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

FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 598 posts

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#121

Post by tsavo »

bloppe wrote: post #104
jrockway wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair Congress does some work. They have avoided 2 government shutdowns. They funded the war efforts in Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan. They passed the infrastructure bill. The reality is, they just don't care about net neutrality. I'm still mad that they haven't passed the bill that gets rid of DST (or rather, gets rid of standard time). Everyone wants it in both parties. Just get it done. Even more annoying is th…

The US trialed permanent DST in 1974. In the first 3 months, public support dropped from 79% to 42%. It was ended prematurely. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daylight_saving_time_in_the_... Of course, there's no difference between permanent DST and abolishing DST but having everyone agree to shift their schedules forward by 1 hour. So abolishing DST altogether isn't really a better option. I used to think DST was st…

It could be much worse and end up with a system with smaller timezones with 30 minute offsets instead of DST. Or a single timezone for the continental US.

DST is annoying but it's far from the worst.

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#122

Post by Cody-99 »

theoperagoer wrote: post #99
Cody-99 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No they shouldn't. I don't think that logic makes any sense at all. No one is paying increased costs because their neighbor is watching netflix, youtube, or browsing reddit. Users already pay for internet service they shouldn't have to pay again because the ISP wants to be greedy and double dip from fees to avoid throttling.

If netflix traffic is straining ISPs to the point of requiring hardware upgrades etc., I think it is fair for ISPs to ask them to pay some of that cost.

It isn't netflix traffic it is ISP customer traffic which they pay for. Hardware upgrade, bandwidth costs, and other operating costs are already paid for by the ISP customers. The ISP should not be able to double dip by charging netflix or the customer a second time.

If the ISP isn't able to provide the service they advertised and sold they should be investigated and be issuing refunds at the very least. Can't provide the service you said you could? Maybe don't advertise and defraud customers.

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#123

Post by gmueckl »

pavlov wrote: post #91
jrockway wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair Congress does some work. They have avoided 2 government shutdowns. They funded the war efforts in Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan. They passed the infrastructure bill. The reality is, they just don't care about net neutrality. I'm still mad that they haven't passed the bill that gets rid of DST (or rather, gets rid of standard time). Everyone wants it in both parties. Just get it done. Even more annoying is th…

“Congress avoided two government shutdowns” is like saying “I avoided pooping in my pants twice today.” It’s factually true and objectively a positive thing, but there’s nothing really commendable about it. The debt ceiling is Congress’s own creation, and Congress itself approves the budgets that cause the increase in debt. There isn’t another parliament on the planet that behaves so absurdly, fighting shadow puppets…

There are plenty of dysfunctional/autocratic/kleptocratic governments based on constitutions that are somewhat democratic in nature. The US is just a high profile example of government structure slowly sliding into one of these failed states (faster if Trump gets another term).

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#124

Post by JeremyNT »

granzymes wrote: post #59
SeanAnderson wrote: post #13

I'm happy this reversal occurred, but I am exhausted by the continuous flip-flopping of legislation depending on which party is in charge. Feels like we're stagnating as a nation by going in a circle rather than finding commonality to go forward. Maybe it's always been this way though and I'm just getting old enough to be bothered by it?

The Supreme Court is poised to decide a case this term, Loper Bright , which should help restore more finality to decisions like this. Because agencies receive considerable deference to their interpretation of the law, even when that interpretation flip-flops every four years, we never get a definitive ruling on what the law says. The Court seems likely to greatly reduce this deference, leading to more consistency.

[flagged]

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#125

Post by tootie »

SeanAnderson wrote: post #13

I'm happy this reversal occurred, but I am exhausted by the continuous flip-flopping of legislation depending on which party is in charge. Feels like we're stagnating as a nation by going in a circle rather than finding commonality to go forward. Maybe it's always been this way though and I'm just getting old enough to be bothered by it?

[flagged]

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#126

Post by lolinder »

wredue wrote: post #82
itishappy wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps one commonality is that we all seem inclined to assume the other half makes political decisions out of spite.

I find the only commonality is that after the right wing does something, both sides say “this is going to hurt so many people”. It’s just that one side is laughing when they say it. I visit alt-right circles A LOT, and I have literally never once heard “the other side does these things out of spite”. The vast majority of the time, they don’t have anything to say on a topic beyond repeating some stupid meme. Additiona…

> The vast majority of the time, they don’t have anything to say on a topic beyond repeating some stupid meme.

You from earlier:

> It is not possible for me to base my legislative direction on “everyone that is not cis white is bad”.

Both sides are totally guilty of repeating stupid memes instead of engaging in intelligent discourse. You just don't recognize your stupid memes because they seem like factual statements since you've heard them so much from your circles.

You hear someone say something that you disagree with and you immediately interpret it using the memetic pigeon hole that you've adopted for that "kind of person" instead of actually listening to what they have to say. Get out more and actually listen (really listen!) to what conservatives have to say. Why do they repeat the memes that they do? What do those memes say about their inner life?

As a rule, conservatives are no less thoughtful and caring than you are, they just have a very different set of axioms governing their ethics. Until you understand those priors their words will sound as irrational and foolish to you as your words do to them.

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#127

Post by rixthefox »

pseudalopex wrote: post #109
Cody-99 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>So, I would be beyond shocked if this was an election year issue of substance. Because it isn't an election year issue. This has been in the works since at least 2022. https://www.cnet.com/home/internet/net-neutrality-will-make-... The rule making process takes time! >From my perspective, nothing about the internet changed since then (my experience did not upgrade or downgrade). People stopped talking about it, ther…

> IMO it seems likely ISPs knew the rules were likely to come back so they avoided most of the practices that would generate outrage (throttling streaming and other popular services unless you pay an additional fee). And several states passed their own laws.

[flagged]

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#128

Post by tootie »

lenerdenator wrote: post #2

What's this thing the government has been doing recently where they're no longer content to just let major corporations screw consumers?

Not to be glib, but it's just Democrats. They are not immune from corporate interests, but they are not wholly owned by them. And really, corporate interests are American interests so long as they don't needlessly harm citizens.

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#129

Post by callalex »

karaterobot wrote: post #29

I'm fully in support of net neutrality, but I'm somewhat surprised they're restoring it, as I have not really heard a peep about it since it was repealed in the first place. From my perspective, nothing about the internet changed since then (my experience did not upgrade or downgrade). People stopped talking about it, there weren't major protests, news about it even largely disappeared from the front page of HN (!).…

What changed for me is that my home internet provider (Comcast) implemented an overly-burdensome impossible data cap that I can only get rid of if I agree to use their router with deep packet inspection, ad injection, and more.

Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules

#130

Post by Mountain_Skies »

richwater wrote: post #60

Remember when the Internet freaked out and "when dark" to protest how the lack of NN would ruin the internet?....and then nothing changed? The boy who cried wolf...again.

You're being down voted for telling the truth, which is extremely inconvenient. Notice all the debate in this thread is about partisan score keeping and no one is able to explain why they want these rules back after all their predictions of terrible doom failed to happen. They need them back so they can claim doom was just around the corner if they hadn't been passed. The longer they went without being in effect, the more difficult it would be to explain why the doom never came to be.

It is 100%, Grade A partisan score keeping to preserve future doomsaying without being called out on this absolutely failed predictions. Looks as bad for the doomsayers as a Bush administration's doomsaying about Weapons of Mass Destruction piling up in Iraq, ready to attack the US if we didn't invade. Incredible what people will let their partisan brains twist reality into. Of course, when this is used against them in the future, they'll scream like banshees, claiming it's unprecedented. This is the power of a brain addicted to partisanism.

Post reply on HN