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

Net Neutrality to Get U.S. Senate Vote as Democrats Force Issue

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 167 posts

Re: Net Neutrality to Get U.S. Senate Vote as Democrats Force Issue

#111

Post by starik36 »

specialist wrote: post #102
danjayh wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem isn't net neutrality, it's lack of competition among ISPs. Normally, I would agree with them - regulating the internet is not the way to spur innovation. But with an ISP monopoly or duopoly in most markets, either more competition (my preferred solution) or regulation is needed. As we've seen with phone service (if you're old enough to remember), regulation will give us reliable but expensive service, and…

What's your proposal for increasing competition?

Allowing any company access to the last mile would be a start. They just pay rent to the line owner, just like it was back in the mid 90s.

Re: Net Neutrality to Get U.S. Senate Vote as Democrats Force Issue

#113

Post by ComradeTaco »

chrchang523 wrote: post #107
awalton wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why didn't Obama do a proper job if it's such an important issue? Obama was president while the Republicans held the legislature hostage. It was a miracle his administration was able to ask for and get any legislation passed at all; it was easily the most obstructionist congress ever. He couldn't even appoint a Supreme Court Justice because Mitch McConnell wouldn't allow congress to hold hearings - that's how impos…

The Democrats controlled both the House and the Senate in 2009-2010. Anything Obama and other Democrats thought was really important could have been forced through then. (Indeed, they did force a major health care reform bill through with zero Republican support, mirroring how a major tax reform bill was forced through with zero Democrat support a few weeks ago.)

The Democrats observed the regular order of the Senate, hosted 5 bipartisan meetings and finished the bill so it could actually be analyzed and read before being passed [1]. The republicans didn't bother with any bipartisan meetings and passed it within the same week of finishing writing it. And they broke the regular order of the senate to do it.

In any case, the two year period between 2009 and 2010 was spent almost entirely on the economy. Which given how strong the Obama-era recovery was, seems to be have been time well spent.

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/07/10/us/republican...

Re: Net Neutrality to Get U.S. Senate Vote as Democrats Force Issue

#114

Post by untog »

meddlepal wrote: post #76
untog wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No it is not. Republicans are far more dedicated to the task of destroying government than Democrats are. I agree that some Democratic senators have historically been pretty shitty on the topic of net neutrality but this false equivalence nonsense needs to stop. Republicans will sell off national parks, shut down the EPA and FDA and shut down any banking regulation you put in front of them.

I agree that some Republican senators have historically been pretty shitty on the topic of FDA, EPA and banking regulation but this false narrative of all Republicans are evil needs to stop.

Your comparison doesn't even work. Some Democratic senators have been weak on net neutrality, but a Democratic administration enacted the common carrier rules we are now losing. That is to say, while the senators were not perfect, the party still made the better choice.

None of this applies to the Republicans and the EPA, banking regulation etc.

Re: Net Neutrality to Get U.S. Senate Vote as Democrats Force Issue

#115

Post by untog »

wooter wrote: post #101
awalton wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[citation needed]. You're going to need some high octane evidence to compare adding new regulations that disproportionally help one industry, verses destroying the established works of the FCC, EPA, NOAA, the Bureau of Land Management/National Parks, the Department of Education... the list is literally too long for me to keep enumerating here, so take a look at articles like this one: https://www.bostonglobe.com/news…

is this a joke? Look at Chicago and Detroit. Democrat corruption is rampant. It is well known that Obama massively increased the amount of illegal domestic surveillance and use of unconstitutional FISA courts. To say nothing of his attempt to subvert the First and Fourth Amendments to the point where Apple had to act in outright defiance with an open letter to the People. To say nothing of how he handled the Snowden…

Is this a joke? Your pivot to corruption is probably the strongest example of whataboutism I've seen on HN in a while. It has absolutely nothing to do with the OPs point, which is that Republicans are overwhelmingly in favour of removing government regulations in preference to big business, and the Democrats are not. (and do you really believe a Republican president would have been easier on Edward Snowden than Obama was?)

Re: Net Neutrality to Get U.S. Senate Vote as Democrats Force Issue

#116

Post by openasocket »

temp-dude-87844 wrote: post #84
smsm42 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where the idea that FCC latest ruling is opposed by majority of conservatives comes from? Moreover, if you think issue as obscure and technical as NN would be important enough for a senator to break with their own party, you are deluding yourself. The only way to make it so is to wage blatantly false campaign like "without NN you'd be paying 100x for Internet tomorrow and all your favorite sites would be blocked" - w…

My assertion as stated in the parent post is based on the University of Maryland Program for Public Consultation's December 2017 poll, which asked respondents to weigh how convincing they found a pro-repeal and a con-repeal argument, and then asked their final stance. The results show [1] that 75% of Republican voters, over 88% of Democrat voters, and almost 86% of independents oppose changes are consistent with the…

But, they didn't ask how much voters cared, like whether a congressman's stance on the issue would change their vote.

Re: Net Neutrality to Get U.S. Senate Vote as Democrats Force Issue

#117

Post by [deleted] »

rconti wrote: post #20
arctia wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SF-specific. Comcast has to step up because competition is fierce. Even just 30 miles south from SF, Comcast is crap because there's less competition there.

28.4 miles south from SF (according to Google Maps driving directions from "San Francisco"), I've got gig down/40 up from Comcast. And the only competition is ATT DSL (yes, I'm like 2000 feet from the CO and they'll only give me 40mbit). Comcast advertises on broadcast TV all over the bay area "gigabit now available in your area". So I'd think penetration is pretty high now. Now, I'd rather pay pretty much anyone oth…

[deleted]

Re: Net Neutrality to Get U.S. Senate Vote as Democrats Force Issue

#118

Post by al3xnull »

1024core wrote: post #78

What I don't understand is: why did it take so much effort to get to 30 supporters, when Democrats have 48 in the Senate? What are the other 18 Democratic Senators doing? Why are they not fully behind NN?

Careful, don't want any of those senators to step out of line over there. I hear dissent is treated with lashing and in-party sabotage.

Re: Net Neutrality to Get U.S. Senate Vote as Democrats Force Issue

#119

Post by dashundchen »

wooter wrote: post #101
awalton wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[citation needed]. You're going to need some high octane evidence to compare adding new regulations that disproportionally help one industry, verses destroying the established works of the FCC, EPA, NOAA, the Bureau of Land Management/National Parks, the Department of Education... the list is literally too long for me to keep enumerating here, so take a look at articles like this one: https://www.bostonglobe.com/news…

is this a joke? Look at Chicago and Detroit. Democrat corruption is rampant. It is well known that Obama massively increased the amount of illegal domestic surveillance and use of unconstitutional FISA courts. To say nothing of his attempt to subvert the First and Fourth Amendments to the point where Apple had to act in outright defiance with an open letter to the People. To say nothing of how he handled the Snowden…

This excellent Reddit comment shows that when it comes to the voting record, no, both sides are not the same.

https://www.reddit.com/r/news/comments/6brytw/comment/dhpcbd...

Re: Net Neutrality to Get U.S. Senate Vote as Democrats Force Issue

#120

Post by rayiner »

tfigment wrote: post #14
anfedorov wrote: post #10

What's a good resource for understanding broadband markets as a whole? At least in SF in the past 5 years, Comcast seems to have upgraded 100Mbps connections to 1Gbps connections. Not sure whether that translates to a bigger shared pipe for the city as a whole, but it certainly looks like a good amount of improvement in $:bits, at least in comparison with $:sqFt.

Its an improvement but Comcast has been delaying real improvements for years but collect insane profits (afaik). I would love to see the numbers as well. The X1 DVR as far as I am concerned was horrible compared to the ReplayTV or Tivo circa 2001 (except for obviously HD improvement). It only took 15 years and lots of legislation mandating cablecards and whatnot to get them to get there. I don't have hope that they w…

> Its an improvement but Comcast has been delaying real improvements for years but collect insane profits (afaik).

Comcast has raised speeds from about 16 mbps to gigabit in the last ten years, through multiple rounds of DOCSIS upgrades.

As to access to the last mile: that’s already the law. Pole and conduit owners are required to lease out access at non-discriminatory rates. Comcast owns few if any poles. They lease access from the power company or the phone company, just like Google would have to do.

Post reply on HN