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

F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 1001 posts

Re: F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules

#221

Post by dmix »

stcredzero wrote: post #146
ikeboy wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's funny, the FCC's mandate isn't to poll the public and do whatever most of them want. Strange how people seem to think it's a numbers game, at least when they feel the numbers are on their side

Logician and Philosopher Raymond Smullyan had a story about this in one of his books. He had gone on a trip with a woman with a little girl. The adults wanted to eat at colorful local cafes, while the girl wanted to eat at McDonalds. He suggested that they vote, and the little girl replied, "That's no fair. I'd lose!" Our republic isn't designed just to do what the people want. It's intentionally designed so that goo…

Yep, there's a reason populism is commonly derided even in democratic societies. The founding fathers and "The Federalist Papers" [1] talked heavily about this problem (aka the influence of the "lowest common denominator" in popular voting).

Where these popular ideas do matter is in the marketplace. The entire tech industry, including some of the wealthiest companies in the world, will most certainly rebel against any attempt by ISPs to threaten net neutrality. And there will similarly be a revolt by customers.

Google Fiber was created merely to promote the deployment of fiber, Net Neutrality is a far bigger issue than fiber to both the tech industry and ISP consumers.

Even without FCC rules it will still be very dangerous for any ISP to make any significant changes to how the internet works.

The most likely scenario is that a few mobile internet providers may offer niche small packages of limited internet to mobile users for $5-10/month (which so far is the only real world example of "net neutrality" being violated in the world, by a Portuguese ISP)... basically a way to offer cheaper packages to some users who can't afford full broadband. This is basically the only thing I could see ISPs getting away with. I highly doubt any ISP would risk limiting the internet for any average home broadband users. Most American ISPs are public companies who still have worry about their bottom line.

The backlash even without FCC laws will be a significant deterrence.

[1] https://www.wikiwand.com/en/The_Federalist_Papers

Re: F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules

#222

Post by wyldfire »

ikeboy wrote: post #52
Dangeranger wrote: post #34

This 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.

It's funny, the FCC's mandate isn't to poll the public and do whatever most of them want. Strange how people seem to think it's a numbers game, at least when they feel the numbers are on their side

You're right that it's not a referendum. But the public poll was not "yea or nea?" it was "if we did this, what sort of problems would it raise for you?" And if they had substantive answers to the problems raised, then it would be logical for them to override the outcry. But it was instead as if the answer was, "Yes, the feedback solicited was merely our bureaucratic obligation but we are not obligated to follow through."

Re: F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules

#223

Post by UncleEntity »

judah wrote: post #77
Johnny555 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would anything stop the next administration from re-instating net neutrality? Money from the even richer companies that want to prevent it from happening. Think of the ad campaigns: "Since have been able to charge content providers for their use of our network, we've kept our costs low - that's why you pay only $99.99/month for your ultra fast 10 mbit connection , f net neutrality comes back, your rates will skyrocke…

Many of those big, rich companies (Google, Amazon, Netflix, etc.) are in favor of net neutrality.

Of course Netflix is in favor of net neutrality, I seem to recall when this was first being proposed they were responsible for something like 10% of all network traffic.

Do you really think they'd be opposed to a plan that basically subsidizes their bandwidth?

Same for all the other internet giants, net neutrality pretty much cemented their spot in the status quo.

Re: F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules

#225

Post by burkaman »

exabrial wrote: post #79

Unpopular opinion: Title II is not a great solution to Net Neutrality. The only thing I disklike is there isn't a better option already in place. I would rather see the FTC address EULAs. If a company says, "we may from time-to-time limit your bandwidth" I think they should be on the hook to produce a report every month when and why they limited you. This is not much different than the report you get from your invest…

How would that help? What are you going to do if you don't like what the report says?

Also, why not leave the Title II designation in place until a better solution is agreed upon and finalized?

Re: F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules

#226

Post by dragonwriter »

wdewind wrote: post #81
brian-armstrong wrote: post #5

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.

Pai was appointed by Obama and confirmed by the Senate as a Republican under law limiting the number of members of one party to a bare majority and a long-standing, strong tradition that the President defer to the leadership of the other party in the Senate in appointing members filling the seats which must be filled by members not of the President's party. (Which Trump slow followed when renominating Democratic former commissioner Rosenworcel.) [0]

Blaming Obama for Pai being on the committee, rather than the Republican Party, is like blaming Elizabeth II for acts of the British Government rather than the parliamentary majority party.

OTOH, where no such legal or traditional constraint limited his choices, Trump selected Pai as FCC Chair, so blaming Trump for Pai’s current position and his reasonably direct endorsement of Pai’s long-overt goals for the FCC is appropriate.

[0] https://www.google.com/amp/s/arstechnica.com/tech-policy/201...

Re: F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules

#228

Post by humanrebar »

juris wrote: post #135

This wouldn't be a problem if ISP's weren't de facto monopolies. If there was competition in this space, then there would be incentive to improve the infrastructure and Internet speeds. However, ISP's kill competition by making legal arrangements with local governments to only do business with them, and by cutting competitors' cables. Since we have no way to guarantee reasonable speeds to small time websites now, we…

> This wouldn't be a problem if ISP's weren't de facto monopolies.

It would still be a problem for startup companies. If TimeWarner gives exclusive preferential pricing to Vimeo and Verizon gives exclusive preference to YouTube, your video-streaming startup still has an extra uphill battle even if there is competition among the established players.

Re: F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules

#229

Post by signet »

judah wrote: post #117
ransom1538 wrote: post #47

Comcast board meeting (RIGHT NOW): "First things first, how do we charge more for netflix streaming."

They're free to do so; companies exist to make money. Cable internet carriers probably will attempt something like this. The next thing that will happen is, when Comcast goes too far, another provider (cable? wireless carrier? satellite broadband? something new from a startup?) disrupts the market by offering an alternative to Comcasts' egregious policies. Comcast loses subscribers and is monetarily forced to be more…

How exactly are they going to lose subscribers when a vast majority of them have no alternative?

Re: F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules

#230

Post by guelo »

FLUX-YOU wrote: post #187
Dangeranger wrote: post #34

This 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.

How can we stop^H^H^H^H subvert this?

VPNs
Post reply on HN