FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

Post by dadjoker » Fri, Apr 26, 2024, 12:53 AM UTC

dmix wrote: post #407

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neutrality, but I'm somewhat surprised they're restoring it, as I have not really heard a peep about it since it was repealed in the first place.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 (!).…

> it since it was repealed in the first place. From my perspective, nothing about the internet changed since then I got downvoted heavily years ago on HN for predicting this when it was making the rounds There is almost no evidence of a tiered model either working or being legitimately attempted, even globally in places without these rules. The only evidence I was ever given was some tiny Portugese mobile network ent…

Post by pixelsort » Fri, Apr 26, 2024, 12:58 AM UTC

mgiampapa wrote: post #346

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neutrality, but I'm somewhat surprised they're restoring it, as I have not really heard a peep about it since it was repealed in the first place.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 (!).…

Because California saved it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Internet_Consumer_P... If any of the companies that wanted to exploit the lack of FCC enforced net neutrality did business with California they would have had a big problem.

Post by adrr » Fri, Apr 26, 2024, 1:04 AM UTC

wtallis wrote: post #12

redserk wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's worth noting that these agencies and their powers did not spring up out of thin air. Various elected Congress sessions wrote the laws that created and empowered these agencies to create rules. This is a reasonable implementation of a "democratic republic" as Congress still has oversight.

The problem with merely having regulations rather than laws is not a concern that they may not have proper legal authority, but that they are less durable and more easily overturned than laws passed by Congress and signed by the President.

Post by redeeman » Fri, Apr 26, 2024, 1:13 AM UTC

a_wild_dandan wrote: post #262

hathawsh wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't you think that is a very cynical view? The party or parties you disagree with may not share your views, but they do have many things in common with you. In order to build bridges with other parties, it's important to believe that the majority of people who get involved in government, regardless of party, are motivated primarily by the desire to serve their neighbors and their country; otherwise they would find…

That's a wonderful perspective, and largely shared by one party! If you can make the other party act like adults, we'll be in business.

Post by int_19h » Fri, Apr 26, 2024, 1:16 AM UTC

dadjoker wrote: post #411

dmix wrote: post #407

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it since it was repealed in the first place. From my perspective, nothing about the internet changed since then I got downvoted heavily years ago on HN for predicting this when it was making the rounds There is almost no evidence of a tiered model either working or being legitimately attempted, even globally in places without these rules. The only evidence I was ever given was some tiny Portugese mobile network ent…

This rule does, however, effectively regulate the prices that broadband providers charge consumers, as it disallows high-volume customers from being charged a higher periodic rate than lower-volume consumers. If that's not regulating prices, it's not at all clear what might be. Just like Obamacare, another gift from the left that has worked out so well...