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

Petition to make unlocking phones legal again passes 100,000 signatures

thenextweb.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 171 posts

Re: Petition to make unlocking phones legal again passes 100,000 signatures

#151

Post by rgbrenner »

jobu wrote: post #83

Fast forward to next week: "The White House announces a new threshold of 500,000 signatures before it will respond to online petitions." I was initially enthusiastic about these online petitions, but it doesn't seem like any of them have had an effect.

"but it doesn't seem like any of them have had an effect."

100,000 out of 300,000,000 people. What effect do you imagine it should have?

If you really want to give these petitions some weight, they should raise the threshold to 150,000,000. And there should be some way of letting people without computers sign it too. Maybe we could have places where people come to sign the petition. But that sounds like a big undertaking. Maybe we could gather several petitions and let people sign the ones they like, every say 4 years.. maybe with a smaller event in-between. And the results should be counted, and then the government forced to do what is decided.

Hmmm... If only there was something like that. That would be awesome.

Re: Petition to make unlocking phones legal again passes 100,000 signatures

#152

Post by graysnorf »

jlgreco wrote: post #148
writtles wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, lets just go back to the days of hitting the streets with those paper petitions, and gathering signatures at bus stops and Phish concerts! Why get the internet involved in politics at all?

How are you reading an opposition to involving the internet in any way out of my post?

i think you're missing some sarcasm.

edit: alternatively, I'm finding some non-existent sarcasm.

Re: Petition to make unlocking phones legal again passes 100,000 signatures

#153

Post by pyre »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #136
pyre wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cool, that applies in this situation, how?

Inability to exercise abstract thinking is a big part of what got us into this mess. It's all well and good when an executive power grab results in an outcome that you agree with, after all.

Someone used a petition to the White House/President as an excuse to lament about needing to use the petition process to appeal to 'law-makers,' presumably referring to Congress. I pointed out that we're talking about the President here, who is not a law-maker.

Referencing a specific ability the President has which might qualify him as a 'law-maker' is at best a factoid in this conversation, especially because it doesn't even apply to the petition that we are discussing. The President's ability to classify drugs has little to do with banning/allowing phone unlocking (and one would be hard-pressed to apply a general label of 'law-maker' to the President based on a single power, which might better reside with Congress).

Also, where do I show a lack of abstract thinking? Where do I say that I agree with the President having such power? Are you assuming my response of, "Cool, but that's not what we are discussing here" is akin to, "I don't want to discuss this because I agree with it?" That would be a pretty huge leap to conclusions (if that's what you're reading into).

TL;DR - The President does not fit the generic term "law-maker," except for (maybe) very specific instance(s), none (that I know) of which apply to this situation.

Re: Petition to make unlocking phones legal again passes 100,000 signatures

#154

Post by duncan_bayne »

jobu wrote: post #83

Fast forward to next week: "The White House announces a new threshold of 500,000 signatures before it will respond to online petitions." I was initially enthusiastic about these online petitions, but it doesn't seem like any of them have had an effect.

> I was initially enthusiastic about these online petitions

Really? I'm honestly surprised to find anyone who is genuinely surprised to discover State malfeasance these days.

Did you really, honestly, hand-on-heart believe that these petitions would change anything?

I think it was P. J. O'Rourke who opined that if voting could change anything, it'd be outlawed.

Re: Petition to make unlocking phones legal again passes 100,000 signatures

#155

Post by donniezazen »

thedufer wrote: post #142
donniezazen wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They do allow you to unlock the phone after two years.

If by "they" you mean "some carriers". They are by no means required to do so, and there's no reason to believe that they will continue to do so.

It is absolutely ridiculous to compare a property, if modest would steal your treasures to amount of 200K, with a 500 bucks phone. Nice thing would be if people abandon this culture of getting subsidized phones and then blame carriers for implementing restrictions.

Re: Petition to make unlocking phones legal again passes 100,000 signatures

#156

Post by codex »

This petition asks the President to interfere with the implementation of law, and to politicize the decisions of the Librarian of Congress, a non-partisan post.

While the President may use his office to champion new laws, he cannot make them himself, or overturn them.

Re: Petition to make unlocking phones legal again passes 100,000 signatures

#157

Post by einhverfr »

ajross wrote: post #99
jobu wrote: post #83

Fast forward to next week: "The White House announces a new threshold of 500,000 signatures before it will respond to online petitions." I was initially enthusiastic about these online petitions, but it doesn't seem like any of them have had an effect.

What kind of effect were you expecting? The president promises to do whatever you want as long as you get N "signatures" on a weakly authenticated website? Even if you got those N people to all show up in person at the White House door, wrapping policy around the desires of a vocal minority is not a valid or just way to structure a government. They promised to respond, which is about all they can promise. And this gi…

Keep in mind that all the white house agrees to do is to send out a PR piece justifying their current position if the petition threshold is reached.

I don't see online petitions as very helpful in any way.

Re: Petition to make unlocking phones legal again passes 100,000 signatures

#158

Post by writtles »

zanny wrote: post #145
writtles wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, lets just go back to the days of hitting the streets with those paper petitions, and gathering signatures at bus stops and Phish concerts! Why get the internet involved in politics at all?

Because anonymous forums on the internet have proven for a decade sane discourse goes out the window due to the Internet Fuckwad Theorem. It is an entirely different dynamic to be in someones face and have to fear consequences beyond words from your behavior, and honestly, that is what almost any protest in history was for - to try to shake the boots of those who are gifted with power. An internet petition is just a…

>Because anonymous forums on the internet have proven for a decade sane discourse goes out the window due to the Internet Fuckwad Theorem. It is an entirely different dynamic to be in someones face and have to fear consequences beyond words from your behavior

Heh. And here you are, in said forums! Somewhat perfecting the voice of righteous judgement! Bravo, but no. I see what you came to represent here, but if you think trumpeting loudly some bad-ass anti-establishment intellectual philosophy while standing on the tiny issue of "the right to cell-phone-unlocking-regardless-of-lender-contract" as a basis for your purist reasoning, then you sir/ma'am, live in a first world overrun with problems of the same degree! There is wisdom in "choosing your battles," and this, my dear zanny, is not the one. Trust me.

Re: Petition to make unlocking phones legal again passes 100,000 signatures

#159

Post by writtles »

graysnorf wrote: post #152
jlgreco wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How are you reading an opposition to involving the internet in any way out of my post?

i think you're missing some sarcasm. edit: alternatively, I'm finding some non-existent sarcasm.

Just to clarify: sarcasm.

Re: Petition to make unlocking phones legal again passes 100,000 signatures

#160

Post by jlgreco »

graysnorf wrote: post #152
jlgreco wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How are you reading an opposition to involving the internet in any way out of my post?

i think you're missing some sarcasm. edit: alternatively, I'm finding some non-existent sarcasm.

No, his sarcasm came across loud and clear. He was sarcastically "agreeing" with me in order to mock me... except the position he was mocking is not one I have endorsed. On the contrary, I embrace the role of the internet in protest and politics.
Post reply on HN