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

To Save Net Neutrality, We Must Build Our Own Internet

motherboard.vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 170 posts

Re: To Save Net Neutrality, We Must Build Our Own Internet

#121

Post by libertyEQ »

DiThi wrote: post #65
StavrosK wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Copy the most successful country in the world? Who would want a great firewall?

Maybe that's the plan in the USA... Without NN it's easier than with NN.

Are you sure your logic is sound here(?):

The great firewall and net neutrality are both examples of the government regulating the internet.

Edit: Just to be clear, I'm sure we all agree that our ISPs should offer neutral transmission of packets without deference to source/destination or protocol/port.

Re: To Save Net Neutrality, We Must Build Our Own Internet

#122

Post by em3rgent0rdr »

featherverse wrote: post #80

Rather than "build our own" we should take back what used to belongs to us in the first place. They say there's a shortage of qualified I.T. people. If you work for telecoms who support a non-neutral internet, then quit. Go on strike. Work only for companies who support Net Neutrality. Kill the enemy using free market capitalism.

> "take back what used to belongs to us in the first place"

Could you elaborate about how we used to be the owners of the ISPs?

Are you referring to the use of eminent domain laws to lay cable?

Re: To Save Net Neutrality, We Must Build Our Own Internet

#123

Post by neom »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #117
neom wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is FTC not FCC.

> That is FTC not FCC. It's the FTC in the case of Microsoft because Microsoft isn't a carrier. Regulating communications carriers is the FCC's entire purpose.

That is correct and I should not have conflated the two. Personal opinion, media should be moved to FTC in the context of internet.

Re: To Save Net Neutrality, We Must Build Our Own Internet

#124

Post by pyvpx »

curtisblaine wrote: post #76
AndyMcConachie wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's be clear on something. "The Internet" doesn't care how Americans go about ruining their economy by prioritizing certain network traffic. As a Dutchie my Internet is largely unaffected by the FCC. If anything the FCC rejecting net neutrality may be a boon for investment in EU startups and might actually benefit the EU tech sector. So go right ahead and take a crap on yourself America. But let's be clear that the…

From what I understand you will still be put in the slow lane if you're a Dutch startup offering services to Americans. and the US market is not exactly small. It's a loss for the Internet as a whole, not only the USA.

the EU market isn't exactly small, either. it is smaller, but not small.

Re: To Save Net Neutrality, We Must Build Our Own Internet

#125

Post by libertyEQ »

qanjl wrote: post #109
DiThi wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My choice of words may not be good, but other countries (esp. allies) copied MANY more things than things they didn't copy, esp. with topics related to NN... Copyright law, patents, free speech, and internet itself... and the fight against software patents was long and difficult.

yeah, I was being a bit flippant... You are definitely right that those in other countries with anti-NN agenda's will use this to advance their cause.

What your comment misses is the commitment to the principle of liberty as set forth by Adam Smith in the Wealth of Nations and its influence on the U.S. Constitution. I would suggest reading all 71 Anti-Federalist Papers. Here is a good collection that was put together:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Complete_Anti-Federalist

Re: To Save Net Neutrality, We Must Build Our Own Internet

#126

Post by pyvpx »

em3rgent0rdr wrote: post #120
pmilot wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless I'm misunderstanding it, the Substratum project you've linked is attempting to implement a decentralized WEB, not a decentralized INTERNET. From what I gather, Substratum would still be running on the same internet backbone, and be subject to the same consequences if Net Neutrality is repelled.

Hypothetically a project like substratum could include internet bandwidth itself as another resource which is rewarded with substratum.

the whole reason "net neutrality" is even a thing in the United States is because how one is able to access internet bandwidth. it's an duopoly at best and the majority have exactly ONE option for broadband internet access.

without an access network (be that copper, fiber, or radio) internet bandwidth can't be delivered. the choke point is the modem.

access networks are a natural monopoly and infrastructure to support an access network MUST be regulated like one in order for "market solutions" to prevail.

but ATT, it's descendants, and the CableCo's have spent tens of millions on lobbying efforts to make sure that never, ever happens.

Re: To Save Net Neutrality, We Must Build Our Own Internet

#127

Post by pyvpx »

danetch wrote: post #44
Feniks wrote: post #42

NN will always be under constant threat. My own country had it all enshrined in law only to be overruled by Brussels. You're fighting against an entire industry who will stop at nothing to expand profits.

Brussel actually enforces nn.

"zero rating" is not conducive to neutral treatment of network traffic.

Re: To Save Net Neutrality, We Must Build Our Own Internet

#128

Post by libertyEQ »

ShabbosGoy wrote: post #93
sundaeofshock wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US soft power and influence are waning (e.g. gutting if the state department) and the US consumer is about to take a hit with a massive transfer of wealth to the super rich. Even with the hard military power, I don’t see how the US is the “most successful country on earth”.

Net neutrality has nothing to do with the consumer. Very specifically, it has to do with peering and PNIs. There's a reason why NN is not a grassroots movement - it's literally corrupt corporations fighting each other over regulatory capture.

You make this claim as if it is a fact, and various Americans cannot have different points of view. I believe heavily in the ideas of individual liberty and private property. Even though I'm a nobody, in fly-over country does not mean I have not researched the underlying principles, and have not independently come to the same conclusion as these corporate conglomerate broadband providers.

These ISPs are insanely jealous of FANG.

Re: To Save Net Neutrality, We Must Build Our Own Internet

#129

Post by notacoward »

wfo wrote: post #118
jrs235 wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>How can so many of those who are usually anti-regulatory "free market" extremists also be so strongly in favor of this regulation? Because in the US, network providers (at least the last mile providers; those charging end consumers) are local monopolies. Most people in the US have one legit high speed internet option, a few have two. There is little competition and the barriers to entry for new comers is very high (…

Every time a monopoly arises, that is the market telling you the most efficient way to produce the good is with a single centrally planned organization, and that competition is not possible or effective. A monopoly is the market's way of saying an industry/service should be nationalized.

I'm not sure I agree, but an interesting thought. Thanks.

Re: To Save Net Neutrality, We Must Build Our Own Internet

#130

Post by humanrebar »

wfo wrote: post #118
jrs235 wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>How can so many of those who are usually anti-regulatory "free market" extremists also be so strongly in favor of this regulation? Because in the US, network providers (at least the last mile providers; those charging end consumers) are local monopolies. Most people in the US have one legit high speed internet option, a few have two. There is little competition and the barriers to entry for new comers is very high (…

Every time a monopoly arises, that is the market telling you the most efficient way to produce the good is with a single centrally planned organization, and that competition is not possible or effective. A monopoly is the market's way of saying an industry/service should be nationalized.

> A monopoly is the market's way of saying an industry/service should be nationalized.

The U.S. doesn't have a nationally run garbage service. Police departments aren't national. There is no national toll authority.

Post reply on HN