If you voted for Trump, this one's on you.
Please don't bring divisive politics into HN. Fwiw Ajit Pai was appointed to the FCC by Obama not Trump.
F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules
81–90 of 1001 posts
Re: F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules
#82Would anything stop the next administration from reinstating net neutrality?
[deleted]
Re: F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules
#83This has been asked a few times but never fully answered, can someone explain why this vote in particular is a problem? I understand net neutrality and I am all for it, but there was considerable public doubt before reclassification that this was the proper way to go about it. It also doesn't seem like the internet regulatory state of pre-2015 was a disaster. Would we better off focusing our efforts on increasing com…
> Would we better off focusing our efforts on increasing competition among ISPs? The answer is, of course, yes . But people like to think in terms of black and white, ingroup and outgroup, friend and enemy. The public is now thoroughly convinced not only that the reclassification had the intended effects (and it's not clear that's the case), but that reinstating the reclassification is the only way to address the iss…
Actually, the public has been convinced that regulation on ISPs is a good thing, and that repealing that regulation without replacing it with anything is a bad thing. And I think that's a pretty fair thing to think.
Re: F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules
#84Earlier quoted context omitted.
Non-voters / people on the “there’s no difference” train also deserve a moment of reflection about whether their reality is true.
No. Give me a candidate worth voting for, and I will vote. The current "pick the lesser of two shitheads" is ridiculous. Both parties in the US are to blame. The two party system in the US today means that voting for anyone that is not a Democrat or Republican is a complete waste of time.
Interestingly, the 3rd party candidates last time around were absolutely worse than Trump and Clinton.
Re: F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules
#85If you voted for Trump, this one's on you.
Sorry but the two are not correlated, as much as I'd like to agree.
Trump appointed Carr. Obama appointed O'Rielly and Pai.
This one is on all of us. We let Congress become a swamp in the first place.
Re: F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules
#86Finally, something good came from the Obama administration. Appointing Pai to the FCC was probably their greatest accomplishment.
Care to explain why you think this is a good thing?
Re: F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules
#87This is proof positive that the current FCC commission has ignored the will of the voters on this issue. Support for Net Neutrality was overwhelming and bi-partisan, yet Ajit Pai just plowed forward without consideration for what the citizens demanded. This is government at its worst.
We live in an oligarchy, the will of the voters hasn't been relevant for a long time:
> Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organised groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on US government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence.
Re: F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules
#88This is proof positive that the current FCC commission has ignored the will of the voters on this issue. Support for Net Neutrality was overwhelming and bi-partisan, yet Ajit Pai just plowed forward without consideration for what the citizens demanded. This is government at its worst.
bi-partisan? Pretty sure the vast majority of Republican candidates came out against it last November. People knew what they were voting for.
Republican legislators are pretty uniformly against net neutrality. The Republican public is not, with one recent poll showing 3 out of 4 Republicans familiar with the issue voicing opposition to the rollback of regulations. [1]
[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2017/12/12...
Re: F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules
#89If you voted for Trump, this one's on you.
Non-voters / people on the “there’s no difference” train also deserve a moment of reflection about whether their reality is true.
We live in an electoral system. For almost all of the states of the U.S. it's actually factually correct that there's no difference for whom you vote in the Presidential elections. In many locations, it also doesn't matter who you vote for in Congressional ones thanks to gerrymandering drawing boundary lines around you before you even get to the polls.
We can discuss ideologically what the differences are between the parties, but as those of us in CA, NY, NJ, etc. well know - it's purely academic.
[edit:] Folks, it's a winner-take-all capital-E Electoral system in the vast majority of states, and in the vast majority of states, the demographic votes consistently in the same way. Thus very few states swing the entire Presidential election process, meaning that they matter. In California, for example, 3 million Democrats could have stayed in bed all day and not voted at all, and still it would have not touched the end result there.
Re: F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules
#90Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, nor will the next congress (likely Democratic or leaning that way) be prevented from passing laws that reinstate it at the legislative level.
Same thing with Obama Care and any other wide reaching law. If this happens enough just the lack of stability will make people and companies leave.
Is this one of those things that is just never going to work? It seems like our system can't execute on things that are all-or-nothing. We shoot for the all, water it down with compromise, and then we're surprised when things fail.
This happens in many situations, such as public transit. Build half a subway line so that it goes to nowhere and it fails, thus getting ridiculed as a failure from the start. How are we supposed to accomplish anything big or complex in this system?