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

GOP net neutrality bill would allow paid fast lanes and preempt state laws

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 156 posts

Re: GOP net neutrality bill would allow paid fast lanes and preempt state laws

#41

Post by Brockenstein »

ryanlol wrote: post #14

Correct me if I’m wrong, but haven’t we always had paid fast lanes available? At least for VOIP this stuff hasn’t seemed very uncommon.

Not in the sense of:

Dear Netflix, if you want to service our customers you need to pay us a $10 million dollars a year.

Dear Customer with 30mbps service, Netflix takes a lot of bandwidth and we're just a poor multi-billion dollar ISP and can't afford to shoulder the burden. But if you pay an additional $9.99 a month we can probably scrape up the bandwidth to let you watch Netflix in HD ($29.99 for 4k)

Also see our other premium options. Have the freedom to pick which services are right for you! Hulu: $9.99 Amazon Video: $9.99 Apple Music: $5.99 YouTube: $7.99

Re: GOP net neutrality bill would allow paid fast lanes and preempt state laws

#42

Post by djschnei »

scoon1329 wrote: post #23
djschnei wrote: post #16

Can someone explain to me how it's evil for them to charge more money for a "bigger pipe"? Their networks can only service so much traffic; not sure why supply and demand are seen as evil in this case.

The issue is more complex than just a bigger pipe. As a site owner, you pay a service provider (or cloud hosting service or whatever) to offer you a certain amount of bandwidth to host your site. The problem comes when other ISP's implement their fast lanes and traffic from your site doesn't get equal priority to traffic from another site who has paid that specific ISP to prioritise their traffic when serving their c…

Thank you for explaining your concerns in a civil way. So this is a hypothetical problem or something that's manifested in the past but regulation then stopped?

Re: GOP net neutrality bill would allow paid fast lanes and preempt state laws

#43

Post by Y_Y »

e40 wrote: post #26
maxxxxx wrote: post #13

It's funny how they always vehemently advocate for states rights unless these states rights get in the way of their agenda.

Came here to say this. It shows the GOP doesn't really stand for anything. They just say what they need to say, in the moment, to get what they want. If Clinton were POTUS and Russian ties like had been found to the Trump administration, she would have been impeached already. But it's their man, so let's look the other way. Same with State's rights.

I hope you aren't implying that the Democratic party is any different.

Re: GOP net neutrality bill would allow paid fast lanes and preempt state laws

#44

Post by Spivak »

Buttons840 wrote: post #38
Spivak wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't very charitable. You should be happy that the GOP doesn't rotely apply their 'principles' even when it's idiotic to do so. Federal laws that create 'maximums' like this always come with preemption. Otherwise a different states are going to enact different versions of NN to score political points accomplishing one of two things: a rule that tries to simplify the regulatory environment will actually make it…

I don't think the FCC did, nor can they, create a new "federal law" though, right? The FCC removed a regulation. Do states not have the right to regulate in the absence of any federal regulation?

The FCC, both under Wheeler and Pai, have had trouble preempting state laws but Congress has no such trouble. The FCC wields delegated congressional power, much like the FDA, and should have authority to preempt state laws as their rules carry the same force of law as bills in congress but the courts have given them a harder time then one might expect. The most notable case was when the courts blocked Wheeler from preventing states from blocking municipal broadband.

States in fact do not have that right if the federal law implicitly or explicitly preempts them. It's a corollary of the supremacy clause.

Re: GOP net neutrality bill would allow paid fast lanes and preempt state laws

#46

Post by djschnei »

notyourday wrote: post #40
scoon1329 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue is more complex than just a bigger pipe. As a site owner, you pay a service provider (or cloud hosting service or whatever) to offer you a certain amount of bandwidth to host your site. The problem comes when other ISP's implement their fast lanes and traffic from your site doesn't get equal priority to traffic from another site who has paid that specific ISP to prioritise their traffic when serving their c…

That's also not correct. If you, as the site owner, are still talking about ISPs or cloud hosting you are someone who is riding a bicycle on a shoulder of I-95 next to semis doing 80mph in 65 zones. You are, frankly, irrelevant. Also you do want to make sure that those semis use -bypass instead of clogging your highway. The real issue is that we allow those ISPs to determine which semis are allowed to use a bypass. P…

So, I guess, my question still stands, right? I'm assuming this bypass costs money for the ISPs to provide. Why is it evil for them to charge people to use it?

Re: GOP net neutrality bill would allow paid fast lanes and preempt state laws

#47

Post by wanderingbort »

notyourday wrote: post #35
coldcode wrote: post #2

If it allows paid fast lanes, then clearly it allows degradation.

Not needed: https://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2010-December/0292...

whats interesting is that nothing about the current net-neutrality discussions addresses concerns like these. They may or may not be substantiated concerns. The graphs don't show intent so, that much is assumed.

Re: GOP net neutrality bill would allow paid fast lanes and preempt state laws

#48

Post by wavefunction »

pjc50 wrote: post #8
croon wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The GOP didn't expect us plebs to see through that.

They're in charge. Their supporters will vote for them no matter what so long as the guns and abortion issues are untouched, because they get their news from a parallel system in which this is all presented as a good thing. They don't depend on floating voters because there aren't any.

The GOP most certainly depends on floating voters. There are many independent/non-affiliated voters in the US, more than either the registered Republican or Democrat voter base.

And there were plenty of people who voted for President Obama but voted for Trump. 13% of 2012 Obama voters voted for Trump in 2016.

http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/just-h...

I strongly agree with the rest of your post.

Re: GOP net neutrality bill would allow paid fast lanes and preempt state laws

#49

Post by oreo81 »

tantalor wrote: post #17
g00gler wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that definitely the case? I interpreted this as meaning that although you pay for 10mb/s Internet, Comcast can offer a special package that allows you to stream Netflix in 4K.

That would be unfair to other streaming services e.g. YouTube, Hulu, HBO, Amazon, etc.

Why? Do you think google adwords is unfair to companies that don't pay for ads?

Re: GOP net neutrality bill would allow paid fast lanes and preempt state laws

#50

Post by ep103 »

From now, until the day I die, I will never vote or donate to the republican party again. This last year was the straw that broke the camel's back.

This isn't the party of small businesses and tax cuts any more. This bill is a handout to large ISPs at the expense of the economy, and the tax bill last night raises my taxes so people making 100k+ more than me can see a tax cut. I'm done with them.

Post reply on HN