Ajit Pai is right • Hacker News Board

Re: Ajit Pai is right

#11

Post by libeclipse » Tue, Nov 28, 2017, 5:12 PM UTC

adamnemecek wrote: post #2

> There is no evidence of systemic abuse by ISPs governed under Title I, which means there are not immediate benefits to regulation, only theoretical ones False. They've tried in the past I believe. There was something with AT&T and iPhone users around 2010 (IIRC it was about Facetime)? There were more. Also the thing about Portugal and Euros. Yeah that graphic has been circulating for a while now, it predates this d…

Yeah, and there was the thing where Comcast slowed down Netflix until they bent over and signed a deal with them.

In the UK, Virgin Media have a deal with Twitter and don't charge for internet traffic to Twitter. Three do the same with Netflix and a bunch of others. Net neutrality is already breaking.

Re: Ajit Pai is right

#12

Post by tcd » Tue, Nov 28, 2017, 5:12 PM UTC

You post this when india just got the toughest laws on Net Neutrality in the world [1]. This guy is clearly fishing for clicks (outrageous headline!) and wants to invite the trolls to comment pages.

He's not right, he never has been, and never will be. And the idiots that upvoted this are also idiots.

[1]: https://redd.it/7g3aaq

Re: Ajit Pai is right

#13

Post by friggingee » Tue, Nov 28, 2017, 5:12 PM UTC

adamnemecek wrote: post #2

> There is no evidence of systemic abuse by ISPs governed under Title I, which means there are not immediate benefits to regulation, only theoretical ones False. They've tried in the past I believe. There was something with AT&T and iPhone users around 2010 (IIRC it was about Facetime)? There were more. Also the thing about Portugal and Euros. Yeah that graphic has been circulating for a while now, it predates this d…

Absolutely right. There is a reddit thread which links to a fairly large list of incidents from before and during the Title II regulations which clearly shows attempts and successful implementation of "fast lanes".

Re: Ajit Pai is right

#14

Post by just_steve_h » Tue, Nov 28, 2017, 5:13 PM UTC

His restaurant example actually undercuts his argument: despite the "burdensome" licensing and safety requirements imposed by San Francisco, the city is flooded with restaurants.

Re: Ajit Pai is right

#15

Post by j2kun » Tue, Nov 28, 2017, 5:13 PM UTC

> It is worth noting, by the way, that BitTorrent users were free-loaders, using massively more bandwidth than the vast majority of Comcast’s customers.

I don't think that's how a service agreement works. If I'm paying for a certain bandwidth and latency, I should get that (to within reasonably improbable outages) if I use it 100% of the time or 1% of the time. If the ISP can't keep up, they should be penalized for it or change the labels on the thing they're selling. You don't see a cloud storage provider saying "you get 100 Gb of storage, but only if you don't use 99 Gb of it."

Re: Ajit Pai is right

#16

Post by gormo2 » Tue, Nov 28, 2017, 5:13 PM UTC

Ajit Pai did nothing wrong and shouldn't be attacked with as much personal vitriol as we're seeing.

Re: Ajit Pai is right

#17

Post by zwerdlds » Tue, Nov 28, 2017, 5:13 PM UTC

giacaglia wrote: post #3

Is this right given that ISPs have local monopolies?

Yeah, the whole comparison to T-Mobile is baseless.

Re: Ajit Pai is right

#18

Post by princetontiger » Tue, Nov 28, 2017, 5:13 PM UTC

Isn't the final evolution of the Web supposed to resemble this? Looks normal to me. This happened to radio and television.

As long as Amazon/Target/Walmart fulfill my shopping needs, and as long as YouTUbe fulfills my video needs, I'm happy. I don't need to worry about other, lesser services.

Frankly, white listing websites might make the Web much safer.

Re: Ajit Pai is right

#19

Post by s73ver_ » Tue, Nov 28, 2017, 5:14 PM UTC

adamnemecek wrote: post #2

> There is no evidence of systemic abuse by ISPs governed under Title I, which means there are not immediate benefits to regulation, only theoretical ones False. They've tried in the past I believe. There was something with AT&T and iPhone users around 2010 (IIRC it was about Facetime)? There were more. Also the thing about Portugal and Euros. Yeah that graphic has been circulating for a while now, it predates this d…

There has been plenty of documented abuse. It's a big reason why there was a push for Title II in the first place.

And, besides that, why would that matter? If there's no abuse, then the regulation should not be causing any burden. If ISPs don't want to do things like paid prioritization, and other uncompetitive things, then why are they pushing to remove the regulation?

Re: Ajit Pai is right

#20

Post by burkaman » Tue, Nov 28, 2017, 5:14 PM UTC

The only argument here is "it might not be necessary, so it's not worth the costs." Can anyone think of any actual costs? Unfortunately there is no substance in the "THE COST OF REGULATION" section.