I like how many times he says "Congress gave us the power to make this decision".
Kind of like he's daring them to try and stop him.
FCC Chairman: This Is How We Will Ensure Net Neutrality
181–190 of 437 posts
Re: FCC Chairman: This Is How We Will Ensure Net Neutrality
#182Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does this mean that (e.g.) specific cities can petition ISPs to block (e.g.) Uber in their area because it's not "lawful?"
If a federal/state/local government declares something illegal, they can shut it down within their jurisdiction. There is no "I'm on the internet so you can't enforce laws" get out of jail free card.
The main concern seemed to be weather or not it was on the burden of the state to prove illegal content before blocking or if it was on the user to prove their content is legal to prevent blocking.
Re: FCC Chairman: This Is How We Will Ensure Net Neutrality
#183Earlier quoted context omitted.
This reads exceedingly well but the devil is in the detail. As we have seen countless times that there is significant difference between what gets proposed and what gets passed. As others have stated > will ban paid prioritization, and the blocking and throttling of lawful content and services. the keyword here is lawful. Will all content be lawful unless proven otherwise?
this isn't an act of congress though. its regulations that the FCC has the authority to create and implement. if Wheeler says thats how it is, then that's how it is. regulations can be challenged at court but until that happens they will stick.
Congress can gut FCC's power to decide these things though, that's what the Republicans want.
Re: FCC Chairman: This Is How We Will Ensure Net Neutrality
#184Earlier quoted context omitted.
This reads exceedingly well but the devil is in the detail. As we have seen countless times that there is significant difference between what gets proposed and what gets passed. As others have stated > will ban paid prioritization, and the blocking and throttling of lawful content and services. the keyword here is lawful. Will all content be lawful unless proven otherwise?
this isn't an act of congress though. its regulations that the FCC has the authority to create and implement. if Wheeler says thats how it is, then that's how it is. regulations can be challenged at court but until that happens they will stick.
> if Wheeler says thats how it is, then that's how it is
Not entirely. It's a proposal, which must be voted on by the rest of the FCC committee. It's unlikely everyone on the committee will agree 100%, but I'd also contend it's unlikely for this to not pass in and around it's current state.
Re: FCC Chairman: This Is How We Will Ensure Net Neutrality
#185Well, I believe this kicks off the biggest lobbying effort seen in a long time to get this to not happen. I certainly hope that the US internet gets Title II.
The lobbying has been in full effect for a year, looks like they already lost this one.
The "Comcast supports Net Neutrality" ads have been flying for a while. Still gets me when I see them.
Re: FCC Chairman: This Is How We Will Ensure Net Neutrality
#186> ban paid prioritization, and the blocking and throttling of lawful content and services. Too bad the regulation isnt simply this one line of text without the "lawful" caveat
Why is that too bad? Do you think that the rules would stand of that caveat weren't present? Do you think that ISP's should not have the ability to block illegal traffic? What happens when they receive a court order to do so, yet doing so would violate FCC regulations? Don't be naive; that exception must be there, and out changes nothing in regards to the current situation.
My biggest problem with that caveat is that its really just a foot in the door for further regulation by the federal government, none of which has anything to do with network neutrality.
Network neutrality by definition is about all packets being treated equally regardless of the source or destination.
Re: FCC Chairman: This Is How We Will Ensure Net Neutrality
#187I like how many times he says "Congress gave us the power to make this decision". Kind of like he's daring them to try and stop him.
I think it's more a justification to explain why non-elected officials are putting laws into motion.
Re: FCC Chairman: This Is How We Will Ensure Net Neutrality
#188Earlier quoted context omitted.
Canada has cable broadband unbundling and the big guys (Rogers + Shaw) are doing just fine. But it's allowed for smaller ISPs to get a foothold, like Teksavvy, which I used to use back in Canada. Now that I'm in the US, I don't see why Comcast can't lease out the last mile to other ISPs for reasonable wholesale rates.
Source that Canada has mandatory line-sharing for cable (not just DSL)?
Re: FCC Chairman: This Is How We Will Ensure Net Neutrality
#189Earlier quoted context omitted.
I suspect you need such a carve out to be able to legally block denial-of-service attacks and other such network events that are intended to disrupt regular operation of a service.
That's what they'll swear to you, but of course the government will use it for censorship just like the FCC nowadays censors the TV and Radio. Read up the history of the FCC. At the time it was also "necessary" to regulate airwaves because of several noble reasons but of course what ends up happening is that now you have to get a license from the government to say something on radio waves. You will have to get a lice…
This is the single most ignorant comment I've seen on HN in a long time.
but of course the government will use it for censorship just like the FCC nowadays censors the TV and Radio.
You mean how OTA broadcasts are supposed to be family friendly between certain hours of the day? The horror.
but of course what ends up happening is that now you have to get a license from the government to say something on radio waves.
No, you need to get a license for a certain chunk of spectrum and demonstrate that you know how to design and operate your equipment in such a way that you're not going to ruin the airwaves for everyone else. There is a DAMN good reason that the EM spectrum is not a free for all! How would you like the local EMS service to be unable to communicate because some random down the street decided to start playing music on their band?
Re: FCC Chairman: This Is How We Will Ensure Net Neutrality
#190Earlier quoted context omitted.
Canada has cable broadband unbundling and the big guys (Rogers + Shaw) are doing just fine. But it's allowed for smaller ISPs to get a foothold, like Teksavvy, which I used to use back in Canada. Now that I'm in the US, I don't see why Comcast can't lease out the last mile to other ISPs for reasonable wholesale rates.
Source that Canada has mandatory line-sharing for cable (not just DSL)?
It does not. Canada has mandatory line-sharing only for "phone" companies - i.e., DSL.
This has been a boon for small-time ISPs but a huge thorn in the side of phone companies like Bell and Telus, who are forced to compete with cable giants that are not playing under the same rules.