I'm on the FCC. Please stop us from killing net neutrality • Hacker News Board

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

#371

Post by mrgordon » Thu, Nov 23, 2017, 5:59 PM UTC

loup-vaillant wrote: post #300

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.

Wait a minute, the opposite of net neutrality is called "net freedom "? This is sick (the lack of net neutrality is more likely to reduce freedoms than to promote them). If you remotely support net neutrality, please never use that term again. This is self defeating.

More like net favoritism

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

#372

Post by mrgordon » Thu, Nov 23, 2017, 6:00 PM UTC

zwily wrote: post #320

loup-vaillant wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait a minute, the opposite of net neutrality is called "net freedom "? This is sick (the lack of net neutrality is more likely to reduce freedoms than to promote them). If you remotely support net neutrality, please never use that term again. This is self defeating.

Sounds like pro-life/pro-choice. Both sound so good!

pro-life-till-theyre-born-and-then-take-away-their-rights-and-send-them-to-war-for-oil

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

#373

Post by jlgaddis » Thu, Nov 23, 2017, 6:08 PM UTC

ep103 wrote: post #128

jlgaddis wrote: post #44

It's probably futile, but you might sign this "Do Not Repeal Net Neutrality" [0] petition on the White House petitions site. It already has over 100,000 signatures -- the threshold at which the White House is supposed to, at minimum, respond to it. Since we can't vote on this and our representatives aren't voting on it either, it's worth a shot. [0]: https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/do-not-repeal-net-...

battleforthenet.com and democracy.io are two much more direct alternatives. Battleforthenet will be over the phone (and therefore be a bit more influenential), so I recommend it. But democracy.io (from the EFF) will have you contact all of your representatives directly, via email, within a minute or two. I highly recommend them.

I don't understand the "contact all of your representatives". As I mentioned in the comment you replied to, "our representatives aren't voting on it".

You think that somehow we're going to cause our reps to put pressure on or "sway" the FCC? No, their votes have already been bought.

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

#374

Post by gerbilly » Thu, Nov 23, 2017, 6:10 PM UTC

maho2nd wrote: post #248

xpac wrote: post #223

If you're wondering, how the wonderful invisible hand of the market would use "net freedom" - say hello to Portugal. https://mobile.twitter.com/rokhanna/status/92370187109244108... I don't see how this benefits anybody besides the ISP. It just makes them find a multitude of reasons why $everybody should pay double and triple to get a proper connection.

Khanna’s original tweet implies that Meo is blocking or limiting certain “packages” unless you pay for them, the way that you can’t watch HBO without the right cable plan. But that's wrong. It’s an add-on to general-purpose mobile subscriptions, which let you access any service — including the ones above. The idea is apparently that if you’re into apps like Snapchat and Facebook (or... LinkedIn, I guess), you pay aro…

>if you’re into apps like Snapchat and Facebook [...] you pay around $8 a month to specifically get more “Social” data...

Ugh. This kind of cable plan confusopoly is so annoying.

I hate how marketing creates all these plans and promotions, then expects us jump through hoops to figure them out.

What a waste of time playing these silly games.

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

#375

Post by mikebenfield » Thu, Nov 23, 2017, 6:11 PM UTC

cabaalis wrote: post #342

I am in favor of net neutrality. But the way you win this argument is not to support it en masse, or to blindly ask your representatives to support it because you think it's good. You have to craft an argument that overcomes the "This is not the government's right or responsibility to control" response. This is what the conservative talking heads are spouting, this is what average Americans believe in and stand behin…

I see very little reason to think that persuading people by rational argument is an effective way to make policy happen.

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

#376

Post by throwanem » Thu, Nov 23, 2017, 6:20 PM UTC

Fnoord wrote: post #297

jinfiesto wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm pretty liberal, and I believe that there is some truth to the "less regulation and more competition will solve the issues" mantra. The issue here being that there isn't a real way to inject more competition into the ISP space. Soooo, we are just getting less regulation. Which will inevitably lead to abuses.

If the government owned the infrastructure, would be held accountable to maintain it, and would provide access to different ISPs there would be more competition. The problem is that some people see this is "regulation" or "socialism" or "lack of choice" while others see this as "healthy competition" and "liberty". If there's just one infrastructure, or maybe two (cable and DSL) and the ISPs own it then there's barely…

> If the government owned the infrastructure, would be held accountable to maintain it, and would provide access to different ISPs

Yeah last time we tried this we got Amtrak so I don't really see it as a workable solution. Size limits and market choice requirements might work, though. They did, pretty well, with media companies, for quite a long time.

Of course, those also only last until we get an FCC that's either so corrupt it'd be right at home in the Gilded Age, or so out of touch it'd be right at home in Versailles. I tend to the latter suspicion, myself; DC people are long known in general to make a habit of thinking of 495 more or less as the end of the civilized world, beyond which lies only a terrifying wasteland full of barbarians and howling ghosts. That's why lobbyists exist - just as in Versailles, there's a market for paying people to present one's case and pray intercession on one's behalf at court. I suppose we'll see whose lobbyists pray most effectively this time. And next time, and the time after that, and...

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

#377

Post by pdimitar » Thu, Nov 23, 2017, 6:27 PM UTC

specialist wrote: post #330

pdimitar wrote: post #321

Seriously? You are on the FCC and expect other people to fix your problems? What are you doing, playing Solitaire all day? YOU NEED TO BE DOING STUFF RIGHT NOW , not tomorrow, not next week. Now. Call ISPs which are against NN repeal. Tell them to pull all the strings they have available. Call senators. Do counter-lobbying, aren't you americans big fans of lobbies? I don't care what you do. DO SOMETHING. The internet…

Alas, that's not how policy making works. She doesn't have the votes. But if you/we bring the heat, the other commissioners will see the light. Then opponents of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness will wait until the heat cools off, and then try again while no ones looking. Been there, been done like that.

Yes, and they will keep trying. Corruption won't be stopped by seeing the light I am afraid.

But I have no solution to the problem, I admit. Still, whoever can help should help, like right now.

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

#378

Post by luckydude » Thu, Nov 23, 2017, 6:32 PM UTC

rconti wrote: post #363

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.

I'm just tired. I'm tired of fighting all these pro-tech and pro-freedom fights going back decades, to the Clipper chip and the CDA. I'm tired of trying to figure out if the hyperbole (this time it's CRITICAL you act!) is deserved, whether the issue is that serious, and whether we're really on the right side of the issue in the first place. I'm tired of trying to figure out if contacting my (Democrat) lawmaker will m…

You and me both, bud. I really fear for our country. I used to be proud to be an American, these days I'm ashamed.

I'm half Dutch and went back to the Netherlands with my family this summer and it was so frigging pleasant. The discourse was sane, they actually work together to fix stuff. As painful as it is to form a government there sometimes, I much prefer their system to ours. We look pretty crazy from the inside, we look bat shit crazy from the outside.

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

#379

Post by jquery » Thu, Nov 23, 2017, 6:36 PM UTC

kenning wrote: post #218

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.

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.

Argumentum by verbosity [1] is a fallacy. So is argumentum via comment history [2]. Maybe you noticed my account is 10x older than yours and couldn’t call me a shill? Perhaps you should lurk a bit longer instead of using the downvote button as a disagree button like it is on the site you came from. You’ll notice even my heavily downvoted posts in this emotional and poltical thread aren’t hidden because I have a long history of discussing things in good faith on this forum. Believe it or not, it is possible to disagree about whether the FCC can make ISPs Title II by fiat.

EDIT: I do not claim everything I say is right. But I will stand the courage of my convictions and am happy to be proven wrong. So far this thread is a total disaster of emotional pleas, doomsday predictions, and bad reddit-like behavior (such as yours).

[1] https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gish_Gallop

[2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

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

#380

Post by cholantesh » Thu, Nov 23, 2017, 6:37 PM UTC

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…

Source, for those wondering: https://reason.com/archives/2017/04/26/fcc-ajit-pai-net-neut...