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

161–170 of 242 posts

Re: Senate votes to reinstate net neutrality

#161

Post by snarfy »

Consultant32452 wrote: post #40
andrewla wrote: post #5

This seems like the way that this should be addressed. The case against Net Neutrality was made almost strictly as a case of regulatory overreach and overly burdensome regulations that inherited irrelevant restrictions and unenforceable provisions designed for specific telecom use cases that don't apply to ISPs. The first issue is clearly addressed by a legislative approach -- it stops being regulatory overreach when…

I feel like the root problem is lack of competition at the ISP level. If we had that, net neutrality regulation would likely not be necessary. Instead we're trying to fix a bad regulatory environment with even more regulations.

Like the electric grid, it is a physical monopoly. Either fiber or coax, the ISPs piggy back on the utility poles of the electric grid, and those poles can only hold so many lines.

Many electric grids have gone through 'deregulation' which is actually more regulations regarding the usage and sharing of the physical lines, resulting in competition among power companies. In those areas the state essentially owns the lines now and power companies sell the power.

Why is this not true for the coax? At this point it should be reclaimed via eminent domain laws. The electric lines and poles already have been, as they have long been recognized as a physical monopoly.

Re: Senate votes to reinstate net neutrality

#162

Post by zaphirplane »

tedunangst wrote: post #125
a1369209993 wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Genuine question: is there anything (technically effective) to prevent someone from registering as both a democrat and a republican? And if not, are there any existing how-to guides I could signal-boost?

Your voter registration record says which party you're in. The election official would likely make some inquiries if yours said "all of them" on it.

Shouldn’t who you vote for be confidential and you can change your mind till the day? And why can’t a person vote one way for local and another for state ? I don’t get the system

Re: Senate votes to reinstate net neutrality

#165

Post by jacquesm »

dcow wrote: post #156
jacquesm wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Republicans are reprehensible? Strawman.

You said that the Republican platform has reprehensible policy. You then criticized single issue voting because when you do so you pull in the entire platform, reprehensible policy included, which you suggest ends up being a net negative, despite whether you agree or not. Now consider another person. If they are a republican and vote for their party, even if they disagree with the reprehensible pieces, they still end…

I don't give a fuck about downvotes and you are dishonest in your arguing, effectively you are arguing with yourself.

Re: Senate votes to reinstate net neutrality

#166

Post by briandear »

I am not in favor of government enforcement of net neutrality under libertarian/free market grounds, however, that being said, I am really happy about this vote on a ideological/philosophical level because one of my problems with government regulation is that it is often unaccountable — it’s via executive/administrative or quasi-government entities that aren’t directly accountable to voters. The Congressional Review Act (proposed and passed as part of the Republican Contract with America) is an exceptionally important law because it allows the public, through their representatives, to essentially override bad regulation (bad, as determined by voters.)

So while the outcome of this particular vote isn’t one With which I agree, I wholeheartedly agree and endorse the vote itself. My big problem with government and regulation in general is that I feel that regulations lag or exceed the will of the public and there is little recourse when those rules are made by officials removed from the direct accountability from the voter.

I could be wrong on Net Neutrality, but if it passes or is defeated, at least the process of our actual representatives voting on such an important issue is happening. Such consequential decisions ought not be at the whims of bureaucrats. Bureaucracts should implement the law, they shouldn’t be making it.

Re: Senate votes to reinstate net neutrality

#167

Post by briandear »

tedunangst wrote: post #125
a1369209993 wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Genuine question: is there anything (technically effective) to prevent someone from registering as both a democrat and a republican? And if not, are there any existing how-to guides I could signal-boost?

Your voter registration record says which party you're in. The election official would likely make some inquiries if yours said "all of them" on it.

State dependent. In Texas, you don’t register for a party. You just vote in the primary you want (but you can’t vote in both primaries.)

Re: Senate votes to reinstate net neutrality

#168

Post by salvar »

a1369209993 wrote: post #122
baddox wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’d like to hear an argument for why #1 might be dishonest. There is no definition of “registered Democrat” except for “someone who is registered as a Democrat.” I’m pretty sure you don’t have to sign anything claiming to believe in certain principles. I’m struggling to think of any way this could be considered dishonest.

Genuine question: is there anything (technically effective) to prevent someone from registering as both a democrat and a republican? And if not, are there any existing how-to guides I could signal-boost?

This definitely differs between countries. Where I'm from, I'm a registered member of all political parties. No rules against it.

Re: Senate votes to reinstate net neutrality

#169

Post by swebs »

whamlastxmas wrote: post #159
mac01021 wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What was the basic gist of the response?

My response from a Texas senator was that he "supports net neutrality" and then went on define net neutrality as the exact opposite of the commonly accepted meaning.

And that's probably what he honestly believes because that's how some lobbyist explained it to him. I think a huge chunk of America's problems would be solved just by getting rid of lobbyists.

Re: Senate votes to reinstate net neutrality

#170

Post by swebs »

zaphirplane wrote: post #162
tedunangst wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your voter registration record says which party you're in. The election official would likely make some inquiries if yours said "all of them" on it.

Shouldn’t who you vote for be confidential and you can change your mind till the day? And why can’t a person vote one way for local and another for state ? I don’t get the system

The primaries aren't official US elections. They're unofficial elections set up by each political party (which are private, non-government entities).

You can vote however you want in official elections.

Post reply on HN