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

FCC won’t delay vote, says net neutrality supporters are “desperate”

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 206 posts

Re: FCC won’t delay vote, says net neutrality supporters are “desperate”

#161

Post by notgoodenuff88 »

slededit wrote: post #154
caseydurfee wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Point of clarification: Pai was appointed to the 5 person FCC commission by Obama. He was named chairman by Trump. FWIW, the previous chairman, Tom Wheeler (ostensibly a Democrat), probably would've dismantled net neutrality if Obama hadn't come out strongly in favor of it. I find it incredibly frustrating that people clearly see the need for referees in sports, but not in business. Nobody's saying that the NFL or th…

There is a referee in business: the court system. What your proposing is more like a league which will solidify the rules as they currently exist. An example of this is banning innovations like Aluminum bats.

The court system isn't suited for this anymore. It was a different time in 1776 when corporations were not allowed to live in perpetuity, amassing as much of the valuable resources as they can, handing it off to ancestors upon the owners death (sounds a bit like monarchism, IMO).

"What your proposing is more like a league which will solidify the rules as they currently exist."

According to Thomas Jefferson, this is exactly what Constitution and laws are for.

Thomas Jefferson:

"I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions, but laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as a civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors."

Re: FCC won’t delay vote, says net neutrality supporters are “desperate”

#162

Post by euvitudo »

jordigh wrote: post #92

"Chairman Pai's plan to restore Internet freedom" This phrase bugs me so much. I can't believe they're calling the end of net neutrality "internet freedom".

It’s a matter of perspective.

Freedom from what? In this case it’s freedom from regulation.

It’s like hospitals always wanting to cut costs. But it’s never about the patient saving money.

Re: FCC won’t delay vote, says net neutrality supporters are “desperate”

#163

Post by masklinn »

thehardsphere wrote: post #148
masklinn wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're assuming ISPs won't try attacking muni federally. > They’re all for states rights If you actually believe that I've got a great bridge called "Fugitive Slave Act of 1850" for sale I'm sure you'd enjoy it.

The Republican Party was founded in 1854.

Name aside, the Republican Party of 1854 has nothing to do with the Republican Party of 2017, that has very little relevance.

My comment is about the "muh states' rights" crowd, back in the 19th century, they were Democrats (quite literally since the Republican Party was founded by anti-slavery democrats splitting off and uniting with the northern Whigs).

Re: FCC won’t delay vote, says net neutrality supporters are “desperate”

#164

Post by [deleted] »

logfromblammo wrote: post #133
masklinn wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh no, don't you read mises and vood^H^H^H^HAustrian Economics? Natural monopolies don't exist: https://mises.org/library/myth-natural-monopoly

Natural monopolies exist, but they don't perpetually persist. They can fluctuate between monopoly, single firm with pricing power plus challenger(s), unstable market, and complete market collapse with no suppliers. Legally protected monopolies are intended to avoid the latter state, especially where interruptions of service could have ripple effects on other industries. I believe the legislative goal was never about…

[deleted]

Re: FCC won’t delay vote, says net neutrality supporters are “desperate”

#165

Post by tw04 »

rhino369 wrote: post #137
paulmd wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> After reading about Pai, it seems like he was hand selected to be the figure head with which the ISPs would finally take down Net Neutrality. He's not. He's a generic Republican, appointed by Obama (since the commission is obligated by Congress to have no more than a simple majority of appointees from any one party). The problem is, this is what all Republicans are like nowadays. Any other person that Obama could h…

>They are un-interested in any semblance of reasonable governance, it's siphoning your money to their backers in the most direct and aggressive fashion, plain and simple. They are uninterested in your view of reasonable governance. Reasonable people can and do disagree with things like net neutrality.

>They are uninterested in your view of reasonable governance. Reasonable people can and do disagree with things like net neutrality.

Really? On what grounds? Because I've literally not run into a single person, democrat or republican, who thinks net neutrality should go away.

*Mind you, I'm not personally friends with any executives from one of the big 8 companies that stand to benefit from it... but outside of them and shareholders I'm struggling to come up with the "reasonable" person who thinks this will be a good thing.

Re: FCC won’t delay vote, says net neutrality supporters are “desperate”

#166

Post by Feniks »

paulmd wrote: post #110
grokas wrote: post #2

After reading about Pai, it seems like he was hand selected to be the figure head with which the ISPs would finally take down Net Neutrality. This whole situation sucks, and no matter how much noise we make and activism we take part in, if Pai has the legal footing to ruin the internet, he will.

> After reading about Pai, it seems like he was hand selected to be the figure head with which the ISPs would finally take down Net Neutrality. He's not. He's a generic Republican, appointed by Obama (since the commission is obligated by Congress to have no more than a simple majority of appointees from any one party). The problem is, this is what all Republicans are like nowadays. Any other person that Obama could h…

Its not the elections or the Republicans.

The US was under the impression that they were special snowflakes. Every country has rules about corporate involvement in political campaigns. But Americans knew better. Our politicians can't be bribed because America fuck yeah!

All citizens are equal but some are more equal than others.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC

Re: FCC won’t delay vote, says net neutrality supporters are “desperate”

#167

Post by Delmania »

boomboomsubban wrote: post #140
paulmd wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> After reading about Pai, it seems like he was hand selected to be the figure head with which the ISPs would finally take down Net Neutrality. He's not. He's a generic Republican, appointed by Obama (since the commission is obligated by Congress to have no more than a simple majority of appointees from any one party). The problem is, this is what all Republicans are like nowadays. Any other person that Obama could h…

There isn't a "reasonable" party, the Democrats could have made this a law making repealing it difficult. They found the to give ISPs billions of dollars, and to legalize spying on their customers though. Both parties are a joke, voting for either is an awful choice.

That's a lie, plain and simple. 2017 is the year that the claim that both parties are just as bad went from being a somewhat valid commentary on American politics to the cries of the intellectually lazy.

One party would not attempt to ram throw a bill that took away health insurance for millions without a back plan. One party would not attempt to ram through a tax reform bill that was literally being amended on the floor before the vote. One party would not let a federal agency make a sweeping change that the overwhelming majority of Americans do not support. One party would not allow the president of the United States to use Twitter to incite violence and spread out racist messages. I can go on, but the point is that had Clinton won, this year would not have been such a mess as the Republican party bungles it's way around trying to pillage and loot America for the benefit of its donors.

Re: FCC won’t delay vote, says net neutrality supporters are “desperate”

#168

Post by boomboomsubban »

Tloewald wrote: post #147
boomboomsubban wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There isn't a "reasonable" party, the Democrats could have made this a law making repealing it difficult. They found the to give ISPs billions of dollars, and to legalize spying on their customers though. Both parties are a joke, voting for either is an awful choice.

The Democrats were pretty much unable to pass any legislation worth a damn after 2010, which is why everything done afterwards is so easily undone. One party is for dealing with climate change, privacy, net neutrality, healthcare, etc. It may be bad, but it's definitely _less_ bad.

One of my examples was before 2010, the other was introduced by a Democrat and signed into law by one.

They didn't consider universal health care an option, saying they cared about privacy is a sick joke, they didn't make net neutrality a law. They may be slightly less bad but voting for them is still a terrible choice.

Re: FCC won’t delay vote, says net neutrality supporters are “desperate”

#169

Post by peterwwillis »

dawnerd wrote: post #80
peterwwillis wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't you think they've already anticipated lawsuits and have been working on their rebuttal? All they have to argue is that removing the regulations improves competition, or that broadband providers aren't subject to regulations. Net neutrality rules have only been around for a couple of years, they could easily be reversed in one or two more.

Considering the current administrations lawyers claimed to have tweeted admission of obstruction, I wouldn’t be so sure they’re the brightest bunch out there. They probably figured it would be a cakewalk.

That was Trump's personal lawyer. He is separate from the lawyers at the FCC, or the White House Counsel, or the Attorney General, etc. There's a lot of different lawyers. Some of them are political veterans, and some of them are former corporate lawyers. They have a lot of experience between them.

Re: FCC won’t delay vote, says net neutrality supporters are “desperate”

#170

Post by boomboomsubban »

Delmania wrote: post #167
boomboomsubban wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There isn't a "reasonable" party, the Democrats could have made this a law making repealing it difficult. They found the to give ISPs billions of dollars, and to legalize spying on their customers though. Both parties are a joke, voting for either is an awful choice.

That's a lie, plain and simple. 2017 is the year that the claim that both parties are just as bad went from being a somewhat valid commentary on American politics to the cries of the intellectually lazy. One party would not attempt to ram throw a bill that took away health insurance for millions without a back plan. One party would not attempt to ram through a tax reform bill that was literally being amended on the f…

Not a lie, supported third parties for my voting life as it's clear the system is a broken joke. Voting Hillary in wouldn't have created a liberal paradise, just changed the details of the mess we are in.
Post reply on HN