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

551–560 of 1001 posts

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

#551

Post by maxsilver »

okreallywtf wrote: post #532
maxsilver wrote: post #457

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

I'm having trouble finding it now, but didn't the FCC overturn the rule that says ISP's have to sell bandwidth to other ISP's? If they do not, or they are able to make it to where they do not have to, they could pretty easily prevent people from doing this or charge some huge amount for a contract to connect directly to a backbone.

Yes absolutely, but it's not really a problem on the commercial market because there's enough competition there.

In my small city in Michigan, for example, there's exactly one phone company and one cable company for residential uses. But there are 4 different local companies selling commercial bandwidth backhaul, in addition to nationwide major providers like Level3 and AT&T.

If you're somewhere truly rural, this can be an issue, the local monopoly might not let you buy commercial (re-sellable) bandwidth. But in most cities -- even small ones, it's probably not a major issue.

At the moment, commercial ISP services are still somewhat competitive. It's the residential ones that are completely monopolized.

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

#552

Post by H99189 »

illumin8 wrote: post #432
beal wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The hyperbole around NN on here and reddit has been annoying. My network carrier already does some anti net neutral things that I like. I do think the market for ISPs has failed. Regulatory patching won't always be able to stay up to date. The government should make it easier to start an ISP.

> My network carrier already does some anti net neutral things that I like. Like what? You do realize that we're all paying $1 more a month for Netflix because Comcast decided to go "rent seeking" and throttled their traffic until they paid up? Our Netflix bills were increased shortly after. You're being fucked by anti-NN, whether you realize it or not.

They just announced another increase the other day, what caused that?

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

#553

Post by jimktrains2 »

ikeboy wrote: post #379
bo1024 wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you read the wording of that survey? It's very deceptive to link responses to net neutrality. "Should companies have to pay more for faster internet speeds?" "Probably yes"

It's pretty much exactly what paid prioritization is, which is a major part of what NN bans.

No, actually it's not. You can pay for a better connection yourself, but "paid prioritization" essentially slows down other people for the person connecting to you, through no fault or issue of theirs.

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

#554

Post by fictionfuture »

tazelo123 wrote: post #546

I think all comments so far have missed the point. So called "net neutrality" is really just a big government handout to Google, Facebook, Amazon and others who want a free ride on the infrastructure built over decades by private company investments of billions of dollars. Putting a chokehold on the telcos has made it so these large companies don't have to make similar investments and put large infrastructure assets…

Because,

1. The companies you mention also have a monopoly on internet content distribution

2. Most people are herd thinkers, don't know anything about NN, only that "it's bad" because the content they see says "it's bad"

Propaganda works.

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

#555

Post by jimktrains2 »

nickik wrote: post #548
chaosite wrote: post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A. The rule isn't that packets must be delivered at the same time, the rule is that you can't shape based on source (but you CAN shape based on other things - so, you can prioritize VoIP for example). Basically it means the telecoms can't favor their own streaming services over Netflix. B. The clients are literally paying the telecoms in order to get access to Netflix. That's what they use their internet connection f…

I don't know about the specific rules in the US. But in Eurpean hacker circles when talking about net neutrality the strong definition is used. Meaning the provider should not be allowed to change quality at all. Some think it would be fine as long as the user indicates the quality level he wants, others are against it completely. There have been a number of debates of the years, at the Chaos Communication Congress f…

In the US, under the OIO/Title II, an ISP could do basic network management (e.g. blocking ddos attacks, holding people to the bandwidth limits they paid for) and basic QoS, though I'm not exactly sure how that was defined or implemented.

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

#556

Post by mijowi »

It's not democratic. It's republican. Remember that America is a republic, not a democracy. Each state has 2 senators/electoral votes because this country was founded as the United States. It was supposed to be more of a coalition of states united under a federal government, than a single nation.

Also, California has a huge population with tons of representatives, and basically every elected official is democratic. I don't think you should complain.

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

#557

Post by [deleted] »

maxsilver wrote: post #457
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…

> 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…

[deleted]

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

#558

Post by Crye »

dtien wrote: post #512
betterunix2 wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"That a Republican-led FCC would err on the side of under-regulating telecommunications companies is about the least surprising outcome you can imagine." That is not why this is shocking. This proceeding is shocking because the legal basis for this change is dependent on a false statements about the technology involved. It goes beyond just, "Republicans prefer deregulation," or, "Republicans favor market-based approa…

>It is not acceptable to pursue that agenda by ignoring expert answers to technical questions, regardless of party affiliation Your entire premise can be rebutted with the policies around climate change. If something as catastrophic and irreversible as climate change can be subject to partisan nonsense, twisting of facts and delegitimization of experts; what makes anyone think that Net Neutrality would be looked upon…

Or, we can accept that ideologies are how we all make the majority of our decisions and then work to create a convincing ideology which combats the systems of power/corruption we're currently dealing with. None of this going to go away with facts and logic.

Change never happened because someone spouted a couple damning facts and shamed people with power.

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

#559

Post by ng12 »

fjabre wrote: post #541
tptacek wrote: post #127

The voters elected a Republican government. That a Republican-led FCC would err on the side of under-regulating telecommunications companies is about the least surprising outcome you can imagine. Anybody who told you that lobbying the FCC was going to make a difference here was, whether they meant to or not, selling a bill of goods. As someone who respects but mostly profoundly disagrees with principled Republican la…

Actually the voters elected a Democrat. The electoral college elected the Republican. Not your issue? I've followed your account for years. This is exactly your issue, and everyone in this community's issue. Without the Internet you have no chance of fighting against things like the new tax bill. It takes away your voice. It takes away all of our voices. This might not be 'your' issue, but make no mistake, it is more…

> Actually the voters elected a Democrat. The electoral college elected the Republican.

You mean 48.2% of 58% of eligible voters elected a Democrat. You can slice it many ways but the electoral college is all that matters.

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

#560

Post by phlakaton »

RpFLCL wrote: post #21
pmoriarty wrote: post #6

Would anything stop the next administration from reinstating net neutrality?

It wouldn't, but then what would stop the administration after that from repealing the protections again? Are going to have to take up this fight every four years?

Welcome to democracy! Political fights can last for generations, and we're still relatively early on in this one...
Post reply on HN