the customer and applications in control. There is nothing wrong with using Resource ReSerVation Protocol (RSVP), DSCP and IPv6 flow labels to get QoS that differ from the dumb pipe. Many future…

But who is going to determine what gets which priority at what price? The only one who can is the ISP and I don't trust them.

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

#180

Post by Griffinsauce »

em3rgent0rdr wrote: post #49
netsec_burn wrote: post #43

Nick Gillespie: Your plan will, according to a write up in Politico, and I think this is accurate, it quote, "will jettison rules that prohibit internet service providers from blocking or slowing web traffic or creating so called paid internet fast lanes." Question for you, do you think fast lanes will become a thing? What is the value of a internet fast lane? Ajit Pai: The answer to the first is we're not sure. We'v…

> "If murder hadn't happened in a certain area yet, would it be 'too preemptive' to outlaw it?" But even with murder, the law doesn't stop murders before they happen, but rather only acts retroactively (and that is for good reason). > "Fast lanes DO exist in other countries right now." But this is ignoring the whole debate: proponents of net freedom don't consider fast lanes to be a problem.

Wait, "net freedom" seriously? That's a cynical name considering what that choice entails. If you called it "corporate freedom", sure.
Post reply on HN