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

101–110 of 598 posts

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#101

Post by curvedinf »

wredue wrote: post #82
itishappy wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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. Additiona…

[flagged]

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#102

Post by throwup238 »

fallingknife wrote: post #43
babypuncher wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Our legislative branch abdicated its power when they stopped bothering to pass laws that people actually want. If the FTC and FCC weren't doing either of these things, they simply wouldn't happen. As soon as a Net Neutrality or non-compete clause ban bill makes it to the senate floor, Republicans will just filibuster it, even though public opinion is overwhelmingly in support of both these measures.

While I support both of those things, I don't see any problem requiring the legislature to actually legislate to make them happen. If the public felt strongly about these issues they would just remove their representatives next election. Just because I happen to agree with the actions of the agency in this case is not enough to justify handing legislative power over to bureaucratic agencies that do not have any of th…

> that do not have any of the checks and balances that are supposed to exist in our system.

But they do have the same checks and balances. All of these rules are open to judicial review and there is a whole process in place due to the Administrative Procedure Act. In fact there are more rules for these agencies like having public commenting periods after which they're required by law to consider that input when making their rules.

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#103

Post by Dylan16807 »

smsm42 wrote: post #71
wredue wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> when half the populations entire political identity is “whatever we think will make the other side angry”? I assume those are the guys who are voting for the party opposed to one you're voting for, correct? > actively stifling progress is not actually funny Another thing that is less than funny is assuming that there's some universal definiton of "progress" and those who disagree are just doing it out of stupid stu…

> I assume those are the guys who are voting for the party opposed to one you're voting for, correct?

Except that it wasn't the same way one or two decades ago. And the republicans have changed a lot more than the democrats on that front.

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#104

Post by bloppe »

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…

The US trialed permanent DST in 1974. In the first 3 months, public support dropped from 79% to 42%. It was ended prematurely. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daylight_saving_time_in_the_...

Of course, there's no difference between permanent DST and abolishing DST but having everyone agree to shift their schedules forward by 1 hour. So abolishing DST altogether isn't really a better option.

I used to think DST was stupid. Now I think it's actually the best we can do.

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#105

Post by bullfightonmars »

bgentry wrote: post #17
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?

It's partly what happens when such important rules are determined by who is appointed at an executive agency, rather than requiring an act of Congress. The former can be trivially gamed by the party in power after each election, whereas getting Congress to take action on something can be difficult and requires you to first get them motivated to do so at a given moment.

This is the tyranny of minority rule. When congress is not representative of the electorate and the minority doesn’t have to compromise to get things done to gain political favor and power, nothing gets done.

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#107

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

Cody-99 wrote: post #52
theoperagoer wrote: post #38

ISPs should be allowed to throttle traffic for services. Otherwise, the result is going to be increased costs for all end-users.

No they shouldn't. I don't think that logic makes any sense at all. No one is paying increased costs because their neighbor is watching netflix, youtube, or browsing reddit. Users already pay for internet service they shouldn't have to pay again because the ISP wants to be greedy and double dip from fees to avoid throttling.

They should be able to throttle across the board to load balance. They sell an IP protocol service. They should honor the customer's wishes by delivering those packets fairly, not necessarily reliably.

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#108

Post by lolinder »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #103
smsm42 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> when half the populations entire political identity is “whatever we think will make the other side angry”? I assume those are the guys who are voting for the party opposed to one you're voting for, correct? > actively stifling progress is not actually funny Another thing that is less than funny is assuming that there's some universal definiton of "progress" and those who disagree are just doing it out of stupid stu…

> I assume those are the guys who are voting for the party opposed to one you're voting for, correct? Except that it wasn't the same way one or two decades ago. And the republicans have changed a lot more than the democrats on that front.

> And the republicans have changed a lot more than the democrats on that front.

Only if you're looking at it from the Democratic perspective. From the Republican side they look at Democratic policies from the last decade and see a group that suddenly decided to throw all previous social norms out the window and upend social order. They see themselves as reacting to that change in the Democratic Party.

I think the truth is that both parties simultaneously escalated, but that perspective usually gets shouted down pretty hard by both sides who each really want to perceive themselves as the consistent one.

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#109

Post by pseudalopex »

Cody-99 wrote: post #81
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, ther…

> 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).

And several states passed their own laws.

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#110

Post by tentacleuno »

exabrial wrote: post #92

I mean great. I don't really want the things it's trying to ban, so good? But this is sorta like plastic straw bans: 0.0000000001% actual impact, all while making HUGE headlines, while doing absolutely zero to solve root systemic issues: Entrenched Local Monopolies by telco providers. So yeah, good, glad my Nebula won't be slower than my YouTubes, while all along I just wanted to ditch the assholes in the first place…

> glad my Nebula won't be slower than my YouTubes

To be fair, wouldn't this still be the case? Google peer with many ISPs, and have a lot of server / networking prowess, so the YouTube experience is normally pretty good across the board.

Nebula, on the other hand, is a fairly new player from my understanding.

Post reply on HN