Donald Trump could dismantle net neutrality • Hacker News Board

Re: Donald Trump could dismantle net neutrality

#31

Post by ci5er » Fri, Nov 25, 2016, 5:10 PM UTC

Well, sure. In theory, he could do anything by fiat within the bounds of established regulatory discretion. Of course, I wouldn't worry too much about all of the stuff that "Trump could do" until he gets around to doing it. He talks a lot. And, I suspect he won't have time to do all of the stuff that people worry about him potentially doing...

As frustratingly slow as congressional action is -- it's more resistant to being hand-waved away.

The lesson that a lot of anti-Trumpers appear to have taken away from this election is that the electoral college is bad because it lets people who don't live on the coasts have a say too. I would prefer that the lesson were: "Gosh! The President has too much power!"

Re: Donald Trump could dismantle net neutrality

#32

Post by nbb » Fri, Nov 25, 2016, 5:11 PM UTC

jachee wrote: post #16

joeclark77 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"no matter which side you're on"... but what about those against net neutrality? Are we not a side ?

Sell me on the argument against it? Arbitrary operator editorial ability seems like a dangerous and irresponsible thing.

Rabble rabble government bad rabble rabble.

Re: Donald Trump could dismantle net neutrality

#33

Post by JustSomeNobody » Fri, Nov 25, 2016, 5:12 PM UTC

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #6

dogma1138 wrote: post #5

Will dismantling the legacy also include scaling back the drone and surveillance programmes? Or is Obama's legacy is only the good parts?

The reason the drone and surveillance programs didn't take a large part in election propaganda this past year is that violating individuals' rights has bipartisan support.

Up voted because I cannot see how anyone could disagree with this. Obama didn't do _anything_ to stem the flow of citizens' data being funneled into the government machinery.

Re: Donald Trump could dismantle net neutrality

#34

Post by rayiner » Fri, Nov 25, 2016, 5:15 PM UTC

briandear wrote: post #21

hx87 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Certainly true of the libertarian right, but not of the social conservative right, who have been rather inconsistent in opposing "FCC legislating TV language and obscenity" and "DEA or Department of Health legislating controlled substances".

As a self-identified member of the libertarian right I absolutely agree. I get into this debate with so-called Conservatives frequently: smaller government and less regulation means marriage equality (at the state level,) the dismantling of the DEA (leaving it to states to make their own rules,) and the elimination of the Dept. of Education (leaving that to states as well,) among many other things. It also calls for…

That makes it seem like federalism is a procedural issue orthogonal to any particular substantive policies. But the US is, Constitutionally, an economic free trade zone. As a result, states cannot use the most potent economic tools to ensure enforcement of their laws. Even if the majority of people would prefer to have environmental or worker protection laws, a minority of people in a few states can create a nationwide race to the bottom.

As a practical matter, saying that some issue is the proper domain of the states is equivalent to saying it can't be effectively regulated at all.

And it's not like the framers were unaware of that dynamic. They empowered the federal government to regulate interstate commerce precisely as a foil to the prohibition on states to do so.

Re: Donald Trump could dismantle net neutrality

#35

Post by seibelj » Fri, Nov 25, 2016, 5:16 PM UTC

This is an unpopular opinion here, but I think net neutrality is too absolutist. If a company wants to pay to have all the data of an app be free for their users, that's great in my opinion. I don't want ISP's to extort small players or artificially slow down anyone. But if a company wants their video streaming app to be zero-rated by paying all the data costs, that seems like a business decision to me. Some people would rather everyone suffer than letting the market innovate on data plans.

Re: Donald Trump could dismantle net neutrality

#36

Post by dcposch » Fri, Nov 25, 2016, 5:17 PM UTC

ci5er wrote: post #31

Well, sure. In theory, he could do anything by fiat within the bounds of established regulatory discretion. Of course, I wouldn't worry too much about all of the stuff that "Trump could do" until he gets around to doing it. He talks a lot. And, I suspect he won't have time to do all of the stuff that people worry about him potentially doing... As frustratingly slow as congressional action is -- it's more resistant to…

> The lesson that a lot of anti-Trumpers appear to have taken away from this election is that the electoral college is bad because it lets people who don't live on the coasts have a say too

No. Everyone should have an equal say. That's what national popular vote ensures. Clinton got over 2m more votes than her opponent, but will not be President. That's not democracy.

I completely agree with your point about limiting executive power.

Re: Donald Trump could dismantle net neutrality

#37

Post by saboot » Fri, Nov 25, 2016, 5:18 PM UTC

ci5er wrote: post #31

Well, sure. In theory, he could do anything by fiat within the bounds of established regulatory discretion. Of course, I wouldn't worry too much about all of the stuff that "Trump could do" until he gets around to doing it. He talks a lot. And, I suspect he won't have time to do all of the stuff that people worry about him potentially doing... As frustratingly slow as congressional action is -- it's more resistant to…

I have talked directly to people in higher positions in telecom industries. They are expecting a reversal on net neutrality towards more "market-friendly" positions.

Yes, this is a personal anecdote. No, I don't have a citation.

Hope for the best, but expect and prepare for the worst.

Re: Donald Trump could dismantle net neutrality

#38

Post by yequalsx » Fri, Nov 25, 2016, 5:18 PM UTC

ci5er wrote: post #31

Well, sure. In theory, he could do anything by fiat within the bounds of established regulatory discretion. Of course, I wouldn't worry too much about all of the stuff that "Trump could do" until he gets around to doing it. He talks a lot. And, I suspect he won't have time to do all of the stuff that people worry about him potentially doing... As frustratingly slow as congressional action is -- it's more resistant to…

Congressional action can be slow but I think it's clear that Republicans are not going slow in this coming Congress. Your statement about the electoral college is uncalled for. Your comment would have been great without that sentence.

Re: Donald Trump could dismantle net neutrality

#39

Post by throwaway729 » Fri, Nov 25, 2016, 5:20 PM UTC

ci5er wrote: post #31

Well, sure. In theory, he could do anything by fiat within the bounds of established regulatory discretion. Of course, I wouldn't worry too much about all of the stuff that "Trump could do" until he gets around to doing it. He talks a lot. And, I suspect he won't have time to do all of the stuff that people worry about him potentially doing... As frustratingly slow as congressional action is -- it's more resistant to…

> because it lets people who don't live on the coasts have a say too

I'm from the midwest and I still don't understand this sentiment. Why should the power of your vote depend on where you choose to lay your head down at night? That seems extremely anti-democratic to me.

It's not that people who don't live on the coasts shouldn't have a say. It's that if someone wins a popular vote by 2 million fucking votes, then they should probably win the election.

We already have the senate. The house also favors less populous states, even if not by design.

And state governments.

People who don't live on the coasts have an enormous amount of say without getting an extremely disproportionate voice in the presidential election.

Re: Donald Trump could dismantle net neutrality

#40

Post by skirunman » Fri, Nov 25, 2016, 5:23 PM UTC

dcposch wrote: post #36

ci5er wrote: post #31

Well, sure. In theory, he could do anything by fiat within the bounds of established regulatory discretion. Of course, I wouldn't worry too much about all of the stuff that "Trump could do" until he gets around to doing it. He talks a lot. And, I suspect he won't have time to do all of the stuff that people worry about him potentially doing... As frustratingly slow as congressional action is -- it's more resistant to…

> The lesson that a lot of anti-Trumpers appear to have taken away from this election is that the electoral college is bad because it lets people who don't live on the coasts have a say too No. Everyone should have an equal say. That's what national popular vote ensures. Clinton got over 2m more votes than her opponent, but will not be President. That's not democracy. I completely agree with your point about limiting…

Exactly, this is not "democracy". However, the USA is not a democracy, but a constitutional republic. Electing the POTUS via a national popular vote would be rife with more problems than it solves. This article does a good job explaining this topic. http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2004/11/the-elector...