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

451–460 of 1001 posts

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

#451

Post by jjeaff »

quasse wrote: post #390
tcheard wrote: post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So an open-access network ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-access_network ). This is done quite successfully in other countries around the world, like New Zealand where we mainly have one infrastructure provider (selected and monitored by the Government), who must offer fair and standard pricing to any ISP who wants to add value to the network. As a result, we have many ISP options throughout the country and comp…

What value do the ISPs actually add to the market? It seems like a government granted middleman position to me, where I'd rather just purchase service from the government or the government's selected infrastructure manager. Presumably there's already some base price for service that this infrastructure provider is charging everyone (a controller monopolist), what are you gaining on top of that by having a second midd…

Given the government's track record with some big projects like healthcare.gov which is still a nightmare to use, I would not trust them to be an ISP. In fact, in the past, some states did (or still do) have their own ISP that they use at a lot of schools and public facilities. Ours was always slow with frequent outages.

I think a hybrid approach with the government managing and maintaining the physical lines and allowing isps to plug in and pay rent is the way to go. The ISP rent should be enough to cover the cost of physical line maintenance.

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

#452

Post by crisdux »

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…

I'm always surprised that folks on here don't think about the future of last mile connectivity being wireless, instead of wired. Next generation wireless networks (5G) are poised to have broadband like speeds, faster latency, and high bandwidth. Wireless operators have been pretty explicit in that their plan to get into the home broadband game. These networks are a few years away from a broad roll out, AT&T is starting next year. I predict there will soon be much more competition in the home broadband game and much of these net neutrality debates will seem pretty silly. Other cities like Boston already have a wireless broadband provider and are moving in this direction.

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

#453

Post by vorotato »

humanrebar wrote: post #228
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.

TimeWarner Cable no longer exists and was purchased by Charter.

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

#454

Post by dicroce »

Aron wrote: post #12

I hope all the loud voices that are against this move have codified their predictions in a way that they can look back and see if they were accurate.

Here is my prediction: they will begin slowly, but eventually ISP's will be priortizing the traffic of their shitty versions of various internet services (youtube.com, DropCam, etc...)... This will impact small new businesses the worst because large entities will be able to afford to pay... So, we'll just have less new internet startups... Will be quite hard to quantify.

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

#455

Post by vultour »

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.

Actually, many of them are not. Because they're big they can afford to pay ISPs to no throttle their traffic, while their small competitors can't.

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

#456

Post by dreamcompiler »

racer-v wrote: post #423
komali2 wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been thinking this over for the past couple months, because I was pretty sure this would be the outcome - that we would lose our net neutrality protection. So let's play out the worse case - Comcast, AT&T etc wait out the shitstorm and then start throttling traffic and packaging the internet, releasing cable-esque "plans." Is it feasible to just start running our own fiber to hubs? I want to learn more about the…

Ask around for community-friendly ISP's in your area (including Monkeybrains and Sonic in San Francisco). EDIT: OK I suggested sharing a T1 but apparently that hasn't been a good deal since the 90's.

T1 lines only carry 1.544 Mbps. On the upside, I don't think they cost $1000 nowadays.

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

#457

Post by maxsilver »

komali2 wrote: post #300
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…

I've been thinking this over for the past couple months, because I was pretty sure this would be the outcome - that we would lose our net neutrality protection. So let's play out the worse case - Comcast, AT&T etc wait out the shitstorm and then start throttling traffic and packaging the internet, releasing cable-esque "plans." Is it feasible to just start running our own fiber to hubs? I want to learn more about the…

> As a private citizen, can I (snip) just lay a super long fiber cable straight to (the internet).

Yes. I worked on a startup ISP for a few years, which attempted to do this. It's actually really easy to do :

1) Pick a point where you can get connection to the internet. (Backhaul). This is usually a phone companies central office, but it can also be at a data centre or other point of presence.

2) Run fiber cable from there to your customers. (You can also use wireless gear instead for a WISP. I don't like this approach, it's very 1990s despite all the newer better gear, but it's much cheaper than fiber and if your careful it can work out OK)

3) Setup some light network management.

Some cities / municipalities have signed agreements for monopoly rights to a telephone or cable provider. Many (but not all) of them can be worked around by simply not selling telephone or TV service.

The land between you and your customers is owned. You'll need space in public property (or 'right of way') to connect to them. This also varies based on city/county/state/local laws, but in Michigan there are somewhat decent rules around this. (Set rates for underground conduit access or utility pole access, rules about what can/can't be blocked, etc).

The only real roadblock is money. Fiber ISPs are super cheap at scale, but are effectively impossible to bootstrap unless you are already a millionaire. In Michigan, I could easily offer everyone residential 500mbps to the home via fiber for $50/month and cover all costs, no problem. But only after we already had a few thousand customers. The cost for your very first customer is somewhere north of $50k/each, and prices don't become reasonable until your in the thousands.

In most areas, the only thing you really need to start an ISP is (1) Lots of money, and (2) perseverance. There's not really any rules that prevent it, and the regulations aren't unreasonable. But the upfront cost is so high, it rules out basically any honest person from having the chance to do it.

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

#458

Post by Corrado »

crisdux wrote: post #452
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…

I'm always surprised that folks on here don't think about the future of last mile connectivity being wireless, instead of wired. Next generation wireless networks (5G) are poised to have broadband like speeds, faster latency, and high bandwidth. Wireless operators have been pretty explicit in that their plan to get into the home broadband game. These networks are a few years away from a broad roll out, AT&T is starti…

I agree, to some extent, but I'm not sure if wireless will ever be able to give me gigabit speed with sub 10ms latency. If that's possible, then I'm ready to sign up right now!

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

#459

Post by drawkbox »

Unfortunately telcos have had a great year in power consolidation in spite of everyone's opinions or demands. Representatives in government have represented the ISPs/telcos over individual demands, voting in favor of their bribes over what nearly everyone wants.

Jeff Flake started this destruction in the senate where he pushed through the ISP privacy bill that allows them monopoly power and first rights to users info that they have no choice in excluding. Google/Facebook/Amazon earned your data by giving you a service you wanted, ISPs just default get it first now and you have NO CHOICE in the matter.

Ajit Pai has now handed the keys to the ISPs further in removing title II protections and common carrier status. Net neutrality is now gone.

Underneath all the madness of 2016/2017, telcos/ISPs have been slashing and burning the internet and privacy. They better hope competition is held back for some time because people will not forget this.

ISPs are not a service friendly to consumers who want fair internet or small/medium business that want fair representation in the markets.

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

#460

Post by vorotato »

craftyguy wrote: post #68
electic wrote: post #18

It is time to make the Internet a utility. Unfortunately, it wont happen until we get Democrats back into the Senate and House.

Democrats had a chance to when they controlled both, and they didn't. This problem may not be as partisan as you think..

That's exactly right. This is why we need to collaborate across party lines.
Post reply on HN