I find it funny that some people still see Net Neutrality as 'government controlling the internet'. They should take a look at FOSTA if they want to know what government controlling the internet really looks like.
[deleted]
The Senate has forced a vote to restore net neutrality
121–130 of 150 posts
Re: The Senate has forced a vote to restore net neutrality
#122> Reddit, Tumblr, Etsy and other sites have put up Red Alert banners as part of a day of action to drive petitions in support of the resolution. This is being seriously mismanaged, and that may actually cause long term harm to the chances of saving (or restoring) net neutrality. The big mistake being made is not explaining where the Congressional Review Act (CRA) approach fits into the bigger picture. There are sever…
In what sport do you hold back from scoring a goal in order to set yourself up to score a goal later though?
That is to say, what you're saying is true, but typically (as long as the net is in sight) the best way to set yourself up to score a goal later is to try to score a goal now.
The approach is prone to local maxima, but I'm not convinced there can be another approach here. If you're not trying to win it all, then you're setting yourself up to lose.
Re: The Senate has forced a vote to restore net neutrality
#123Earlier quoted context omitted.
You probably don't because net neutrality isn't an automatic win for everyone. Some companies clearly benefit from the repeal. They do have incentive to invest in their networks when they can monetize it every which way, it's now a feature they can charge for... Except maybe for a PR tidal wave so huge that anyone who opposes net neutrality is driven out of business, I don't see how you convince companies to go again…
You don't - you can only change the rules of the game so their interests are set in line with public opinion, or environmental standards, or safety practices, or whatever else.
^^ Right answer. Board members will be upset if companies don't do every thing they can to increase profits, including "persuading" members of Congress and swaying public opinion. Our job, as "civilians," is to set the rules of the game the way we want them. The companies won't- unless there is accidental alignment between the company's goals and ours (in this case, small companies may align for example).
Re: The Senate has forced a vote to restore net neutrality
#124> Reddit, Tumblr, Etsy and other sites have put up Red Alert banners as part of a day of action to drive petitions in support of the resolution. This is being seriously mismanaged, and that may actually cause long term harm to the chances of saving (or restoring) net neutrality. The big mistake being made is not explaining where the Congressional Review Act (CRA) approach fits into the bigger picture. There are sever…
In what sport do you hold back from scoring a goal in order to set yourself up to score a goal later though? That is to say, what you're saying is true, but typically (as long as the net is in sight) the best way to set yourself up to score a goal later is to try to score a goal now. The approach is prone to local maxima, but I'm not convinced there can be another approach here. If you're not trying to win it all, th…
Pretty much every sport? You don't go all out every opportunity you have the instant you have priority. Nearly every sport has some concept of setting up plays: American football, soccer, basketball, boxing, MMA.
They can't even score a goal now. The purpose of this within the US legal system is a pure intermediate play. And the when net neutrality doesn't get overturned as a result of this instance people will feel demoralized and hopeless.
Re: The Senate has forced a vote to restore net neutrality
#125> Reddit, Tumblr, Etsy and other sites have put up Red Alert banners as part of a day of action to drive petitions in support of the resolution. This is being seriously mismanaged, and that may actually cause long term harm to the chances of saving (or restoring) net neutrality. The big mistake being made is not explaining where the Congressional Review Act (CRA) approach fits into the bigger picture. There are sever…
In what sport do you hold back from scoring a goal in order to set yourself up to score a goal later though? That is to say, what you're saying is true, but typically (as long as the net is in sight) the best way to set yourself up to score a goal later is to try to score a goal now. The approach is prone to local maxima, but I'm not convinced there can be another approach here. If you're not trying to win it all, th…
Consider Small Ball in baseball: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_ball_(baseball)
Re: The Senate has forced a vote to restore net neutrality
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
The USA is big. Like, really fucking big. As a result running an ISP, wired or cellular, has an extremely high cost to entry. As a result of that, most people’s choices for internet provider is precisely limited to one choice, the local telco monopoly. No net neutrality means that ISP ca. Do whatever they want and get away with it because what are you going to do? Send a sternly written letter?
> The USA is big. Like, really fucking big. So? Most of that is empty space nobody is trying to serve. The key metric is population density, which is comparable between urban areas in Europe and the US. The size of the US has nothing to do with lack of ISP choice, as evidenced by the fact that the same problem doesn't occur in countries with lower population densities than the US (33.8 people per km²) such as Sweden…
ISPs serve more than just downtown urban areas.
Re: The Senate has forced a vote to restore net neutrality
#127Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The USA is big. Like, really fucking big. So? Most of that is empty space nobody is trying to serve. The key metric is population density, which is comparable between urban areas in Europe and the US. The size of the US has nothing to do with lack of ISP choice, as evidenced by the fact that the same problem doesn't occur in countries with lower population densities than the US (33.8 people per km²) such as Sweden…
ISPs serve more than just downtown urban areas.
They don't have to when they start. Google Fiber hasn't gone into any rural areas AFAIK.
Re: The Senate has forced a vote to restore net neutrality
#128Earlier quoted context omitted.
What? He is literally the person who appointed the guy who made this happen. While Trump is erratic, so no one can rule out a complete 180 at any moment, to say that is "to his credit" is ridiculous.
I get your point, but he is also the guy to fire multiple people in his cabinet for arbitrary/popularity reasons, so don't put it past him to throw ajit under the bus because it would make him 'look good'
Exactly. He is fine with seeing if ideas or people will float or sink; it's his modus operandi.
Plus, Trump is a master at walking stuff back and saving face with his party and base. Net neutrality comes back? Well it's Trump net neutrality now, way better than broken Obama net neutrality. Obama job numbers fake, Trump job numbers great. Trump economy(which has basically not deviated from the Obama economy trajectory) doing great, Obama economy was broken. Etc, etc. All that matters is if it floats, and he can brand it Trump.
Re: The Senate has forced a vote to restore net neutrality
#129Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not to introduce flame bait but one of the reasons the NRA is powerful is the ability to quickly motivate their very vocal members.
The fact that those members have guns might also have something to do with it. 'Do this or else we will sick our gun carrying members on you' even if they do nothing at all is a more powerful signal than 'Do this or a bunch of people will show up to protest'.
> 'Do this or else we will sick our gun carrying members on you' even if they do nothing at all is a more powerful signal than 'Do this or a bunch of people will show up to protest'.
That threat is entirely without teeth for two reasons:
One: Disorganized militias fail against a well-regulated military force. Especially since this militia would be a minority group, composed of the subset of gun owners who are outright crazy/stupid enough to go up against their own government.
Two: It would destroy the NRA in the public sphere. They'd go from being a normal political group to truly being Yall-Qaeda, the armed paramilitary force of reactionary idiots no normal person can support. The NRA can put on a normal face right now, and get practically everything it wants through politics, but if it tries to force the issue through armed insurrection, it gets crushed like an insect. A small insect.
Re: The Senate has forced a vote to restore net neutrality
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know, man. You cherry-pick some examples of government inefficiency, but our society benefits greatly from all the rules that the government enforces in order to benefit citizens (e.g. the FDA approving new food products).
First of all, the government has its hands in almost everything, so any list small enough to fit into a hacker news comment is necessarily going to be "cherry picked". I'm not one of those people who thinks we don't need any regulations. I think they need to be a last-resort when everything else has been tried. Everything else has not been tried here. I mean, 5G and the SpaceX satellite internet plan are right around…
It's pretty easy to cherry-pick areas of business which are pretty much a big mess and a boondoggle as well. Especially large businesses. Bureaucracy is inevitable with size. United States high speed is actually dominated by businesses that very accurately could be described as "big messes" and "boondoggles" (check the consumer ratings of big cable companies for instance).
From what I see with these corporations, they are quite happy creating "regulations" of their own that benefit them and do not benefit their competitors. So I'm not getting this reaction, personally, which seems reflexively anti-government because bureaucracy. In a regulatory vacuum, eventually, someone's eventually going to step in with their own "regulations". And these rules will most likely benefit themselves... not the public.
I'm mainly okay with net neutrality because high speed broadband is a quasi monopoly in the United States. If this changes (which includes eliminating any regulations that stifle competition among US high speed Internet), net neutrality is probably not necessary.