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

211–220 of 423 posts

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

#211

Post by ekianjo »

tambienben wrote: post #185
em3rgent0rdr wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "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.

>But this is ignoring the whole debate: proponents of net freedom don't consider fast lanes to be a problem. And they literally wouldn't be if internet service was delivered in a free market. The problem is that the market isn't free. ISPs have spent years rigging the market in their favor, politically. The landscape is already hostile to the consumer--they intend to make it more so.

That's why the law should dissociate the "tubes" from the service providers. Let any company operate on the infrastructure with their own policies as long as they rent the lines, and the lines should be traffic agnostic by definition.

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

#212

Post by whataretensors »

throwaway5752 wrote: post #50
luckydude wrote: post #38

I feel helpless. In this and in many things that this administration has brought on. Vote? Yeah, right. Sign a petition? Yeah, right. I feel like unless there are real ramifications to the people doing this stuff, nothing we do matters.

You're a dope if you don't vote. It's impolite to mention this, but it is not a political problem, but a Republican problem. A Democratic administration's FCC enacted Net Neutrality, a Republican one is attempting to dismantle it. Vote for Democrats at every level of government, in every election possible. This will change some day, but today the Republican party has lost its mind and morals. To be clear, I'm not cal…

America cannot be divided by D and R. Nobody fits cleanly in either category if they have any independent thought. It's completely ridiculous that my views on internet regulation should be aligned with my views on the school system.

Our government might just need to be completely rebuilt to include more granularity. And we should toss these lossy classifiers that only serve to dehumanize one another.

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

#213

Post by StudentStuff »

enraged_camel wrote: post #175
maehwasu wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I hope so, it was so sad to see this region fall to power plays by various large and medium sized nations. Fending that off while a revolution is occurring is a challenge though!

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

#214

Post by drvdevd »

dtech wrote: post #179
Nokinside wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

If any positive effect will come from the rollback of net neutrality, it's that more people in the US may realize that ISPs are generally adverserial. They have been for a while.

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

#215

Post by AnthonyMouse »

notyourday wrote: post #200
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They don't want NN when it comes to gaming latency vs. email latency. That isn't a thing. ISPs don't actually do that. Latency on any reasonably provisioned network is determined by distance and the speed of light. There is no magic thing routers can do for special packets to make it go down, it's just the laws of physics. They could only do something when the network isn't reasonably provisioned and the ISP's upli…

> but that should never normally happen unless the ISP is either incompetent or creating artificial scarcity for anticompetitive reasons. See Verizon and Comcast. Today. With Net Neutrality on the books. Want to bypass this congestion? Buy some PNIs. So what we have here is dilettantes talking about a how they think the world should be or is today rather than acknowledging that net neutrality stopped existing in 1995…

> See Verizon and Comcast. Today. With Net Neutrality on the books. Want to bypass this congestion? Buy some PNIs.

That absolutely is a problem with the existing rules. Some people pointed that out when they were proposed.

But the existing rules solve some problems, just not all of them. And you don't go forward by going backward.

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

#217

Post by ReverseCold »

notyourday wrote: post #198
zamalek wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Fast lanes DO exist in other countries right now. It's called shaping and you easily pay 2x the price to avoid it. Everyone above the poverty line pays.

No, it is called PNIs to Comcast, Verizon, AT&T and other eyeball networks where whoever puts the PNIs still pays to Comcast, Verizon, AT&T and other eyeball networks to reach their eyeballs over those PNIs.

PNIs?

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

#218

Post by kenning »

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.

I've been looking through your comment history and the majority of stuff you say is unsubstantiated, provocative, and immediately refuted by comments 5x longer than yours with a bunch of sources because your original comment sounded informed but was actually way off base. Your six comments on this story fit this pattern as well.

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

#219

Post by xpac »

of wrote: post #74
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…

> Fast lanes DO exist in other countries right now. Which countries?

Portugal.

https://mobile.twitter.com/rokhanna/status/92370187109244108...

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

#220

Post by jerkstate »

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…

You've listed a set of applications that require priority on the network. Do you think that there is value to traffic prioritization?
Post reply on HN