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

681–690 of 1001 posts

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

#681

Post by crisdux »

tomchuk wrote: post #624
crisdux wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

As a Webpass customer in Boston, you really hit the nail on the head. More than twice the speeds of Comcast's best offering at less than half the price, better reliability and none of the bullshit - no outages, no slowdowns, no rate hikes, no forced modem upgrades, no shitty customer service, just 500Mbps up/down for $45 a month.

The amount of people who argue that this tech isn't possible is astonishing! I show them it's literally happening now and they don't believe me. I show them how wireless mobile and traditional companies have plans to create wireless home broadband networks and they don't believe me. We are at the early stages of this and it's pretty clear to me that this industry is about to be massively disrupted.

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

#682

Post by ghrifter »

sigmar wrote: post #247
ng12 wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. Sure. But it was an attainable solution, which is much better than no solution at all. It's not like Pai is going to find some other way to protect NN.

I think Title II is a fine solution (why shouldn't internet be a utility?). There are a ridiculous amount of people in these comments that are trying to thread the needle between "I support NN," but saying "it is fine that they reversed Title-II classification" (which I guess is their cool contrarian point of view, but functionally tripe)

Title II is a loooot more than being classified as a "utility"

Theres a lot of reports and other tasks that the ISP would have to do, but was put of 2 to 3 years since 2015.

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

#683

Post by fjabre »

tptacek wrote: post #192
russdill wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I think the biggest take away of this is to push the fact that republican legislators did not listen to their constituents. At all. They did not put their constituents first. At all. The chairman actually talked about consumers working with the FCC to enforce regulations as a bad thing.

I do not agree. I believe Republican voters do not in fact want the government extensively regulating the Internet. It is very difficult to argue in 2017 that the Republican party is the party of a pragmatic, consumer-protected regulatory state. The Republicans believe that the market will take better care of Internet users than any regulatory agency. On this one issue, it's possible they're even right.

You do know that TCP/IP packet data delivery is handled by network protocol right? Protocol is designed to work, not to please Verizon lawyers.

Internet only works when neutral.

Here is your argument: Regulation bad - Deregulation good. Don't you think that's a bit overly simplistic?

What part of this are you missing? Either you have the Internet with protections in place or simply you don't have an Internet at all. Your world view is AOL and Compuserv. That's what a world without NN looks like.

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

#684

Post by jsonne »

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…

When I emailed my Senator this was essentially his response. Whether genuine or not he said he wants to see a permanent solution that creates more competition. Who knows if he's being truthful but it is an argument I've seen for a long term solution.

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

#685

Post by chiaro »

betterunix2 wrote: post #299
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…

"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…

>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 approaches." There is plenty of room and a general need for debates about what policy approaches are best, but there is no room for debate about the answer to technical questions.

Haha. Try working in education or, gasp, environmental science, if you think that the contestability of simple facts is shocking.

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

#686

Post by azeotropic »

thadjo wrote: post #506
Someone1234 wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "last mile" is a utility, and by its very nature will always result in monopolistic control. It is impractical and irrational to wire up a home to multiple ISPs with their own fiber channels. Each channel could cost tens of thousands to install. Instead the "last mile" should be a non-profit funded by ISPs who lease the channels. The non-profit is responsible for installing the "last mile," upgrading it, and repa…

> The "last mile" is a utility, and by its very nature will always result in monopolistic control. This is THE central point. Everyone saying that they would be OK with the latest FCC regs if there were only more competition need to consider this. In what bizarro world would anyone actually want ISPs competing for the last mile?

The one where 5g is faster than my comcast connection.

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

#687

Post by macinjosh »

Amazingly good news!

The argument that net neutrality protects the little guy, the small startup, etc is backwards. Internet giants like Facebook, Google, Netflix et al. only want net neutrality so that their current business model is protected through government force.

There are plenty of mechanisms in place to keep telcos in check. (e.g. FTC, customer choice).

If we really want to reform Internet policy create more competition in the marketplace by making it easier to start an ISP not harder.

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

#688

Post by s73ver_ »

remarkEon wrote: post #604
s73ver_ wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Unpopular opinion: Title II is not a great solution to Net Neutrality." Do you have a compelling reason why? Tittle II worked fantastically for phone calls. I see zero reason why it wouldn't work for internet as well.

https://stratechery.com/2017/pro-neutrality-anti-title-ii/

I wasn't convinced by that article when it first came out, due to it's using several arguments in bad faith, and simply mischaracterizing many things (you can check back to the HN thread when that article was released for examples). I'm less inclined to believe it now.

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

#689

Post by s73ver_ »

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.

The entire world is made up of divisive politics. Unless you want this to be a place where nothing of substance is discussed, ever, then you cannot escape it.

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

#690

Post by jpao79 »

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…

There's a microwave based ISP in SF called Monkeybrains. From their about us page:

"Monkeybrains is primarily a WISP (Wireless Internet Service Provider). What this means is Monkeybrains uses microwave technology to create a wireless network covering much of San Francisco. We deliver internet service to individual locations by placing an antenna on the roof. This antenna picks up an encrypted wireless signal from one of our network access points which can be found on over 1000 buildings city-wide.

From the roof, we run a Cat5 Ethernet wire either to the unit, telecom closet, or the property's Ethernet patch panel. We are happy to comply with any building wiring guidelines or work with the building's riser company if required."

https://www.monkeybrains.net/how-it-works

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/infrastructure/a1...

They are pretty responsive in terms of customer service.

*Don't work for Monkeybrains but my company uses their service.

Post reply on HN