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

311–320 of 449 posts

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#311

Post by rhino369 »

joezydeco wrote: post #238

And it's already getting worse: https://twitter.com/SenTedCruz/status/531834493922189313 "Net Neutrality" is Obamacare for the Internet; the Internet should not operate at the speed of government.

Net Neutrality isn't, but Title II regulation is definitely the Obamacare of the internet. Title II gives the FCC broad powers over regulating the internet.

You just have to look at the what the BushII-era FCC did about policing broadcast media to see the potential dangers in letting the FCC heavily regulate every ISP in America.

Title II will heavily disincentivize investment into faster networks because of the uncertainty.

I agree that net neutrality should be law but not if we need Title II to get it. I'd only support that if the ISPs started fucking up the internet massively. Sort of a "nuclear option."

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#312

Post by jobposter1234 »

ablesable wrote: post #280
jobposter1234 wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, plus the culture of informing on your fellow citizens at large scale (10-20% of German citizens were active informers...) ... or the German citizens killed by the Stasi... Do you really think the only difference between the Stasi and the NSA is the technology available?

Absolutely. The mindsets of spy masters never changes, no matter the era or country.

Then how do you explain how the Stasi kidnapped and killed lots of German citizens, while the NSA has yet to do the like?

I can understand if you're saying you fear the NSA's power grab because of similarities with the Stasi. I have trouble believing that you think there is literally no difference between the Stasi and the current NSA, given their body of work has significant differences.

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#313

Post by _greim_ »

therealdrag0 wrote: post #308
crazy1van wrote: post #300

First, let me say that my local ISPs have left a lot to be desired. Comcast and Verizon have driven me crazy in the past. But making them a utility scares me. As bad as my ISPs have been, looking back 15 years, I was on a 56k modem. Now I have 50 mbps broadband. When I look at other utilities like power and water, I've seen zero innovation and my bill continues to rise. Something should be done, but I'd rather the fo…

What innovation could be done for basic utilities? I understand your concern and sympathize with it. But it seems like there is a difference. Everyone wants faster more reliable internet (Personally I'm more concerned about reliability at peak times at this point; >10mbps is plenty otherwise). But when is the last time you heard someone complain about the reliability of their power/water/sewage? Maybe I'm spoiled, bu…

The electrical grid is (supposedly) badly in need of an overhaul. I don't know if this is correlated to electrical being a utility however.

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#314

Post by dkopi »

crazy1van wrote: post #300

First, let me say that my local ISPs have left a lot to be desired. Comcast and Verizon have driven me crazy in the past. But making them a utility scares me. As bad as my ISPs have been, looking back 15 years, I was on a 56k modem. Now I have 50 mbps broadband. When I look at other utilities like power and water, I've seen zero innovation and my bill continues to rise. Something should be done, but I'd rather the fo…

That's actually a much more interesting question than the so called net neutrality. What regulations restrict competition, and prevent you from being able to choose between several ISPs.

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#315

Post by dragonwriter »

jeangenie wrote: post #265
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 agree that the presence of that single qualifier casts an irrevocably ominous shadow over the entire sentiment. In a purely-hypothetical dystopia it could be the basis of more invasive monitoring and control capabilities over network infrastructure.

Not really. Blocking of illegal content is possible -- and can be (and, at times, has been) encouraged and even mandated by government -- even without protection of legal content. So, while the qualifier might suggest that such practices would not be curtailed by the neutrality, they don't provide the basis for more invasive monitoring and control than the absence of neutrality does, because the basis of that more invasive monitory and control already exists in the illegality of certain content, whether or not there is neutrality for legal content.

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#316

Post by scottkduncan »

crazy1van wrote: post #300

First, let me say that my local ISPs have left a lot to be desired. Comcast and Verizon have driven me crazy in the past. But making them a utility scares me. As bad as my ISPs have been, looking back 15 years, I was on a 56k modem. Now I have 50 mbps broadband. When I look at other utilities like power and water, I've seen zero innovation and my bill continues to rise. Something should be done, but I'd rather the fo…

Of course the innovation curve has been steep on broadband over the last fifteen years when compared with legacies like electricity and water. It could have been much better though, and many other developed countries have faster broadband speeds at lower prices than we do here in the United States, perhaps owing to some combination of different regulations or more competition.

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#317

Post by rinon »

brandonmenc wrote: post #221
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'm betting "illegal content" will eventually come to include things like "bullying." Expect a much broader array of takedown notices once the FCC is granted content-level authority over the internet.

If such "bullying" is found illegal in court, then I don't see the problem here. Nobody is saying the FCC should be in charge of deciding these things, just that companies are still required to comply with court orders.

Speaking of "bullying," assault, "an intentional act by one person that creates an apprehension in another of an imminent harmful or offensive contact," [1] is already illegal. Sounds an awful lot like credible bullying. Why should this be legal online?

[1] http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Verbal+assault

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#319

Post by leeber »

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 wouldn't read into it too much.

If he didn't put that in there, tons of idiots would go around saying how net neutrality will support all the crooks of the dark web, illegal filesharing websites, etc. Obviously that's ridiculous and not the case, but it would have really given net neutrality a bad image to the average person who probably has no idea what net neutrality is at all.

We've already got idiots let Ted Cruz tweeting that net neutrality is the "Obamacare of the internet."

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#320

Post by jameshart »

therealdrag0 wrote: post #308
crazy1van wrote: post #300

First, let me say that my local ISPs have left a lot to be desired. Comcast and Verizon have driven me crazy in the past. But making them a utility scares me. As bad as my ISPs have been, looking back 15 years, I was on a 56k modem. Now I have 50 mbps broadband. When I look at other utilities like power and water, I've seen zero innovation and my bill continues to rise. Something should be done, but I'd rather the fo…

What innovation could be done for basic utilities? I understand your concern and sympathize with it. But it seems like there is a difference. Everyone wants faster more reliable internet (Personally I'm more concerned about reliability at peak times at this point; >10mbps is plenty otherwise). But when is the last time you heard someone complain about the reliability of their power/water/sewage? Maybe I'm spoiled, bu…

AC 2.0: now running at 120Hz! That's TWICE AS FAST as your grandfather's AC. And delivered at a selection of voltages to suit your needs - from a new 30V option for price-conscious consumers, right up to 120V to meet the needs of even the most demanding family.*

Worried about replacing all your appliances? Don't be! We can supply all the latest AC 2.0 devices from top manufacturers for a low initial price, when you sign up for a three year contract.

* Full voltage available for first 2kWh every month only. Fair wattage policy applies.

Post reply on HN