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

F.C.C. Is Expected to Propose Regulating the Internet as a Utility

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 452 posts

Re: F.C.C. Is Expected to Propose Regulating the Internet as a Utility

#41

Post by pluma »

spiritplumber wrote: post #34
ceejayoz wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I get what they're trying to accomplish, we all want faster more reliable service, but as comparison is anyone 100% happy with their utility (power, water, etc)? I am. My water is clean and I've never had an outage. My power is reasonably cheap and quite reliable. The state doesn't allow either one to raise rates exorbitantly from year to year, either, and despite that both have made major upgrades to their facilit…

I'm surprised at how reliable utilities are in America. I was in a low income neighborhood in San Antonio during university, and had maybe 2 blackouts in 3 years.

Where are you from exactly? I live in Europe and 2 blackouts in 3 years would still be an outrage.

(To be fair, we have less natural disasters.)

Re: F.C.C. Is Expected to Propose Regulating the Internet as a Utility

#42

Post by wmf »

IanDrake wrote: post #33
IanDrake wrote: post #23

That will be a sad day. Internet technology still has a lot of room to improve before the government steps in and kills all market forces that encourage those improvements. If you don't like your current service levels now, just wait until the government gets involved.

I realize HN is full of idealistic kids who never lived through the government taking control of something to "improve" it, so your down votes are forgiven.

Whether you're right or not, your point is shallow and tired. But I guess the "groundhog day" nature of HN resetting every discussion to zero every day encourages such comments.

Re: F.C.C. Is Expected to Propose Regulating the Internet as a Utility

#43

Post by robertfw »

thissideup wrote: post #29
ceejayoz wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That has nothing to do with whether or not it's a utility. They're clearly already capable of doing so.

Explain how the two ideas aren't related.

I'd be interested to hear you explain how they are

Re: F.C.C. Is Expected to Propose Regulating the Internet as a Utility

#44

Post by relaytheurgency »

res0nat0r wrote: post #30
relaytheurgency wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Before I got Google Fiber I was definitely happier with my water and electric than my service provider. Now I am probably actually still happier, but I don't have too many complaints about Google Fiber. I can't think of the last time I had an issue with my water! It's got 100% uptime.

The issue most here are not mentioning is the sad state of affairs of much of the US public infrastructure. I wonder how old the pipes running to your house are and how long ago they should have been upgraded? This is also a possibility if internet becomes a utility.

Well, it doesn't really matter how old the pipes are as long as they continue working and provide water that meets the EPA/state standards for health. The US public water system is, for all intents and purposes, a miracle that most people do not even think about. They just rely on it.

It's also your duty to replace the pipes leading up to your own house off of the mains in most cases, so I guess take it up with your landlord.

Re: F.C.C. Is Expected to Propose Regulating the Internet as a Utility

#45

Post by DanielBMarkham »

skywhopper wrote: post #27
djrogers wrote: post #13

Setting aside the ultimate politics and ramifications of this, it is interesting (and kind of scary) to watch the fight between a non-elected bureaucracy and our elected house of representatives to regulate the internet. Congress seems to be completely incapable of doing more than grandstanding, while the bureaucrats may wind up dramatically increasing their own power with a single stroke of their unelected pens. It'…

It's worth noting that these "unelected bureaucrats" are nominated by a President for limited terms and confirmed by the Senate, and that all powers they have are bestowed upon them by Congress and can be revoked, and that their regulations have to fit within restrictions that are defined and may be revised by Congress. It's certainly not pretty, but it's not unaccountable, and it seems to be moving things in the gen…

(Note: I support the move. However I believe you may be overstating your case a bit.)

Accountable in what way? Based on either 1) Doing something so horrendous that would require direct Congressional intervention, which has never (?) happened before? 2) Waiting until a completely new Senate or president is elected, which is basically a 4-8 year cycle?

In theory all of these folks are accountable, sure, but in actuality the entire gimmick here is that the bureaucrats can make all the tough choices while Congress grandstands and makes speeches. That way the work gets done and there's nobody really to blame.

Some parts of that system are pretty good! Some parts are not. But it's only accountable in the strictest sense. There is only an infinitesimal chance that any citizen could have any influence at all over these types of machinations.

Re: F.C.C. Is Expected to Propose Regulating the Internet as a Utility

#46

Post by djrogers »

skywhopper wrote: post #27
djrogers wrote: post #13

Setting aside the ultimate politics and ramifications of this, it is interesting (and kind of scary) to watch the fight between a non-elected bureaucracy and our elected house of representatives to regulate the internet. Congress seems to be completely incapable of doing more than grandstanding, while the bureaucrats may wind up dramatically increasing their own power with a single stroke of their unelected pens. It'…

It's worth noting that these "unelected bureaucrats" are nominated by a President for limited terms and confirmed by the Senate, and that all powers they have are bestowed upon them by Congress and can be revoked, and that their regulations have to fit within restrictions that are defined and may be revised by Congress. It's certainly not pretty, but it's not unaccountable, and it seems to be moving things in the gen…

>> their regulations have to fit within restrictions that are defined and may be revised by Congress

This is only notionally true, and history is replete with examples of federal agencies declaring their own authority over things which were obviously not envisioned so. While congress could act to change that, they don't, so power collects.

Re: F.C.C. Is Expected to Propose Regulating the Internet as a Utility

#47

Post by freehunter »

IanDrake wrote: post #23

That will be a sad day. Internet technology still has a lot of room to improve before the government steps in and kills all market forces that encourage those improvements. If you don't like your current service levels now, just wait until the government gets involved.

>market forces that encourage those improvements.

Like a Comcast monopoly? You mean those market forces?

Re: F.C.C. Is Expected to Propose Regulating the Internet as a Utility

#48

Post by cranklin »

HelloMcFly wrote: post #16
supergeek133 wrote: post #4

I get what they're trying to accomplish, we all want faster more reliable service, but as comparison is anyone 100% happy with their utility (power, water, etc)? That's where this is headed.

I'm not 100% happy with my utility companies, but I'm 500% more satisfied with them than any cable company I've ever had.

I can dump my cable company if they piss me off. I can't do that with my utility companies

Re: F.C.C. Is Expected to Propose Regulating the Internet as a Utility

#49

Post by rasz_pl »

djrogers wrote: post #13

Setting aside the ultimate politics and ramifications of this, it is interesting (and kind of scary) to watch the fight between a non-elected bureaucracy and our elected house of representatives to regulate the internet. Congress seems to be completely incapable of doing more than grandstanding, while the bureaucrats may wind up dramatically increasing their own power with a single stroke of their unelected pens. It'…

Yes yes, it would be terrible if US had actual consumer oriented regulation. Nothing says communism like $16 300Mbit Internet (http://giga-kablowka.pl this offering is possible directly because of tight regulation) in some ex soviet shithole of a country in middle/east Europe.

Re: F.C.C. Is Expected to Propose Regulating the Internet as a Utility

#50

Post by ceejayoz »

tptacek wrote: post #22
markbao wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends on where you live, I suppose. I have zero problems with my ConEd power and whoever supplies my water, and I find the pricing pretty reasonable. My power supplier even offers different energy sources to use other than the standard one, which honestly blows my mind. And then I call into Time Warner spend more time trying to get them to understand what I'm talking about than I've ever spent on the phone with my…

I also have generally positive experiences with power company employees. On the other hand: i. I can't fire my power company, nor can I ever really expect to gain that ability. ii. As nice and hardworking as the power company employees are, there's still only one main power run for the 1/8th of Oak Park that I live in, and any time a tree goes down in the alley along that run, or a squirrel detonates a transformer al…

> I can't fire my power company, nor can I ever really expect to gain that ability.

The same is true for many folks and Comcast or Time Warner - it's hardly unique to utilities. Here in Rochester, NY TWC is the only reasonable option for high-speed internet in most areas - the local phone company Frontier is crap, and the upstart fiber company is only in a few high-density spots thus far.

Meanwhile, your city and state governments can really give the power company a rough time if enough citizens are complaining.

Post reply on HN