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

One Step Closer to a Closed Internet

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 223 posts

Re: One Step Closer to a Closed Internet

#191

Post by bigbugbag »

guelo wrote: post #42

Google and Facebook's silence on net neutrality is deafening. It makes no sense. Are they thinking they'll be able to pay for access to the customers that their competitors won't be able to afford?

Aren't those two mentioned in the death of transit ?

Besides, facebook is a fierce opposant to net neutrality, remember their facebook basics offer as an attempt to conquer more users in emergent markets ? Pay less than a regular ISP and have an internet access limited to facebook and its partners, the exact opposite of net neutrality.

Re: One Step Closer to a Closed Internet

#192

Post by loup-vaillant »

AstralStorm wrote: post #163
loup-vaillant wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First, bandwidth is limited. It's whatever download and upload you sign for. Second, there is no such thin as "full speed access to Netflix" or whatever. It's limited by your own bandwidth at least. Third, when you pay for an internet access, you pay for a public IP and associated bandwidth, so you can send and receive as much IP packet as your bandwidth will allow you, no matter the provenance or destination . In pr…

Although sometimes the money you pay is actually for a caching proxy space within the ISP's control for a set of services. Very rarely a low latency link. (like VoIP/real time specialized services)

> sometimes the money you pay is actually for a caching proxy

That would make sense, and I agree it could be sold and charged separately, though I don't like the conflict of interest (the temptation of prioritising proxy data at the expense of everything else).

More to the point, is that even possible with generalised TLS? Or are big streaming web sites tailored for this capability?

Re: One Step Closer to a Closed Internet

#194

Post by bigbugbag »

One Step Closer to a Closed Internet ... in the USA

This probably means internet business will move outside the USA where it is way too centralized, some good could come out of such a move.

On the other hand we have mozilla not putting money where its mouth is, not giving a shit about non-majority users and using skewed users tracking to justify those decisions. Have a look at how they dropped alsa support and refused to admit they made a mistake rejecting the responsibility on people disabling their spying, refused to backtrack when someone came forward to fix their code and maintain it.

When mozilla's action will be in line with the air they push out of their lung, I'll pay attention and support them again. Right now and after 15+ years supporting them, I'm giving them the same support they give me, the faster mozilla fails and disappears the faster a competent body can replace them and start doing the right thing and give the right direction to firefox.

Re: One Step Closer to a Closed Internet

#195

Post by simonh »

pitaj wrote: post #173
arcticbull wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(1) The FCC exists (almost?) solely to regulate private and not public entities. (2) There's no evidence that local municipalities running infrastructure and allowing telecoms to compete on services instead will reduce competition. It will likely increase it by lowering barrier to entry, as you can see all over Europe. Can you cite evidence of municipalities refusing to allow fiber installs? I did a lot of research a…

(1) I know that but it doesn't matter to me (2) I wasn't talking about "local municipalities running infrastructure" I was talking about them being used to prevent competition as you specifically gave an example of. (3) I know, but the application of that regulation is at the discretion of the FCC, which, as we've seen, can be easily swayed the opposite way. That's why its better to have legislation.

This has been legislated and the legislation has delegated this authority to the FCC.

I agree completely that explicit legislation would be far better, but in the absence of that it's the FCCs job to regulate. Saying they should abrogate that responsibility and not regulate on general principle doesn't address the issue. They are required do their job to serve the public interest.

Re: One Step Closer to a Closed Internet

#196

Post by mSparks »

orthecreedence wrote: post #4

I want to say this first: I love net neutrality and I support it 100%. That said, I think this battle will go on forever until either - We have a decentralized network anybody can plug into without ISPs (mesh net) or - Cities build their own fiber infrastructure (or 4G towers for rural areas) and rent it out to companies. Cable/DSL become a thing of the past, and you connect via radio/public wifi/direct fiber. This b…

Taking a devils advocate position for a moment.

I wonder if deminishing "net neutrality" will be "yet another nail" in the copyright industries coffin.

The closest analogy I can think of to a historic non neutral network is AOL. And we (should) all know how that worked out.

Re: One Step Closer to a Closed Internet

#197

Post by a2decrow »

bogomipz wrote: post #88
a2decrow wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You do realize that not all technology originates in the US, yeah? The US isn't the center of the world. You don't have a monopoly on technology or IT and in fact, most of it wasn't even conceived in the US or by US inventors. You need to get off your high horse about "US-America being the greatest country in the world" because it's not. And to answer your question, no, I don't use Google, nor Youtube and especially…

I didn't say that all tech originate from the U.S, I even referenced a Swedish company in my comment. I never said the U.S was the greatest country in the world or even implied that. You are projecting. You also seem to have a quite a chip on your shoulder. You have no idea what my nationality is. That being said please tell me the country that has produced more successful tech companies than the US? Or what country…

Let me ask a counter question.

How much innovation in other countries was stifled because of the way the US companies operate?

And to get back to Google and Facebook, these two companies are building walled gardens not unlike the way ISPs in the US operate. They either force the competition out or buy them. They do everything in their power to keep you inside their bubble. In a few years down the road, we may just end up with only the services those companies offer and no alternatives to go to, because everything that threatens their dominance will be suppressed with everything they got.

Just like the US ISPs are doing it and the US government is doing it.

The US getting some of their own medicine certainly isn't a bad thing. Maybe it'll wake them up.

Re: One Step Closer to a Closed Internet

#199

Post by strin »

Love the vision of neutrality, but it feels disheartening that net neutrality has been broken with increasing number of platform companies.

Google's algorithm decide which content show up in search results, and Facebook's ranking model determines the news you will see.

Same wth app store, only apps that fit the "Apple philosophy" can get approved.

Since most of our times on internet nowadays are spent on platforms, it turns out unconsciously we've already lived in a "closed internet".

Re: One Step Closer to a Closed Internet

#200

Post by Moru »

orthecreedence wrote: post #4

I want to say this first: I love net neutrality and I support it 100%. That said, I think this battle will go on forever until either - We have a decentralized network anybody can plug into without ISPs (mesh net) or - Cities build their own fiber infrastructure (or 4G towers for rural areas) and rent it out to companies. Cable/DSL become a thing of the past, and you connect via radio/public wifi/direct fiber. This b…

I think you are right, the free market just don't exist if one ISP owns the network to your home.

My house in a tiny village in the north of Sweden had 100 Mbps up/down 15 years ago. My apartment in a slightly bigger town (2000 people) had 10/10 Mbps 20(?) years ago. All this was never above $35 per month. Right now we pay $28 for 100/100 Mbps including phone. And yes, it actually measures to 100/100 Mbps if you test it. I can freely choose between five providers with the click of a button.

Post reply on HN