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

President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

whitehouse.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 449 posts

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#31

Post by crackalackin »

diminoten wrote: post #12

I'm glad the president is giving a hoot about this issue, because it's an issue I care deeply about and follow closely. That said, I'm still not convinced a "no slow lanes" policy is possible. Peering is a huge part of the Internet, and without it, the Internet doesn't work. Paid peering is a private network owner's right to ask for, and it's every other person's right to deny.

Really? I wish he'd keep his mouth shut. The moment he makes his position known on anything, the Republican controlled congress makes it their holy crusade to block. Those guys are now in complete control of the legislative body that makes these rules.

If he REALLY wanted to help, he'd start supporting the opposite of everything he wants to do. He should be good at that, re: NSA, Drones, Gitmo, etc. "I will close down Gitmo! ... lol"

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#32

Post by ablesable »

yc1010 wrote: post #6

I am not American (feel free to ignore my opinion) but this is just a bad joke from someone who seems to be an utmost failure. Especially in light of last week FBI/NSA/DHS undermining TOR and killing its utility for any dissidents and free speech in authoritarian states. Under his watch the surveillance state has expanded and has become downright creepy 25 years after the fall of the Berlin wall we should be saying "…

I am an American and I agree with your bad joke assessment. It's rather depressing to see my fellow citizens fall for these jokes over and over again, all the while losing their rights, even their right to privacy.

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#33

Post by mpweiher »

CognitiveLens wrote: post #23
tjaerv wrote: post #15

Because that worked so well with the phone companies.

Obama's statement isn't quite as limp as the article title implied: "I am asking for an explicit ban on paid prioritization" This isn't a request to "set up a committee to explore regulation ideas and form lobby groups from all stakeholders" - it sounds more like "I want to pass laws AND create an enforcement structure for those laws". Ambitious and probably overly optimistic, but it's a good perspective from the top…

Well, the enforcement structure is already in place, AFAIK. This is just putting his finger on the scale as the FCC ponders the issues (and implying that if the FCC doesn't make the right choice by itself, it could be compelled by law).

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#34

Post by DominikR »

His administration literally started the process that will ultimately be the end of the open internet in the next few years.

Now everybody is working on a national/regional "Internet", even the EU is going the first steps into this direction.

Him calling for open and free Internet is absolutely bizarre. Who knows, maybe he'll call tomorrow for the end of torture and drone executions without trial.

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#35

Post by eps »

untog wrote: post #14
yc1010 wrote: post #6

I am not American (feel free to ignore my opinion) but this is just a bad joke from someone who seems to be an utmost failure. Especially in light of last week FBI/NSA/DHS undermining TOR and killing its utility for any dissidents and free speech in authoritarian states. Under his watch the surveillance state has expanded and has become downright creepy 25 years after the fall of the Berlin wall we should be saying "…

Please don't complain about downvotes, it just makes people downvote you more. And I suspect the reason you're being downvoted in the first place is that the TC post is about net neutrality and not government spying. While the two are connected (they both involve the internet, after all) they're different topics. If we refuse net neutrality until we also disband the NSA then we'll just lose on two counts.

> Please don't complain about downvotes, it just makes people downvote you more.

No, of course it doesn't.

And, no, there's nothing wrong with complaining about the downvotes as there' heck of a lot of knee-jerk downvoting happening on HN. Almost as much as righteous preaching about proper HN "etiquette", but not as damaging in the long run.

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#36

Post by AndrewHampton »

couchand wrote: post #27
AndrewHampton wrote: post #9

Here's the thing that bothers me the most about a lot of the talk about net neutrality by government officials: > If a consumer requests access to a website or service, and the content is legal, your ISP should not be permitted to block it. Specifically "and the content is legal" is what raises a flag for me. I've seen similar phrases in nearly everything I've read coming from any government official regarding net ne…

It's a pretty massive stretch to go from "ISPs are permitted to block illegal traffic" to "ISPs are required to perform deep-packet inspection to ensure the legality of all traffic they carry".

It is. It's just a concern I have since similar language seems to be everywhere, which makes me think including it is intentional.

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#38

Post by wylee »

yc1010 wrote: post #6

I am not American (feel free to ignore my opinion) but this is just a bad joke from someone who seems to be an utmost failure. Especially in light of last week FBI/NSA/DHS undermining TOR and killing its utility for any dissidents and free speech in authoritarian states. Under his watch the surveillance state has expanded and has become downright creepy 25 years after the fall of the Berlin wall we should be saying "…

I'm not a huge fan of Obama, but do you really think the surveillance state was created during his presidency? This type of thing has been going on... well, probably forever. It's gotten more sophisticated in the Internet age, but that started before Obama too.

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#39

Post by [deleted] »

eps wrote: post #35
untog wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please don't complain about downvotes, it just makes people downvote you more. And I suspect the reason you're being downvoted in the first place is that the TC post is about net neutrality and not government spying. While the two are connected (they both involve the internet, after all) they're different topics. If we refuse net neutrality until we also disband the NSA then we'll just lose on two counts.

> Please don't complain about downvotes, it just makes people downvote you more. No, of course it doesn't. And, no, there's nothing wrong with complaining about the downvotes as there' heck of a lot of knee-jerk downvoting happening on HN. Almost as much as righteous preaching about proper HN "etiquette", but not as damaging in the long run.

[deleted]

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#40

Post by dragonwriter »

AndrewHampton wrote: post #9

Here's the thing that bothers me the most about a lot of the talk about net neutrality by government officials: > If a consumer requests access to a website or service, and the content is legal, your ISP should not be permitted to block it. Specifically "and the content is legal" is what raises a flag for me. I've seen similar phrases in nearly everything I've read coming from any government official regarding net ne…

I think the concern is somewhat misplaced, because we've already seen the FCC take multiple stabs at regulations on net neutrality, that have been based on the principle of no or limited interference with lawful content, and they haven't required inspection of traffic.

Its not a requirement that ISPs block unlawful content, its a prohibition on blocking lawful content. A strong enough prohibition on blocking lawful content (e.g., one which provides consequences whenever lawful content is blocked, even if the intent was to block unlawful content and the lawful content just got caught up in the net) actually reduces the incentive for ISPs to attempt to identify and block unlawful content, since attempting to do so but making a misidentification in the process can result in penalties.

In fact, I'd argue that a no-blocking-lawful-content rule combined with a safe harbor provisions preventing ISPs from being liable for transmission of unlawful content by customers so long as the ISP wasn't actively involved in soliciting or promoting the specific illegal content is probably a good protection against ISP-initiated snooping, since it eliminates any liability-based incentive for it.

OTOH, it doesn't stop ISP-snooping-at-behest-of-government, but if you get a mechanism to do that, its going to be outside the context of net neutrality.

Post reply on HN