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

201–206 of 206 posts

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

#201

Post by tripzilch »

slededit wrote: post #176
notgoodenuff88 wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 e…

The dutch east india company controlled half the world at one point. Do you really believe today's corporations are more powerful? Your quote says laws should evolve with the people which lends to neither of our arguments as we're discussing how it should evolve not "if".

"The world" during the high days of the VOC was only 8% of the population today so it's kind of difficult to honestly compare, IMHO.

But more importantly, the VOC "perished under corruption" not because it was dragged to court :) It's not really fair to say that "the system" dealt with it when it obviously just succumbed over time under the inevitability of impermanence.

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

#202

Post by isleyaardvark »

notgoodenuff88 wrote: post #161
slededit wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 e…

Thomas Jefferson had more direct opinions on corporations, having tried (and failed) to add an 11th amendment limiting their power. For example:

"I hope we shall take warning from the example [of England] and crush in it’s birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength, and to bid defiance to the laws of their country."

https://books.google.com/books?id=KCFfDQAAQBAJ&lpg=PT110&ots...

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

#203

Post by slededit »

tripzilch wrote: post #201
slededit wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The dutch east india company controlled half the world at one point. Do you really believe today's corporations are more powerful? Your quote says laws should evolve with the people which lends to neither of our arguments as we're discussing how it should evolve not "if".

"The world" during the high days of the VOC was only 8% of the population today so it's kind of difficult to honestly compare, IMHO. But more importantly, the VOC "perished under corruption" not because it was dragged to court :) It's not really fair to say that "the system" dealt with it when it obviously just succumbed over time under the inevitability of impermanence.

The Dutch east India company had standing armies and war ships. To say that modern companies are more powerfully merely because of population growth is a bit of a stretch.

How they came to an end is irrelevant to whether courts are effective referees unless you believe the only fair thing is to destroy large companies.

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

#204

Post by boomboomsubban »

Tloewald wrote: post #197
boomboomsubban wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea that it is a binary choice is a false one. The two parties will drone on about how other candidates are "spoilers" who only benefit who you see as the worse choice. That's nonsense, your vote should go towards who you think represents your interests best. Yes, that vision ultimately needs more than just a third party win. The system itself is broken. It's still a better choice. I'm not knowledgeable enough a…

> The two parties will drone on about how other candidates are "spoilers" who only benefit who you see as the worse choice. That's nonsense, your vote should go towards who you think represents your interests best. You need to learn Civics. I could write in my own name since my opinions are closer to my opinions than the Green candidate. What would that accomplish? If, one day, the US introduces proportional or prefe…

>I could write in my own name since my opinions are closer to my opinions than the Green candidate. What would that accomplish?

I don't think I have the political knowledge or general knowledge to represent my interests best in government, and failing to campaign shows I'm not prepared for the responsibility. I can't say for certain, but I assume it's the same for you. If I'm wrong, you should vote for yourself. I imagine most candidates do.

Yes, some better form of representation is part of my ultimate goal. The fear of small parties having a disproportionate influence doesn't worry me, small groups already have a disproportionate influence.

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

#205

Post by notgoodenuff88 »

slededit wrote: post #203
tripzilch wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The world" during the high days of the VOC was only 8% of the population today so it's kind of difficult to honestly compare, IMHO. But more importantly, the VOC "perished under corruption" not because it was dragged to court :) It's not really fair to say that "the system" dealt with it when it obviously just succumbed over time under the inevitability of impermanence.

The Dutch east India company had standing armies and war ships. To say that modern companies are more powerfully merely because of population growth is a bit of a stretch. How they came to an end is irrelevant to whether courts are effective referees unless you believe the only fair thing is to destroy large companies.

The fact that they had warships is pointless. We've seen companies today tank the global economy for no reason other than their own gambling fetish.

People died because of it. Entirely families were wiped out economically. People are dying from lack of preventative healthcare because corporations think it would be too expensive.

Corporations don't need literal guns to destroy lives.

The courts are bound by laws and their historical interpretation in the court. Judges, scholars, and lawmakers themselves say we need to change the laws. But the location of the goal posts are well known to power players, and how to succeed within.

You want free market competition, make them learn them again. We're stagnating because we have to mind the MBAs, and stay within the boundaries they've been told to maintain.

We've moved beyond open warfare. The damage is being done in different ways. Set aside your guns fetish; nukes mean that large scale resolution of differences through war is not tenable.

It's clear to me this conversation will not go much further. So I'm done with it. TTFN

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

#206

Post by rocketpastsix »

ConceptJunkie wrote: post #119
craftyguy wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Give me candidates worth voting for first.

This is the most important issue. The system is rigged in favor of the incumbents in many, many ways.

Nothing stopping you from running, even if it is to just push the conversation in a certain direction.
Post reply on HN