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

151–160 of 449 posts

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#151

Post by webXL »

benmathes wrote: post #107
bko wrote: post #92

I don't think I fully understand the argument for net neutrality. I try to think about it from a few different perspectives: Broadband intensive services like Netflix: I think a problem that they face is that their connection is often slow, not only intentionally, but also because developing infrastructure is expensive. Why would an ISP bother building out the infrastructure if they can't extract a higher value from…

Short Answer: Communications industries are different, and too important. The information they carry is, like journalism, a 4th estate to democracy. An econ101 approach to that industry breeds consolidated information empires that influence policy, society, and public discourse to the point of control. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/12/books/review/Leonhardt-t.h...

Communications industries are different, and too important.

More important than shelter, food and energy? We draw a line as to what the government should provide/subsidize/control and what the private sector provides in those sectors.

The information they carry is, like journalism, a 4th estate to democracy.

If the 4th estate is a check on government, why would we want the government to decide what constituted it? Please don't conflate a first amendment issue with this conflict between content providers and ISPs.

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#152

Post by mindcrime »

bovermyer wrote: post #75
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 going to ignore your opinion as a result of your not being American; I'd say that foreign perspective is very useful in such discussions. I do however take issue with the ad hominem attack on the President. It's not necessary, nor constructive, to lay down a blanket criticism like "[he's] an utmost failure." The "surveillance state" does exist, but it's a global phenomenon. In the US, at least, it's something…

In the US, at least, it's something that we're actively fighting

Are we really, thought? At least at any meaningful scale? A handful of geeks on HN, Reddit, Facebook, Twitter and Slashdot isn't much of a resistance. Do you perceive that people who care about this issue have mobilized in sufficient quantity and enthusiasm to do something meaningful, like influence election outcomes?

It's good that at least some of us care, but just chattering with each other here probably isn't going to accomplish much.

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#153

Post by Sven7 »

revscat wrote: post #55
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 "…

Let me explain a few things about the American government. The most important thing to understand is that the ability of the executive to influence the direction of the government is limited. The reasons for this are several, but I will try to elucidate a few here. First, it is commonly believed that because of the ability to hire/fire people the President can more or less do whatever he wants in regards to the direc…

"First, it is commonly believed..."

And why do these common beliefs exist?

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#154

Post by DigitalSea »

As per usual with all politicians, these are just words. Nice words, but until a bill is passed and there is movement in the senate to make something like this closer to a reality, words are meaningless.

My question to Obama is: why now? This whole net neutrality debate has been going on long before Obama started his first term of presidency, why wait until you are almost out of the White House to act upon something as important as this? He has had six years to act on this. Could it perhaps have anything to do with the fact the Democrats took a heavy blow recently with Republicans being popular with the voters in the recent election? Is Obama merely trying to save some face with the voters for his party to mitigate risk at the next presidential election?

Maybe, maybe not. It probably is not fair of me to try and make connections to speculative thoughts like that. I am passionate about net neutrality and it just feels weird Obama is going public on a subject like this not long after votes were casted.

But you know what? Either way, if Obama can get a bill deeming internet to be classified as a utility within the next two years, maybe he will leave behind a legacy that we talk of in the years to come. It might be six years too late, but if anyone can make something like this happen, it is the president.

I am aware that the FCC can change things without any bills needing to be passed and while I am speculating here, the FCC is not exactly known for being honest and transparent. An independent agency with some suspicious ties to lobbyists and corporations trying to protect their monopolies like Comcast. The issue here is the FCC can change things and should change things but ultimately will not change a thing unless the pressure is there from the right hands. Obama speaking up is great, do not get me wrong, but I think the likes of the FCC will need more than gentle words to start changing things. Action needs to be taken.

I simply refuse to believe that an agency can run itself to the point where it controls what can and cannot happen with something as important as the internet which in my opinion is a basic human right to have access to.

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#155

Post by cynicalkane »

vegancap wrote: post #132

So on one hand he calls for state regulation of ISP's, yet on the other he calls for a "free and open" internet. So which is it to be?

The standard economic and policy solution is local anti-monopoly regulation plus a nationwide free market. Laying fiber and cable is pretty expensive so it's likely the "local" scope will often include entire states.

This falls into the category of "free markets need to be regulated", which is the economic field's most important and most repeated caveat.

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#156

Post by nicksergeant »

DigitalSea wrote: post #154

As per usual with all politicians, these are just words. Nice words, but until a bill is passed and there is movement in the senate to make something like this closer to a reality, words are meaningless. My question to Obama is: why now? This whole net neutrality debate has been going on long before Obama started his first term of presidency, why wait until you are almost out of the White House to act upon something…

Before there are bills, there must be words.

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#157

Post by rayiner »

adventured wrote: post #108
atonse wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but Obama is suggesting that we re-classify ISPs as utilities. That would force them to lease out their lines to competitors.

That's not going to happen. Comcast is one of Obama's - and the Democrats in general - closest corporate sponsors. And were the Republicans to win the Presidency, I can't see them pushing for a formal classification either. They think Comcast is a private company competing in a market, when it's actually a government protected and sanctioned monopoly just like AT&T and Verizon.

What substantial government sanctioned monopoly does Comcast have? Can we point to something concrete rather than hand waving?

It's been illegal to grant monopoly franchises to cable companies since the mid 1990's. I don't know of a single market where Comcast is the only cable company because it has a sanctioned monopoly. There are a lot of places where Comcast has a de-facto monopoly because nobody else is willing to build high-speed service in a given area. But almost anywhere that's the case, it's because of telco-unfriendly regulations, not telco-friendly ones.

The people who rant about telcos can't get their story straight. They say Comcast has a legally protected monopoly, but then attack Verizon for not building fiber to the huge swath of places where the local governments are dying to get a competitor to the local telco. Their arguments are based on a false premise: that building fiber is profitable enough to justify the investment, and the government and telcos are getting in the way. The falsity of this premise is amply demonstrated when you look at places like New York, where the government has shoved the cable companies out of the way, but still has to drag Verizon kicking and screaming to build all this supposedly lucrative infrastructure.

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#158

Post by adventured »

Cuuugi wrote: post #124
trvz wrote: post #109

1) Him having to interfere against the bs of the ISPs makes me sad, as it's one more sign of the politicisation of the internet. 2) I welcome Obama being well advised, but he remains the spy master of the world.

Not to mention the policing of content, which this legislation permits. Regulation is the beginning of the end of the open internet.

The thing the fans of net neutrality don't seem to believe, is the notion that as the US Government gets more entrenched into regulating the Internet, they will regulate content as well. And that's exactly what will happen. It would take a complete lack of understanding of the modern US Government (say the last 40 years) to think they won't regulate content. They abuse every power they're granted to an extreme, in an ever widening spiral.

I appreciate the premise behind net neutrality, but all governments are not the same; if you give two different governments the same power, they'll use it differently. This is an extraordinarily abusive government, that just loves to silence people, they cannot be trusted to be hands off when it comes to controlling free speech online. It's best to keep them far away from such powers.

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#159

Post by corford »

philovivero wrote: post #50

Huh? Is this the same President Obama that put Tom Wheeler in charge of the FCC? In case it isn't obvious (and since no-one else has mentioned it yet, I guess it's not), Tom Wheeler was a huge lobbyist for the very people who are trying to end net neutrality. I don't get calling for X then performing actions that negate X. Edit: there's another front-page story to Bloomberg that actually explicitly mentions the Tom W…

Tom Wheeler might not be the wolf in the hen house a lot of people think he is. See: https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=rayiner

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#160

Post by venomsnake »

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 that it is preventative of headlines "Obama wants pedophiles to be able to download kiddie porn fast" that the other party pundits are sure to make.

Edit: I am not defending any party, just assume that in current poisonous climate ANY action of ANY high position party official of ANY party will be stretched and twisted by the other side.

Inspection of traffic with the coming certificate pinning and https implementations will be very hard. And you always have VPN. At worst there will be overnet in which bittorrent will flow.

Post reply on HN