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

Mozilla Fights for Net Neutrality This May (and Always)

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 180 posts

Re: Mozilla Fights for Net Neutrality This May (and Always)

#161

Post by sintaxi »

I expect Mozilla to do a much better job at educating the public on the pros and cons on a complex topic like this. Seems like they're just blindly taking a side. I expect Mozilla has a team of Lawyers who should all be able to speak intelligently on the topic. So where are they?

Mozilla tell me...

- Why does classifying internet as Title 2 make sense?

- Why is the Sherman Act (1890) not adequate for preventing ISPs from picking winners?

- Why do we want ISP to have to apply for broadcasting licenses and thus giving the government the power to shut down content without court order?

Re: Mozilla Fights for Net Neutrality This May (and Always)

#162

Post by AsyncAwait »

dragonwriter wrote: post #160
Fnoord wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I find amazing is that there are still people on this planet who oppose anything a government does, so they end up at the perils of corporations. I guess, according to you, GDPR is also a Bad Thing (tm)? Hint: it is a response to an industry which failed to regulate itself. When corporations cannot manage themselves, the government must interact by rule of law. An example of that is the sale of frequencies such…

> What I find amazing is that there are still people on this planet who oppose anything a government does, so they end up at the perils of corporations. Well, no, because if they oppose everything government does, they'd oppose corporations, too, since they are a thing government does.

If you want to be this pedantic over it, it's that they oppose every piece of government regulation, regardless of merits, so basically everything the government does that isn't unchecked capitalism.

Re: Mozilla Fights for Net Neutrality This May (and Always)

#163

Post by AsyncAwait »

RaleyField wrote: post #93
Fnoord wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I find amazing is that there are still people on this planet who oppose anything a government does, so they end up at the perils of corporations. I guess, according to you, GDPR is also a Bad Thing (tm)? Hint: it is a response to an industry which failed to regulate itself. When corporations cannot manage themselves, the government must interact by rule of law. An example of that is the sale of frequencies such…

> Hint: it is a response to an industry which failed to regulate itself. Hint: maybe stop being condescending. Also, I'm from EU and I'm split on GDPR. On one side I acknowledge its benefits and where it's coming from (the industry is known for highly morally dubious practices), on the other hand I don't agree on principle with the implication that users don't/can't have free will to enter into (however unfair) contr…

> I don't agree on principle with the implication that users don't/can't have free will to enter into (however unfair) contracts these companies wish to use.

These companies have lawyers who spend 40+ hours a week crafting contracts from which it's impossible to determine what are your rights for the average person. Good for you for not having a bad experience yet, but once you do you'll want a recourse that's more than just 'tough luck'.

I know where this thinking comes from - is this absolutist "I should be free to do whatever" mentality, which ignores the fact that you rely on the fact of people not being able to do that daily.

Are you of the opinion, for example, that simply leaving your house gives anyone who dares a free pass to enter it? I mean, you're technically free to take it back from them once you get back and if they're stronger, better equipped so you don't manage to? Well, tough luck, I guess.

Re: Mozilla Fights for Net Neutrality This May (and Always)

#164

Post by devnonymous »

briandear wrote: post #81
devnonymous wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know if you are intentionally trolling but I'll bite. Independent hacker culture is the exact thing at risk here without government intervention. Else, you'll end up with the fragmented Verizon hacker culture and the Comcast hacker culture and the... Goddess forbid Google / Facebook / Amazon hacker culture, each with its own non-independent thought. As an aside, Why are regulations that prevent bad actors fro…

Because regulations that “prevent” bad actors actually have unintended consequences that the big-government people never seem to grasp. And free markets are far more powerful and adapt far more quickly than regulation — while preserving freedom for people to make their own choices. Certain European governments in the past century made regulations to “protect” society — and that resulted in millions of people killed o…

> And free markets are far more powerful and adapt far more quickly than regulation — while preserving freedom for people to make their own choices.

Wrong.

> Trust in government is the stupidest thing a society can ever do. We need governments for sure, but it should be a government with extensive limits to their power and it should be viewed with an attitude of suspicion

Right. And this is where the devil lies in the details. It is not impossible to define clearly the extent and limits of government regulations. It isn't rocket science. Hell, some countries already have these.

But if you're mind is already made up and you firmly believe America is the greatest damm country in the universe and every principle it holds dear (or claims to hold dear, via gratuitous mental gymnastics to rationalise the opposite), there's no point in convincing you otherwise.

Re: Mozilla Fights for Net Neutrality This May (and Always)

#165

Post by speedplane »

briandear wrote: post #81
devnonymous wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know if you are intentionally trolling but I'll bite. Independent hacker culture is the exact thing at risk here without government intervention. Else, you'll end up with the fragmented Verizon hacker culture and the Comcast hacker culture and the... Goddess forbid Google / Facebook / Amazon hacker culture, each with its own non-independent thought. As an aside, Why are regulations that prevent bad actors fro…

Because regulations that “prevent” bad actors actually have unintended consequences that the big-government people never seem to grasp. And free markets are far more powerful and adapt far more quickly than regulation — while preserving freedom for people to make their own choices. Certain European governments in the past century made regulations to “protect” society — and that resulted in millions of people killed o…

> And free markets are far more powerful and adapt far more quickly than regulation

Agreed, but free markets rarely exist. There are almost always market forces that prevent them from being free. The broadband internet market is Exhibit A. Most consumers have only one choice of broadband, and very few have more than two choices. In many markets, there is effectively no competition, which allows the utility to act as a monopoly and due whatever it wants.

I would be okay with dropping net neutrality if every American had 5 choices for internet service. But that's not what happening here. In the US we have a handful of companies that act as monopolies (the exact opposite of a free market), and exert the market control power for richer profits.

Any free market proponent would agree that this is not just unfair, but economically inefficient.

Re: Mozilla Fights for Net Neutrality This May (and Always)

#166

Post by dragonwriter »

AsyncAwait wrote: post #162
dragonwriter wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What I find amazing is that there are still people on this planet who oppose anything a government does, so they end up at the perils of corporations. Well, no, because if they oppose everything government does, they'd oppose corporations, too, since they are a thing government does.

If you want to be this pedantic over it, it's that they oppose every piece of government regulation, regardless of merits, so basically everything the government does that isn't unchecked capitalism.

> If you want to be this pedantic over it

I don't think it's pedantic to point out that many (but not all) people who voice “anti-government” attitudes are fine with particular government interventions.

> it's that they oppose every piece of government regulation, regardless of merits

That doesn't really change the issue; corporations (and even more the only motivation to form them) are products of government regulation.

> so basically everything the government does that isn't unchecked capitalism.

This, on the other hand, is spot on; it's just the idea they it somehow corresponds to the absence of government activity (or even particularly regulatory activity) that is wrong: the service of capitalism is an active, regulatory pursuit of government.

Re: Mozilla Fights for Net Neutrality This May (and Always)

#167

Post by Fnoord »

ttoinou wrote: post #157
dizzystar wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I opened a Facebook about one year ago. The information they had on me was rather disturbing. I never gave Facebook permission, directly or implied, to track my circle of past friends or make assumptions about my personal interests.

Permission was implied when you sent your data to them. Website you visit send you webpages that your browser parse and connect to every tracking widgets present in the html. If you don't like it, configure better your browser.

"Implied"? That's not how opt-in works, sorry.

Re: Mozilla Fights for Net Neutrality This May (and Always)

#168

Post by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC »

ttoinou wrote: post #156
zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not making a point, I am simply providing a reference for you to read up on the basics of the stuff that you so confidently speak about.

So if all my friends and family are on facebook, I am ~forced~ to use facebook ? All my friends and family live in my state so I guess I don't have a choice and have to live my whole life in my motherland

If you want to productively engage in a conversation, it isn't helpful if you use the weakest possible example for the other side's position to then dismiss it. That is just a slightly less obvious version of straw-manning.

Also, your definition of "voluntary" as "the victim could conceivably have done something to prevent it but didn't" is very unusual and completely useless. By that definition, if someone poisons your food with a poison that is detectable with a test known in the literature, and you then eat it without testing it first, you have voluntarily let yourself be poisoned. If you get shot because you didn't wear bullet-proof clothing, then you voluntarily let yourself be shot. That's neither what "voluntary" normally means, nor would it in any way be a useful definition, as essentially everything that happens to you would have to be considered voluntary.

Re: Mozilla Fights for Net Neutrality This May (and Always)

#169

Post by Fnoord »

ttoinou wrote: post #156
zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not making a point, I am simply providing a reference for you to read up on the basics of the stuff that you so confidently speak about.

So if all my friends and family are on facebook, I am ~forced~ to use facebook ? All my friends and family live in my state so I guess I don't have a choice and have to live my whole life in my motherland

> So if all my friends and family are on facebook, I am ~forced~ to use facebook ?

"The classic example is the telephone, where a greater number of users increases the value to each. A positive externality is created when a telephone is purchased without its owner intending to create value for other users, but does so regardless. Online social networks work similarly, with sites like Twitter and Facebook increasing in value to each member as more users join." [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_effect

Re: Mozilla Fights for Net Neutrality This May (and Always)

#170

Post by ttoinou »

zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC wrote: post #168
ttoinou wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So if all my friends and family are on facebook, I am ~forced~ to use facebook ? All my friends and family live in my state so I guess I don't have a choice and have to live my whole life in my motherland

If you want to productively engage in a conversation, it isn't helpful if you use the weakest possible example for the other side's position to then dismiss it. That is just a slightly less obvious version of straw-manning. Also, your definition of "voluntary" as "the victim could conceivably have done something to prevent it but didn't" is very unusual and completely useless. By that definition, if someone poisons y…

You did not express a position here, just provide a link, so I had to make assumptions
Post reply on HN