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

371–380 of 598 posts

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#371

Post by Sohcahtoa82 »

zoeysmithe wrote: post #221
feoren wrote: post #167

This flip-flopping happens because there is no commonality to find. One of the only (effectively) two major political parties of the United States is completely uninterested in governing. They have no policy. They have no plan for governing; they don't like governing. Their only goal is the piecemeal selloff of government powers to the highest bidder, and they convince their stalwart followers of this by making sure…

This is sort of a democrat neolib explanation that's only possible if you ignore the corrupting effects of capitalism and the unending class struggle between workers and capital, regardless of party. The GOP isn't some weird guys who can't govern, but an incredibly powerful group that works almost exclusively for the capital owning class and uses social issues to empower that class. The GOP caters a bit to the worker…

> The GOP caters a bit to the workers class but not a lot and is actively radicalizing them to believe they have the same interests as the capital owning class.

They don't cater to them as much as they convince them that they could one day be a member of the capital owning class.

The whole "temporarily embarrassed millionaire" line.

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#372

Post by xyzzyz »

pavlov wrote: post #91
jrockway wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

“Congress avoided two government shutdowns” is like saying “I avoided pooping in my pants twice today.” It’s factually true and objectively a positive thing, but there’s nothing really commendable about it. The debt ceiling is Congress’s own creation, and Congress itself approves the budgets that cause the increase in debt. There isn’t another parliament on the planet that behaves so absurdly, fighting shadow puppets…

There are plenty of countries with legal debt ceilings, some of them even in the constitution. That said, I'll grant you that I don't know of any that behave so absurdly about it. The trick is to stay clear very far from the limit, which is something that recent US governments are simply unwilling to do.

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#373

Post by callalex »

thisgoesnowhere wrote: post #368
julienb_sea wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fwiw you can set their router to bridge mode and use your own. It is probably still doing some traffic analysis but certainly no ad injection. This is what I do to get unlimited data without paying their exorbitant standalone fee.

This is a completely out of reach solution for most people.

If configuring a router into bridge mode is too burdensome of a step, then Comcast is actually providing that person a service by forcibly managing equipment for them at that point. If only the stalking component of it could be made illegal with proper privacy laws instead of piecemeal app bans.

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#374

Post by polygamous_bat »

dantheman wrote: post #334
notatoad wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>What, then, is the impetus for restoring the net neutrality rules, given there is always some political cost to any action like this? there's usually some principled people in the government, and every now an then when an issue is obscure enough they can manage to get something done without the other side caring too much. what's the impetus for blocking this?

it's not needed, the fcc doesnt have the authority, keeping the government away from internet is a good thing

> keeping the government away from internet is a good thing

See, I would have agreed more with this if most of our internet infrastructures were not controlled by three megacorps with more power than many small to medium sized economies in the world. As it stands, the only valid option is to fight fire with fire.

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#375

Post by whatshisface »

Sohcahtoa82 wrote: post #366
whatshisface wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trump supporters resonate with that rhetoric because the rent is too high, groceries are too expensive, and inflation doesn't seem to apply to wages. The causes of unrest haven't changed in thousands of years, but they can be convenient to forget.

> Trump supporters resonate with that rhetoric because the rent is too high, groceries are too expensive, and inflation doesn't seem to apply to wages. And so they vote for the party that is against rent controls, against expanding food stamps, and against raising the minimum wage? Make it make sense.

See my response to a sibling comment:

"Think of it like a riot. What does smashing windows have to do with anything? Yet one follows the other."

Very few people have any idea about the causes of their suffering.

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#376

Post by thegrim33 »

feoren wrote: post #175
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 (!).…

[flagged]

Your first post in this thread containing partisan flamebait getting flagged into destruction wasn't enough for you? You toned down the cultish political speech about 30% but posted effectively the same comment again. Your posts do not create useful discourse, they just create political flame wars with echo chamber 1 fighting echo chamber 2.

[Edit] Looking through your history you seem to often make similar political posts making biased, (in my opinion hate-based), partisan assertions and having people reply to you telling you this. There's Reddit/Twitter/etc for you to do this sort of thing.

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#377

Post by devindotcom »

ostenning wrote: post #355

This battle has been happening for a better part of a decade and won’t seem to go away. Every time it’s defeated it seems to pop back up.

in a sense it goes back to 1966

https://techcrunch.com/2017/05/30/commission-impossible-how-...

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#378

Post by devindotcom »

paulddraper wrote: post #356
andy_xor_andrew wrote: post #9

great, what are the odds they reverse the reversal next year in a hypothetical new administration?

If there is a new administration, close to 100%.

yep imo it's dead in that case:

https://techcrunch.com/2024/04/04/net-neutrality-wont-surviv...

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#379

Post by objektif »

Spivak wrote: post #276
objektif wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Administration sees they are losing the young vote. Administration checks what can get them more young votes…..

Ahh yes courting the young vote, that group famous for going out to the polls in large numbers. The 16-25 age group is really into FCC regulation and anti-TikTok right now.

Check to see if Biden loses what will most likely cause it.

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#380

Post by _heimdall »

Interesting to see this come through effectively at the same time as the law granting powers that allows the government to ban TikTok and others in the future.

I can't help but assume there's a connection there. I also don't know why the new law allowing a ban on foreign influenced social media would be necessary if the FCC decides again that it can regulate ISPs as utilities. Weren't the powers there already strong enough to force an ISP-level ban on a service deemed a national security threat?

Post reply on HN