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

Senate votes to reinstate net neutrality

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 242 posts

Re: Senate votes to reinstate net neutrality

#111

Post by sykh »

spynxic wrote: post #92
sykh wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for keeping the discussion in the realm of the plausible and feasible. I'd hate for extreme situations to be brought up. A number of people have given reasons for why they think net neutrality is as important as it is to them. Thank you for definitively letting me know that Obviously net neutrality is something we should be concerned about but a single issue voter says it's the only thing we should be conce…

> To suggest that your concerns and what constitutes a single voter issue for you is wrong is condescending. > Since you think net neutrality is a stupid single voter issue then I suggest it not be one for you. This argument seems to have finished on the wrong point. It isn't that net neutrality or any other issues have more or less value (although they intrinsically do -- that's for the individual to decide). Instea…

Overall I agree with you. I agree that for me net neutrality is not that important. But in a nation with as much voter apathy, with the growing sense of voting being futile I’ll take a single issue voter that gets galvanized. If everyone were a single issue voter it’d be a mess. With a few people not so much.

Re: Senate votes to reinstate net neutrality

#113

Post by [deleted] »

scarface74 wrote: post #93
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've heard the rhetoric. It's not relevant to my point: Group A of companies wants B to pay a bill. Group B doesn't want to pay it. Corporate lobbying ensues, as each tries to make the other's position illegal. Who is "right" or whether or not Group B should pay Group A's bill is not relevant to the accuracy of my statement. EDIT: Please keep this thread on the topic at hand: Why net neutrality is perceived as a libe…

That's not "rhetoric" that's how the internet has worked for decades. Group A and Group B are already paying their own bills for internet traffic via peering agreements and cash when there is unequal traffic on one side. It's not like there is competition for last mile internet service in most of the United States. If Comcast decided they wanted to charge netflix specifically more and not just charge the owner of the…

[deleted]

Re: Senate votes to reinstate net neutrality

#114

Post by aerotwelve »

dragonwriter wrote: post #32
Lionsion wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but not a practical real world scenario here nonetheless. That is the kind of thinking that entrenches the status quo. Close political fights are worth fighting because there's nothing to be gained by preemptively surrendering. > Only 35 Senators are up for reelection this year, I assume you meant the House, not "all of Congress". (Note that all of the House is up for reelection every election term, and it doesn't…

> Single issue voters make policy. Most often, and most significantly, unintentionally, on all the issues they aren't considering when voting. Because, actually, the policy makers they elect make policy, and and that's true whether or not the one election a single issue voter tips is enough to shift the national balance on the issue of concern. Or whether the candidate elected on your one issue even bothers voting th…

Single issue voters, if they are a large enough group that can organize themselves effectively, can have an extraordinary impact on American politics. Look at the NRA.

Yes, they won't have as much sway on the issues they aren't campaigning for, but that's a necessary consequence of voting on a single issue.

Re: Senate votes to reinstate net neutrality

#115

Post by _emacsomancer_ »

hueving wrote: post #69
NeoBasilisk wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is ok for net neutrality to be someone's number 1 issue as long as they recognize that they are likely viewing issues from a position of tremendous privilege.

It's okay even if they don't recognize it. Every issue in the US is one of tremendous privilege. Recognizing that doesn't change anything.

If you're middle-class or above perhaps. The US is not a country I'd want to be poor in.

Re: Senate votes to reinstate net neutrality

#116

Post by dannyw »

caf wrote: post #100

It's interesting the way that the Congressional Review Act operates, to require both houses and the president to sign off on overruling the decision of an executive agency. In bicameral Westminster-style systems, delegated legislation (ie. executive regulations) can usually be vetoed by either chamber. This being under the principle that if the regulation in question had been enacted as regular legislation it would h…

In this case, the action is repeal of net neutrality regulation. To establish net neutrality through legislation would require both house and senate.

Re: Senate votes to reinstate net neutrality

#117

Post by ryanlaws »

poulsbohemian wrote: post #87
komali2 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For everyone's amusement, can you let us know what he says? When I lived in Texas, the responses I got from my representatives were comically evil. Straight up bond villain.

That sounds exactly like what I got from Cathy mcmorris Rodgers in eastern Washington as well

Same. I have to give her some credit for not pretending to care.

Re: Senate votes to reinstate net neutrality

#118

Post by rascul »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #15
dragontamer wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Things aren't addressed either. Because the House still needs to vote. Bicameral Legislative process in the USA. Laws need to be passed twice before they have any effect, and Trump has the (nearly) final say in the form of a presidential veto. Assuming the Democrats manage to vote as a bloc in the House, there still needs to be ~25 Republicans who switch sides on this issue. Net Neutrality is... for some reason... se…

Net neutrality is a "Democrat issue" because the companies who benefit from net neutrality primarily fund Democrats. The companies who benefit from it being repealed primarily fund Republicans.

The ISPs fund both sides [0]. Although more of a breakdown would be nice, to get an idea of who is funding who and for what.

https://www.theverge.com/2017/12/11/16746230/net-neutrality-...

Re: Senate votes to reinstate net neutrality

#119

Post by hasahmed »

chocolatebunny wrote: post #98
poulsbohemian wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sounds exactly like what I got from Cathy mcmorris Rodgers in eastern Washington as well

I wonder if there's a "Letter's from my Congressman" website where random people post letters they got from their congressman.

Time to make it happen

Re: Senate votes to reinstate net neutrality

#120

Post by fma »

tzs wrote: post #90
ComputerGuru wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm presuming purple (being red + blue) means a district that could either way? Lucky you. Here we don't have elections that matter because thanks to redistricting and gerrymandering, the outcome (along party lines) is well established.

> Here we don't have elections that matter because thanks to redistricting and gerrymandering, the outcome (along party lines) is well established. All that means is that the general election doesn't matter, and so you need to move your vote to whatever comes before the general election in your district to make it matter. 1. Register for the party that the redistricting and gerrymandering favors. 2. Vote in that part…

I did that - then I researched all the candidates and they are trying to one up each other on who is more conservative. The guy trailing behind for government just started a "Deportation Bus" and driving it around for publicity. It's amusingly sad.
Post reply on HN