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

The Senate has forced a vote to restore net neutrality

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 150 posts

Re: The Senate has forced a vote to restore net neutrality

#131

Post by monocasa »

davvolun wrote: post #122
tzs wrote: post #72

> 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…

Literally any game that has a distinction between tactics and strategy (ie. most of them).

Re: The Senate has forced a vote to restore net neutrality

#132

Post by ryanpcmcquen »

chimeracoder wrote: post #94
ryanpcmcquen wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I made no mention of it 'not being as bad' as other bills. I stand by my statement. Net Neutrality is government regulating ISPs. ISPs are not the internet. And I think it could convert those in the anti camp. Some are against Net Neutrality because they see it as government control of the internet (it is not). They need to recognize that FOSTA is directly what they perceive Net Neutrality to be (at least in terms of…

> And I think it could convert those in the anti camp. Some are against Net Neutrality because they see it as government control of the internet (it is not). They need to recognize that FOSTA is directly what they perceive Net Neutrality to be (at least in terms of results). As someone who's fairly active around both issues, trust me when I say that all this will do is solidify their opposition to net neutrality, and…

In my experience in discussing these issues with people who were pro-FOSTA, this argument has helped them realize that it is violating the first amendment, and an example of government controlling the internet. So I have to respectfully disagree with your conclusion.

Re: The Senate has forced a vote to restore net neutrality

#133

Post by ryanpcmcquen »

splintercell wrote: post #106
ryanpcmcquen wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I made no mention of it 'not being as bad' as other bills. I stand by my statement. Net Neutrality is government regulating ISPs. ISPs are not the internet. And I think it could convert those in the anti camp. Some are against Net Neutrality because they see it as government control of the internet (it is not). They need to recognize that FOSTA is directly what they perceive Net Neutrality to be (at least in terms of…

> Net Neutrality is government regulating ISPs. ISPs are not the internet. I've been doing some research on the prelude to Russian revolution and what I discovered is that Communist party of USSR did not start or create the concept of a brutal 'Secret Police'. The Tsar of Russia created the secret police and they had no concept of civil liberties to begin it. When Communist party took over, they merely used this conc…

Slippery slope? Haha.

Re: The Senate has forced a vote to restore net neutrality

#134

Post by orthecreedence »

jeremyt wrote: post #83
matchbok wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Healthcare? Name me one country with free-market healthcare. I'll wait. Also, your friend chose to live in that house, along with all the regulations that came with it. Spare us the sob story. You clearly don't understand why NN was put in place. All the telcos were prioritizing content, taking advantage of their monopoly power. Starting a telco is serious work, and that isn't simply due to government regulation. Try…

Veterinary care. Cheap, quick, high quality...free market and unregulated

It's cheap because it's "ok" to let animals die. If an operation is > $5000, most people just don't do it.

Try applying the same logic to people. It's fine in a Randian utopia but for people who aren't delusional, dying because you need your appendix out kind of sucks ass.

Re: The Senate has forced a vote to restore net neutrality

#135

Post by dhimes »

everdev wrote: post #91
polotics wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well any representative that votes No puts themselves fair and square in the parliament of whores.

It's cool to be passionate about a cause but name calling drags everyone down. Not the right site for a comment like this.

Wait- that was a reference to political writer P.J. O'Rourke:

https://www.amazon.com/Parliament-Whores-Humorist-Attempts-G...

It's an excellent read.

Re: The Senate has forced a vote to restore net neutrality

#136

Post by d0lph »

graphitezepp wrote: post #105
jeremyt wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Veterinary care. Cheap, quick, high quality...free market and unregulated

You might want to take a step back and understand that these are different markets.

To be fair, they're kinda similar too. Both provide health care to biological organisms. Of course human doctors will probably have better training.

Re: The Senate has forced a vote to restore net neutrality

#137

Post by craftyguy »

esaym wrote: post #14
craftyguy wrote: post #2

> 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. I get the feeling that these sites are just 'preaching to the choir' (i.e. their customers already support these things, and most likely have let their 'representative' know). Is anyone doing anything to give the 50 senators who are against this a taste of what is to come? I…

>Is anyone doing anything to give the 50 senators who are against this a taste of what is to come? No, because I am fine with the way things are, ie unregulated.

It's not currently 'unregulated.' Consumers are being regulated by ISPs, who are driven by profits and literally nothing else.

Re: The Senate has forced a vote to restore net neutrality

#138

Post by InitialLastName »

jeremyt wrote: post #115
jcranmer wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you want to see what pharmaceuticals would look like without the FDA, look at the "dietary supplements" industry, which is a drug industry that the FDA is explicitly prohibited from regulating, except in the most narrow truth-in-advertising and product-safety areas. The companies can't be bothered to actually put their claimed active ingredients in their products.

Great, and I'll be the first person arguing against FDA regulation of dietary supplements. How many people die every year from dietary supplements? Not many. It's not the governments job to regulate quality. The free market is doing that just fine with sites like labdoor.com

http://www.whatstheharm.net/herbalremedies.html

Re: The Senate has forced a vote to restore net neutrality

#139

Post by InitialLastName »

econochoice wrote: post #48
mch82 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about the internet seems broken to you that loss of net neutrality will fix?

Once the government gets its hands out of the internet, ISPs can finally offer premium internet packages with higher quality bits.

I'm so tired of my bits coming into my house all fuzzy and distorted. Once my ISP replaces their wires with oxygen-free gold-plated fibre, my spotify playlists will sound way more pristine.

Re: The Senate has forced a vote to restore net neutrality

#140

Post by boomboomsubban »

daveFNbuck wrote: post #117
boomboomsubban wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This doesn't make sense. Why would the ISP's want to throttle the websites that their customers are using? Even with the lack of ISP competition, pissing off your users that much seems like a bad strategy. And they can already throttle users based on bandwidth used, how would eliminating net neutrality help them achieve this goal. I predict the ISP's selling a default throttled connection to everything, and then for…

Your prediction is exactly what you said doesn't make sense. Your prediction also doesn't match history. In 2014 Netflix was the one that had to pay Comcast to end its throttling.

In 2014, my prediction was illegal due to net neutrality regulations, while limiting Netflix based on usage was possible.
Post reply on HN