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

AMA: NY AG Schneiderman on net neutrality and protecting our voice in government

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 281 posts

Re: AMA: NY AG Schneiderman on net neutrality and protecting our voice in government

#161

Post by DigitalJack »

AGSchneiderman wrote: post #136
_red wrote: post #41

For those of us who have used the internet 1989 to present, and who are dubious anytime we are told government is taking broad sweeping actions to "protect" us. Please explain the need for this regulation to exist. 1. Please define "network neutrality" - if possible do so without using hand-waving nonsense words, but technical definitions. What strictly defines a "neutrality infraction"? 2. If the internet existed fo…

I’m glad you asked – this is a very important question. In short, the regulation is needed to protect against ISPs prioritizing their profits over their consumers, which is something we have seen in the past where regulations were lacking. As a preliminary matter, it’s important to recognize that net neutrality principles and protections in different forms have actually been around since 2005 and even earlier. So the…

Could you please reference what it was the courts struck down related to Title I enforcement? This is news to me and I'm very interested in a more complete view of things.

Re: AMA: NY AG Schneiderman on net neutrality and protecting our voice in government

#162

Post by bifrost »

jerkstate wrote: post #153
bifrost wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its rarely opaque TBH. Its usually pretty obvious who's failing to hold up to their end of the bargain. Gamers figure this out on their own all the time.

I've seen a lot of cases where people think they figured it out but are wrong. Traceroutes are hard to interpret. Did you know that most paths on the Internet are asymmetric, and traceroute doesn't tell you what the reverse path is?

Yes, I've actually run part of the internet for around 16 years.

Re: AMA: NY AG Schneiderman on net neutrality and protecting our voice in government

#163

Post by bifrost »

DiThi wrote: post #149
bifrost wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regulatory and compliance costs are regressive - they target small businesses because they're aimed at large businesses but tend to adversely affect smaller ones at a greater rate.

Are we talking about net neutrality here? Because I don't think NN can be costly. Net Neutrality is the _natural_ state of computer networks, you don't have to do anything special.

NN regulation is not at all the "natural" state, which is why I think its a bad idea.

Re: AMA: NY AG Schneiderman on net neutrality and protecting our voice in government

#165

Post by AGSchneiderman »

matt4077 wrote: post #15

Could you give us an impression to what degree a trustworthy comment period matters legally in the agency decision-making process? I believe many people consider the comment period a PR gimmick with no relevance, but I got the impression that it is legally required to some degree. If so, is this a substantive requirement with actual protective powers against agencies deciding arbitrarily, or just a veneer of rational…

The law in our country requires federal agencies to provide every citizen with the right to notice and the opportunity to have his or her voice heard in policymaking. We now know from my office’s investigation and other reports of major flaws in the current proceeding that our citizens have not been given the opportunity to be truly heard, because the real voices are being drowned out, negated, or undermined by fake comments, stolen identities, and other irregularities.

I disagree with those people who call the comment period a mere “PR gimmick.” For approximately 70 years America has had laws requiring federal agencies to provide citizens with notice of certain policy changes and an opportunity to make their voices heard. The last time net neutrality was up for consideration, the FCC received an outpouring from the public in favor of Title II net neutrality protections, and the FCC ultimately adopted those rules.

Re: AMA: NY AG Schneiderman on net neutrality and protecting our voice in government

#166

Post by guelo »

_d8fd wrote: post #102

If net neutrality fails, would it makes sense aggressively pursue a legal effort to break up "big cable"? Back in the long distance/DSL days, the local telcos were forced into allowing alternate vendors to sell long distance & Internet service over the copper wire running to one's house. Can we bust up Comcast's strangehold on the Internet service available to my apartment by forcing them to allow any vendor to sell…

The legal authority to regulate the telcos is partly based on their common carrier status, which is the exactly the regulatory category that Ajit Pai wants to remove from ISPs.

Re: AMA: NY AG Schneiderman on net neutrality and protecting our voice in government

#167

Post by jerkstate »

bifrost wrote: post #162
jerkstate wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen a lot of cases where people think they figured it out but are wrong. Traceroutes are hard to interpret. Did you know that most paths on the Internet are asymmetric, and traceroute doesn't tell you what the reverse path is?

Yes, I've actually run part of the internet for around 16 years.

great, maybe you can provide evidence to back up your claim that gamers can (accurately) determine which party is in breach of a peering agreement

Re: AMA: NY AG Schneiderman on net neutrality and protecting our voice in government

#168

Post by randogogogo »

_d8fd wrote: post #102

If net neutrality fails, would it makes sense aggressively pursue a legal effort to break up "big cable"? Back in the long distance/DSL days, the local telcos were forced into allowing alternate vendors to sell long distance & Internet service over the copper wire running to one's house. Can we bust up Comcast's strangehold on the Internet service available to my apartment by forcing them to allow any vendor to sell…

This is exactly the way it was until W's FCC changed it removing wholesale line sharing regulations by declaring ISPs information services.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2007/10/appeals-court-up...

Re: AMA: NY AG Schneiderman on net neutrality and protecting our voice in government

#169

Post by DiThi »

bifrost wrote: post #163
DiThi wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are we talking about net neutrality here? Because I don't think NN can be costly. Net Neutrality is the _natural_ state of computer networks, you don't have to do anything special.

NN regulation is not at all the "natural" state, which is why I think its a bad idea.

Suppose you're a new ISP. Explain what is the cost of complying with NN regulation.

Re: AMA: NY AG Schneiderman on net neutrality and protecting our voice in government

#170

Post by AGSchneiderman »

fosco wrote: post #98

Thank you for your leadership in many areas and especially this one! on a side note, I live far out east on Long Island and only have one viable option for an ISP that enables me to work, others (like satellite) are not viable for me to vpn to different clients, is there anything I can do to help increase competition out here so myself and neighbors have alternatives to "Optimum online"? Thank you again I am very hap…

You’re not alone. Many Americans – especially those far from major cities -- have only a single ISP available, others have only two ISPs. That’s why competition is more limited in the market for broadband than in other markets (because consumers can’t “vote with their feet” by switching to a competitor), and that’s a major reason I believe the existing net neutrality regulation under Title II is needed.
Post reply on HN