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

FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 598 posts

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#81

Post by Cody-99 »

karaterobot wrote: post #29

I'm fully in support of net neutrality, but I'm somewhat surprised they're restoring it, as I have not really heard a peep about it since it was repealed in the first place. From my perspective, nothing about the internet changed since then (my experience did not upgrade or downgrade). People stopped talking about it, there weren't major protests, news about it even largely disappeared from the front page of HN (!).…

>So, I would be beyond shocked if this was an election year issue of substance.

Because it isn't an election year issue. This has been in the works since at least 2022.https://www.cnet.com/home/internet/net-neutrality-will-make-...

The rule making process takes time!

>From my perspective, nothing about the internet changed since then (my experience did not upgrade or downgrade). People stopped talking about it, there weren't major protests, news about it even largely disappeared from the front page of HN (!). ... What, then, is the impetus for restoring the net neutrality rules, given there is always some political cost to any action like this? Has the lack of net neutrality caused issues that I just have not heard about?

IMO it seems likely ISPs knew the rules were likely to come back so they avoided most of the practices that would generate outrage (throttling streaming and other popular services unless you pay an additional fee). I have no doubt if they could get away with it they would haha. Many providers did roll out zero rating programs.

As for why this is important just because ISPs aren't currently doing it on a large scale doesn't mean steps shouldn't be taken to prohibit it. We already know what happens in the long run when ISPs are allowed to double dip https://restofworld.org/2024/south-korea-twitch-exit-problem...

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#82

Post by wredue »

itishappy wrote: post #55
wredue wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Perhaps one commonality is that we all seem inclined to assume the other half makes political decisions out of spite.

I find the only commonality is that after the right wing does something, both sides say “this is going to hurt so many people”. It’s just that one side is laughing when they say it.

I visit alt-right circles A LOT, and I have literally never once heard “the other side does these things out of spite”. The vast majority of the time, they don’t have anything to say on a topic beyond repeating some stupid meme.

Additionally, I would also like to point out that people on the right actually demonstrably DO have zero conviction for their beliefs. It is a tested fact that on the whole people on the right will absolutely flip flop on a topic the moment they find out that the left supports it (some 90% of right wing voters in tests), however, on the whole, people on the left are *far* less likely to flip flop (only some 10% of left wing voters flip on a topic upon learning the right supports it).

That the right actually votes out of spite is not just something people assert, it’s a tested fact.

Mitch *blocked his own goddamn bill upon finding out that dems supported it*.

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#83

Post by wtallis »

gwbas1c wrote: post #68
wtallis wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you need to provide a lot more explanation and clarification of what you mean; your comment as written sounds like nothing more than a hollow talking point. What kind of throttling in what situations would be prohibited by these regulations and how would that cause increased costs?

Maybe DDOS protection? IE: Things that ensure that a malicious user can't negatively impact other users on the network.

Have you ever seen even a draft of a proposed regulation that didn't already have clear exceptions for that?

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#84

Post by kjkjadksj »

SeanAnderson wrote: post #13

I'm happy this reversal occurred, but I am exhausted by the continuous flip-flopping of legislation depending on which party is in charge. Feels like we're stagnating as a nation by going in a circle rather than finding commonality to go forward. Maybe it's always been this way though and I'm just getting old enough to be bothered by it?

Its always been this way, but the internet sure has amplified the effect of Edward Bernay’s theories. So much free PR copy is created on your behalf by your army of sheep active on the internet. Used to be that stuff was put on car windshield wipers and promptly thrown away, now people are engaging with it online now that there’s a mechanism to talk back to it.

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#85

Post by gwbas1c »

wtallis wrote: post #35
redserk wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, and I'd rather Congress weigh in now that we've had this specific issue flip-flop twice. I do not like the implication that agency rulemaking is anti-democratic though. We have utilized this structure for well over 120 years, or practically half of the country's history.

You may not like it being pointed out, but having rules made by appointed regulators rather than elected legislators is obviously anti-democratic. Yes, delegating powers like this is a practical necessity, but having made that reasonable tradeoff does not erase the reality that it's a less than perfectly democratic process. So is the structure of Congress itself.

> rules made by appointed regulators rather than elected legislators is obviously anti-democratic

The people making the appointments are elected. It is obviously democratic.

The general population can't get together to vote on everything, so we elect representatives to do that job for us. Our representatives can't make rules on minutia, so they appoint regulators. Don't like the regulators? Go talk to your representative.

The opposite is worse: I live in a town that still has old-style town meeting where any resident can show up. It's tyranny of whoever has time to show up and stay up late, because someone will always create an amendment at 11PM to overrule a town-wide vote.

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#86

Post by jackcosgrove »

Bjartr wrote: post #20
SeanAnderson wrote: post #13

I'm happy this reversal occurred, but I am exhausted by the continuous flip-flopping of legislation depending on which party is in charge. Feels like we're stagnating as a nation by going in a circle rather than finding commonality to go forward. Maybe it's always been this way though and I'm just getting old enough to be bothered by it?

The supreme court has a long history of overturning its rulings years, or decades, later https://constitution.congress.gov/resources/decisions-overru...

An implicit assumption of the American political order is that a body that makes policy also has the ability to unmake that policy. I think that's good because otherwise there would be a land rush to create policies that are irreversible or have a higher bar for reversal than enactment. These policies would inevitably become out of date and reversing them could be politically impossible.

The big exception to this was the drafting of the Constitution itself, which arguably was easier to ratify than it is to amend. The problem of the practical impossibility of undoing past policies applies very much here.

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#87

Post by [deleted] »

granzymes wrote: post #59
SeanAnderson wrote: post #13

I'm happy this reversal occurred, but I am exhausted by the continuous flip-flopping of legislation depending on which party is in charge. Feels like we're stagnating as a nation by going in a circle rather than finding commonality to go forward. Maybe it's always been this way though and I'm just getting old enough to be bothered by it?

The Supreme Court is poised to decide a case this term, Loper Bright , which should help restore more finality to decisions like this. Because agencies receive considerable deference to their interpretation of the law, even when that interpretation flip-flops every four years, we never get a definitive ruling on what the law says. The Court seems likely to greatly reduce this deference, leading to more consistency.

[deleted]

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#88

Post by smsm42 »

SeanAnderson wrote: post #13

I'm happy this reversal occurred, but I am exhausted by the continuous flip-flopping of legislation depending on which party is in charge. Feels like we're stagnating as a nation by going in a circle rather than finding commonality to go forward. Maybe it's always been this way though and I'm just getting old enough to be bothered by it?

Unfortunately, if you have a contentious issue which is decided by fiat of one of the sides being in power and not by mutual compromise, there's no reason for the other side, coming in power, to not change it back. Since, fortunately, we still have a functioning democracy in the US, the sides in power change. Since, unfortunately, there seems to be not enough will to reach a workable compromise satisfactory to both sides, flip-flopping will likely continue in the foreseeable future, until either societal consensus moves firmly on one side of the issue to the point that makes other side's position untenable, or some mutually agreeable compromise emerges.

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#89

Post by _aavaa_ »

jrockway wrote: post #75
bearjaws wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd flip it and say its what happens when Congress has been dysfunctional for over a decade. It's not even possible to get a house bill with net neutrality passed without it included 99 other things that will inevitably get the bill punted on forever. Congress could have drafted this anytime if they had seen fit, but they are "too busy" fighting ideology wars.

To be fair Congress does some work. They have avoided 2 government shutdowns. They funded the war efforts in Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan. They passed the infrastructure bill. The reality is, they just don't care about net neutrality. I'm still mad that they haven't passed the bill that gets rid of DST (or rather, gets rid of standard time). Everyone wants it in both parties. Just get it done. Even more annoying is th…

> They have avoided 2 government shutdowns.

My what a low bar

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#90

Post by packetlost »

jrockway wrote: post #75
bearjaws wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd flip it and say its what happens when Congress has been dysfunctional for over a decade. It's not even possible to get a house bill with net neutrality passed without it included 99 other things that will inevitably get the bill punted on forever. Congress could have drafted this anytime if they had seen fit, but they are "too busy" fighting ideology wars.

To be fair Congress does some work. They have avoided 2 government shutdowns. They funded the war efforts in Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan. They passed the infrastructure bill. The reality is, they just don't care about net neutrality. I'm still mad that they haven't passed the bill that gets rid of DST (or rather, gets rid of standard time). Everyone wants it in both parties. Just get it done. Even more annoying is th…

> They have avoided 2 government shutdowns

You mean they passed a bill that was necessary for them to get their paychecks. I fail to see how this is even remotely surprising.

Post reply on HN