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

Net neutrality

blog.samaltman.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 270 posts

Re: Net neutrality

#31

Post by cyorir »

mkx wrote: post #6

Direct link to the proceeding on the fcc website: http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/upload/display (Proceeding #14-28 here: http://www.fcc.gov/comments )

I'd love to see someone scrape all of these comments (since they're provided in convenient tabular form, might as well!) and analyze them to see if there is any interesting data to be seen.

Just browsing through a couple, some people give one-liners but a few comments are all-out, nearly essays. I assume the FCC doesn't read all of these. Do they just use a program to analyze these comments, and gauge overall content?

Re: Net neutrality

#32

Post by rhino369 »

hezakia1 wrote: post #5

"I have met with the Chairman of the FCC, Tom Wheeler, and I believe he is a good actor that wants to do the right thing. But he is fighting against very powerful lobbyists and large companies that want to disrupt the freedom of the Internet." "Prior to working at the FCC, Wheeler worked as a venture capitalist and lobbyist for the cable and wireless industry" -Wikipedia Really? Somehow I doubt that he has turned a f…

1) Lobbyists are hired guns not true believers or activists. There is no reason to believe he is still beholden to them or something.

2) He worked for cable in until 1984. Cable wasn't even operating in internet then.

3) Most of his tenure when he was a cellular and internet lobbyist was in trying to get more spectrum for wireless use.

Re: Net neutrality

#33

Post by kokey »

There is a lot about the wording of this that I really like. It clearly acknowledges the real cause of the problem, which is basically locally rigged markets, and actually suggests a solution that won't simply help entrench the incumbents through increased regulation similar to price and quality fixing.

Re: Net neutrality

#34

Post by [deleted] »

njs12345 wrote: post #19

> I would love to see a world where the companies that own last-mile infrastructure are required to lease the lines to any ISP the end consumer wants; this would create a competitive market and mostly eliminate the problem. [2] This is pretty much how it works in the UK; see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Openreach It does seem to work pretty well.. there are a wide variety of operators and prices are very low. If I ha…

[deleted]

Re: Net neutrality

#35

Post by bitJericho »

exelius wrote: post #29
danielweber wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been led to believe (by conversations here on HN as well as elsewhere) that DSL in the US is operating under that regime -- the phone companies are required to lease them out, so you can have 5 different providers all selling you DSL over the same wires. But DSL bandwidths strongly lag behind cable modem bandwidths because the people laying the wire have no desire to upgrade for the benefit of their competitors.…

DSL in the US used to operate that way until it failed spectacularly due to the reasons you mention and the FCC reclassified DSL as an information service.

I don't know when that happened, but when I had DSL about, oh 6 years ago, they practically begged me to sign up with MSN. I think they got a commission for it. I chose just to go straight with the company who owned the equipment, my phone company.

Re: Net neutrality

#36

Post by [deleted] »

cyorir wrote: post #31
mkx wrote: post #6

Direct link to the proceeding on the fcc website: http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/upload/display (Proceeding #14-28 here: http://www.fcc.gov/comments )

I'd love to see someone scrape all of these comments (since they're provided in convenient tabular form, might as well!) and analyze them to see if there is any interesting data to be seen. Just browsing through a couple, some people give one-liners but a few comments are all-out, nearly essays. I assume the FCC doesn't read all of these. Do they just use a program to analyze these comments, and gauge overall content…

[deleted]

Re: Net neutrality

#37

Post by Daishiman »

twoodfin wrote: post #26
njs12345 wrote: post #19

> I would love to see a world where the companies that own last-mile infrastructure are required to lease the lines to any ISP the end consumer wants; this would create a competitive market and mostly eliminate the problem. [2] This is pretty much how it works in the UK; see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Openreach It does seem to work pretty well.. there are a wide variety of operators and prices are very low. If I ha…

If I had to pick out common criticisms, Openreach can take their time if you have to deal with them directly (getting a line installed in a new office or apartment can take a few weeks), and there seems to be very limited innovation in the last mile - even in London it's hard to get more than 20mbps, and many people in rural areas are stuck with a crappy DSL line at 2mbps or so. That's exactly what I'd expect. Make i…

The same way they happen with unregulated providers: some government actor has to step in and provide incentives.

We've already seen that expecting multiple last-mile physical providers everywhere is impossible due to cost reasons and the fact that land lines are a natural monopoly, therefore you'll have to manage it as such in the face of absence of normal market pressures.

It's still a better scenario than the current situation in the US

Re: Net neutrality

#38

Post by [deleted] »

btilly wrote: post #16
hezakia1 wrote: post #5

"I have met with the Chairman of the FCC, Tom Wheeler, and I believe he is a good actor that wants to do the right thing. But he is fighting against very powerful lobbyists and large companies that want to disrupt the freedom of the Internet." "Prior to working at the FCC, Wheeler worked as a venture capitalist and lobbyist for the cable and wireless industry" -Wikipedia Really? Somehow I doubt that he has turned a f…

Rule of thumb. Assume people are operating fairly until proven otherwise. If you meet someone and treat them as a good actor, it becomes easier for them to BE one. Truth is he is probably a politician. He will do whatever he thinks is going to get him the most support. So if you can convince him that is going against his former friends, he will do that. (180 flips in policy are very common in politicians.)

[deleted]

Re: Net neutrality

#39

Post by oesmith »

njs12345 wrote: post #19

> I would love to see a world where the companies that own last-mile infrastructure are required to lease the lines to any ISP the end consumer wants; this would create a competitive market and mostly eliminate the problem. [2] This is pretty much how it works in the UK; see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Openreach It does seem to work pretty well.. there are a wide variety of operators and prices are very low. If I ha…

+1, I live in a semi-rural town of ~10k residents and I get 75Mbps / 15Mbps fibre-to-the-cabinet broadband.

The infrastructure is owned by the incumbent monopoly provider, but the service over the top can be supplied by any one of a number of large and small suppliers.

Re: Net neutrality

#40

Post by oesmith »

njs12345 wrote: post #19

> I would love to see a world where the companies that own last-mile infrastructure are required to lease the lines to any ISP the end consumer wants; this would create a competitive market and mostly eliminate the problem. [2] This is pretty much how it works in the UK; see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Openreach It does seem to work pretty well.. there are a wide variety of operators and prices are very low. If I ha…

+1, I live in a semi-rural town of ~10k residents and I get 75Mbps / 15Mbps fibre-to-the-cabinet broadband.

The infrastructure is owned by the incumbent monopoly provider, but the service over the top can be supplied by any one of a number of large and small suppliers.

Post reply on HN