FCC Passes Strict Net Neutrality Regulations on 3-2 Vote • Hacker News Board

Re: FCC Passes Strict Net Neutrality Regulations on 3-2 Vote

#31

Post by cheald » Thu, Feb 26, 2015, 6:30 PM UTC

smileysteve wrote: post #21

mudil wrote: post #16

FCC has now "fixed" something that was not broken, and gov't is now regulating internet. I am on this one with Mark Cuban, who is scared shitless of this gov't take over. Speaking of shitless, is everyone ready for decency standards?

Netflix was having to make back market deals (with companies with conflicts of interest) to have the isp's customers (who were paying for access to) have access to their service. How was this "not broken"?

No, they didn't. Netflix had plenty of options for transit to Comcast - they didn't have to use Cogent. But it would have cost them a lot more. Cogent is famous for both cut-rate transit and peering disputes with last-mile providers.

The fact that they bought from Comcast rather than someone like Level3 or XO should tell you that they rate they got from Comcast was better than what they'd have gotten from another transit provider.

If you serve content on the internet, you have to buy transit from someone.

Edit: Would the downvoters like to point out what's wrong about my assertion?

Re: FCC Passes Strict Net Neutrality Regulations on 3-2 Vote

#32

Post by walexander » Thu, Feb 26, 2015, 6:31 PM UTC

api wrote: post #7

paulhauggis wrote: post #2

What scares me is that there are 700 regulations (that we haven't even seen) that got passed. I wouldn't sign a contract without reading it (and having the person on the other side telling me all of the reasons why I should), and neither should you. But apparently, the general population (and many here) will. I watched the entire live broadcast and the pros played only on emotion (safety, helping out the disadvantage…

Almost nobody in Washington reads anything. They just rubber stamp stuff written for them by bureaucrats, think tanks, and lobbyists. Question is who wrote this stuff: telecoms, Google, the NSA, ???

Don't forget the MPAA and RIAA.

Re: FCC Passes Strict Net Neutrality Regulations on 3-2 Vote

#33

Post by unprepare » Thu, Feb 26, 2015, 6:31 PM UTC

supergeek133 wrote: post #18

unprepare wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The grass is always greener. Seriously though, I think there was a lot of hype built up around net neutrality(for good reason) and it ended up clouding the discussion. Quickly it became a dichotomy, you must be either for Title II and whatever the FCC decides that entails, or you must be against any change to the status quo. Now that we are passed that dichotomy, we are faced with the reality that we have little cont…

Yep, that's all most of us want. Transparency. The FCC is un-elected, that's always scary. Not that our elected officials know better. Haha.

I agree On one hand- the FCC is non-elected and thus the people have less control of them

On the other hand, this also means they don't need to seek funding for running a campaign which theoretically could insulate them from what we see with our elected officials currently pandering to business interests.

Time will tell with this decision i suppose, whats important from my perspective is that change happens quickly if there are any major objectionable pieces of these new regulations

Re: FCC Passes Strict Net Neutrality Regulations on 3-2 Vote

#34

Post by paulhauggis » Thu, Feb 26, 2015, 6:31 PM UTC

Zancarius wrote: post #10

paulhauggis wrote: post #2

What scares me is that there are 700 regulations (that we haven't even seen) that got passed. I wouldn't sign a contract without reading it (and having the person on the other side telling me all of the reasons why I should), and neither should you. But apparently, the general population (and many here) will. I watched the entire live broadcast and the pros played only on emotion (safety, helping out the disadvantage…

Funny how something intended to prevent ISPs from throttling content turned into a debate about helping out the disadvantaged, etc. It worries me that issues like this are co-opted to turn them into a one-size-fits-all batch of regulations sidelining their original intent. On the other hand, it's my understanding that the FCC will enter a period of public comments after voting on the rules but prior to enacting them.…

I have no faith in the general public anymore. I've seen so many Twitter hash tag campaigns started on false information and lies (and even the mainstream media picks up on it and continues to spread it around as truth) that I can't expect the opposite to happen when it comes to really important things such as regulating the Internet. Anyone with a little bit of social power can convince more people to vote their way.

It's a good example of why we have representatives representing the people and we don't have a traditional democracy.

Re: FCC Passes Strict Net Neutrality Regulations on 3-2 Vote

#35

Post by Eric_WVGG » Thu, Feb 26, 2015, 6:31 PM UTC

ForHackernews wrote: post #24

paulhauggis wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In addition to this, Chairman Wheeler refused to testify before congress about Net Neutrality. I would just like more transparency. With all of the Snowden leaks, why aren't we demanding transparency? Do we really just want to give our rights away like this?

Honestly, I don't blame him. We have a GOP-controlled Congress, so testifying would just be an hours-long exercise in getting yelled at by old people who don't understand technology or believe in science, but love an opportunity for political grandstanding against an Obama-appointee.

This. There was widespread belief that Wheeler was a cable industry stooge. Wheeler and Obama deserve some credit for making this happen in an obstructionist environment.

http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/obamas-bad-pick-a...

Re: FCC Passes Strict Net Neutrality Regulations on 3-2 Vote

#36

Post by paulhauggis » Thu, Feb 26, 2015, 6:32 PM UTC

ForHackernews wrote: post #24

paulhauggis wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In addition to this, Chairman Wheeler refused to testify before congress about Net Neutrality. I would just like more transparency. With all of the Snowden leaks, why aren't we demanding transparency? Do we really just want to give our rights away like this?

Honestly, I don't blame him. We have a GOP-controlled Congress, so testifying would just be an hours-long exercise in getting yelled at by old people who don't understand technology or believe in science, but love an opportunity for political grandstanding against an Obama-appointee.

This is a poor excuse for a lack of transparency and is unacceptable.

Re: FCC Passes Strict Net Neutrality Regulations on 3-2 Vote

#37

Post by dragonwriter » Thu, Feb 26, 2015, 6:32 PM UTC

at-fates-hands wrote: post #9

pyrophane wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any idea when or how these additional 700 regulations will be published?

Two of the dissenting commissioners attempted to get the bill published so people could see how bad it was going to be - without success. Also add in the fact the FCC is supposed to be a independent office, and Obama has been meddling them since he got into office: http://reason.com/archives/2015/02/25/fccs-ajit-pai-on-net-n... Regulating the internet like a utility is quite possibly the worst thing you can imagine,…

> Two of the dissenting commissioners attempted to get the bill published

There is no bill. And, under the normal regulatory process, there is nothing to be published until the authority responsible for regulation approves something -- its true that the FCC could have delayed action and issued another NPRM. But regulations are published fairly quickly once adopted by the issuing authority, not generally effective immediately, and subject to revision by the issuing authority or overriding by Congress once they are published, so the idea that this will go into effect without people knowing what is in it is incorrect, as is the idea that there is anything unusual about the process here.

Having failed to drum up opposition to the general idea of regulation, opponents have attempted to paint the process as unusual and nefarious, but that just isn't an argument that has a grounding in reality.

> Regulating the internet like a utility is quite possibly the worst thing you can imagine

Even the worst possible regulation of the internet isn't even in the top 50% of the worst things I can imagine.

Re: FCC Passes Strict Net Neutrality Regulations on 3-2 Vote

#38

Post by Zancarius » Thu, Feb 26, 2015, 6:32 PM UTC

carlisle_ wrote: post #30

Zancarius wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny how something intended to prevent ISPs from throttling content turned into a debate about helping out the disadvantaged, etc. It worries me that issues like this are co-opted to turn them into a one-size-fits-all batch of regulations sidelining their original intent. On the other hand, it's my understanding that the FCC will enter a period of public comments after voting on the rules but prior to enacting them.…

>Funny how something intended to prevent ISPs from throttling content turned into a debate about helping out the disadvantaged, etc Isn't that just politics in general?

Yep.

It's like everything else in the last 20+ years. Someone drafts a bill that sounds like a good idea, then before you know it, it balloons to thousands of pages of rhetoric drafted by every lobbyist in Washington.

I don't know what the answer is. I can think of a few solutions, but they're impractical and would never happen.

Re: FCC Passes Strict Net Neutrality Regulations on 3-2 Vote

#39

Post by guelo » Thu, Feb 26, 2015, 6:33 PM UTC

paulhauggis wrote: post #2

What scares me is that there are 700 regulations (that we haven't even seen) that got passed. I wouldn't sign a contract without reading it (and having the person on the other side telling me all of the reasons why I should), and neither should you. But apparently, the general population (and many here) will. I watched the entire live broadcast and the pros played only on emotion (safety, helping out the disadvantage…

So when ex-Verizon lawyer Ajit Pai said the FCC is replacing Internet freedom with government control and then blamed Obama, that wasn't playing on emotion?

Re: FCC Passes Strict Net Neutrality Regulations on 3-2 Vote

#40

Post by Zancarius » Thu, Feb 26, 2015, 6:33 PM UTC

sigzero wrote: post #12

Zancarius wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny how something intended to prevent ISPs from throttling content turned into a debate about helping out the disadvantaged, etc. It worries me that issues like this are co-opted to turn them into a one-size-fits-all batch of regulations sidelining their original intent. On the other hand, it's my understanding that the FCC will enter a period of public comments after voting on the rules but prior to enacting them.…

Congress can also slap them down I believe.

Also true. But then you run into the problem of Congress actually doing something. And even if they do, the President can still veto it.

I suppose they could try to defund the FCC, but I guarantee that would never happen.