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

President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

whitehouse.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 449 posts

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#121

Post by techsupporter »

300bps wrote: post #90
revscat wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me explain a few things about the American government. The most important thing to understand is that the ability of the executive to influence the direction of the government is limited. The reasons for this are several, but I will try to elucidate a few here. First, it is commonly believed that because of the ability to hire/fire people the President can more or less do whatever he wants in regards to the direc…

The President can nominate candidates for various positions, but these positions must be approved by Congress. President Obama was inaugurated January 20, 2009. At that time, his Democratic party controlled both houses of Congress decisively[1]. It was not until 2011 that his party lost the house. And in fact, his party still retains the Senate but will lose it in January 2015. But it is only the Senate that approves…

> The President is the Commander in Chief of the military. He exercises complete authority over them.

No, he doesn't. The Constitution specifically limits the President's ability to make war and wage military campaigns. He has a great deal of authority but even the US' current adventures in Afghanistan and Iraq are backed by Congress' approval through passed laws.

> At that time, his Democratic party controlled both houses of Congress decisively.

This displays a lack of insight around the Democratic party. Senator Lieberman was nominally a Democrat but he voted more often with the Republicans in the last few years of his career in the Senate. So-called "blue dog Democrats" are more conservative than you might think; that's why we got such grand bargains as the "Cornhusker Kickback" during the PPACA debates.

In reality, the President's party firmly controlled roughly 51-54 votes in the Senate with the remainder of the "majority" part of the coalition as a result of them simply not being as good a fit with the Republicans. That has arguably been one of the Democrats' greatest weaknesses: the Republican party has demonstrated its ability to move in lockstep even when some members disagree. The Democrats have not.

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#122

Post by jkestner »

mvd366 wrote: post #13
higherpurpose wrote: post #4

Since I have zero trust in Obama these days, I'm waiting for the other shoe to drop - or to see what's Obama's angle in this. Is he doing it because he already knows a Republican-backed Congress and FCC have already made up their minds against net neutrality - and he just wants to be remembered that "he tried"? Or is he supporting full net neutrality because that would give the government much more control over the I…

I don't understand this mentality. If Obama comes out as against Net Neutrality, it's him being evil. If he comes out in favor of it, he's lying. I understand politicians often have ulterior motives but from the information provided, this is exactly what the majority of citizens were asking him (and the FCC) to do.

That might be the opposition position, but from his own side, I think the prevailing mood is generally disappointment. Look at the context. Nominating a former telecom lobbyist to run the FCC in the first place is not a sign of sincerity about reform.

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#123

Post by adventured »

benmathes wrote: post #107
bko wrote: post #92

I don't think I fully understand the argument for net neutrality. I try to think about it from a few different perspectives: Broadband intensive services like Netflix: I think a problem that they face is that their connection is often slow, not only intentionally, but also because developing infrastructure is expensive. Why would an ISP bother building out the infrastructure if they can't extract a higher value from…

Short Answer: Communications industries are different, and too important. The information they carry is, like journalism, a 4th estate to democracy. An econ101 approach to that industry breeds consolidated information empires that influence policy, society, and public discourse to the point of control. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/12/books/review/Leonhardt-t.h...

Everything you just said about controlling policy, society, public discourse - applies to governments that show authoritarian tendencies, exactly as the US Government does these days.

Except with the government it's radically worse. They have the guns, and the legal 'right' (might) to spy on you and criminalize what you do if they see fit - or you know, use your porn habits to blackmail you as the NSA chief suggested doing. They also already substantially control education in countless ways.

So a violent central government that likes to murder innocent people by the thousands overseas, with a rising police state domestically with military weapons given to them by the Feds, and a mentality to wage perpetual war, and spy on all citizens and acquire all information they can in any way they can without any regard for the Constitution or privacy ... and you want to give them more power over the biggest free speech platform in world history - oh yeah, this is going to end real well.

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#124

Post by Cuuugi »

trvz wrote: post #109

1) Him having to interfere against the bs of the ISPs makes me sad, as it's one more sign of the politicisation of the internet. 2) I welcome Obama being well advised, but he remains the spy master of the world.

Not to mention the policing of content, which this legislation permits. Regulation is the beginning of the end of the open internet.

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#125

Post by noobermin »

adventured wrote: post #91
noobermin wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least give him credit for doing one right thing, I think that's fair.

He waited six years to make this rather limp statement of obviousness. And he waited until he was a lame duck President, that just lost the Senate. Meanwhile, in the passing of those six years the US has continued to fall further behind on fixed broadband speeds and ISP competitiveness.

Which especially makes it better that he finally has done it.

He deserves criticism and his motives deserve criticism, but I'm just happy that he decided to support it after all.

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#127

Post by rudolf0 »

CWuestefeld wrote: post #104
mpweiher wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are the same thing: in order to protect net neutrality (the free and open internet), you need strong regulation, it doesn't happen by itself.

This sounds very George Orwell, like "Freedom is Slavery". It's going to take a very strong argument to support the idea that freedom is enhanced by limiting freedom. Not that it's impossible; my glib statement plays fast-and-loose with "freedom", using the same word in one sentence to mean both the overall amount of freedom as well as in a microcosm. But even so, the apparent contradiction should make us think befor…

Well, it depends if you consider monolithic monopolies or governments a greater threat to freedom.

In the case of US ISPs, most people simply have no choice and are locked into one company. This creates a difficult situation and allows ISPs to easily collude. You theoretically have freedom to switch to another company, but in practice it's not possible because most people would have to up and move their entire family.

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#130

Post by pessimizer »

wylee wrote: post #38
yc1010 wrote: post #6

I am not American (feel free to ignore my opinion) but this is just a bad joke from someone who seems to be an utmost failure. Especially in light of last week FBI/NSA/DHS undermining TOR and killing its utility for any dissidents and free speech in authoritarian states. Under his watch the surveillance state has expanded and has become downright creepy 25 years after the fall of the Berlin wall we should be saying "…

I'm not a huge fan of Obama, but do you really think the surveillance state was created during his presidency? This type of thing has been going on... well, probably forever. It's gotten more sophisticated in the Internet age, but that started before Obama too.

It was legalized under Obama. Under Bush, it was criminal; now, it's institutional.
Post reply on HN