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

FCC plan would give Internet providers power to choose the sites customers see

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

551–560 of 674 posts

Re: FCC plan would give Internet providers power to choose the sites customers see

#551

Post by jimktrains2 »

guiambros wrote: post #307
nathan_long wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The argument that Netflix needs to pay Comcast is absurd. Why are people buying high-bandwidth plans from ISPs? Because they want to use services like Netflix . Netflix is not costing ISPs money, it's giving them something to sell . Imagine that taxi drivers want to charge the airport for overwhelming them with passengers and you'll see the absurdity.

> The argument that Netflix needs to pay Comcast is absurd. Absurd for you, not for the carriers. And, unfortunately, they are the ones dealing the cards now. Outrageous, for sure, but according to Chairman Pai's plan, carriers will be able to charge both consumers and content providers.

> Absurd for you, not for the carriers.

Yup, and only because those same carriers are making competition impossible, if not illegal.

Re: FCC plan would give Internet providers power to choose the sites customers see

#552

Post by Coincoin »

LocalH wrote: post #530

I find it funny how they have completely shed the notion that the Internet is an "information superhighway". What they wish to do is akin to having a middleman that charges you a different toll to use the same piece of road depending on your destination. Going to Walmart? That'll be $5. Going to the bar? That'll be $50. Going to the strip bar? That'll be $500.

...going to that political rally? I'm afraid you can't pass sir.

Re: FCC plan would give Internet providers power to choose the sites customers see

#553

Post by Taniwha »

The way I see it if you edit some of the content passing though your service you're responsible for all of it.

If companies want to do away with net neutrality they also have to lose the legal protections that being a common carrier give you .... just wait until the family of someone who died in a terrorist act sues you because the terrorists used your ISP .... because you're responsible for ALL the content on your wires

Re: FCC plan would give Internet providers power to choose the sites customers see

#554

Post by Delmania »

matt4077 wrote: post #391
Delmania wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What is the actual reason they shouldn't? In many areas of the United States, there is only one ISP available. Part of this is due to the high cost of entry, but the ISPs also have a past filled with rather shady activity. Verizon was given federal money to expand their network, did a fraction of the work, and then used their influence to pocket the rest. Comcast will throw lawsuits at new ISPs in order to bankrupt…

No, no, no! This is not the problem with net neutrality. This is some generic argument for the regulation of monopolies, and as such, it is fine. But net neutrality is devious beyond the abuse of a local monopoly. It doesn't matter if there are ten ISPs available to any given consumer. The problem is that creates a new monopoly: that of access to an ISPs subscriber. See my aunt-comment (to this) for the full argument…

They can do both with NN gone. Force the consumers to pay for different packages and lanes, and then force the services to pay for access to the subscribers.

Re: FCC plan would give Internet providers power to choose the sites customers see

#555

Post by gfodor »

Taniwha wrote: post #553

The way I see it if you edit some of the content passing though your service you're responsible for all of it. If companies want to do away with net neutrality they also have to lose the legal protections that being a common carrier give you .... just wait until the family of someone who died in a terrorist act sues you because the terrorists used your ISP .... because you're responsible for ALL the content on your w…

This is an interesting point. I hope the EFF et al are on standby to start filing lawsuits once this starts happening to see if it's actually legally sound.

Re: FCC plan would give Internet providers power to choose the sites customers see

#556

Post by gfodor »

marsrover wrote: post #494

The other day I was sitting at home with my family. My parents, two siblings and my grandma, who moved from Germany after WW2. My parents and siblings are sitting around talking about how Trump is going to save America. My brother mentions how a guy in town (also a Trump supporter) said he's a fascist. I'm sitting on the other side of the table and my grandma is looking down at her plate not saying anything. She's ab…

I guess you should ask her if she thinks we are about to go through the 40s or the 60s again.

Re: FCC plan would give Internet providers power to choose the sites customers see

#557

Post by himom »

Fuck Ajit Pai. Internet access (and healthcare) is like universal education, a basic human right. I hope a news organization finds some resignation- or imprisonment-worthy dirt on him... bribery, corruption or other such revolving-door impropriety.

Re: FCC plan would give Internet providers power to choose the sites customers see

#558

Post by himom »

frogpelt wrote: post #368
ghewgill wrote: post #89

For those who don't understand why net neutrality is important, it is worthwhile to read about the history of communications (telephone, radio, TV). There is an excellent book by Tim Wu called The Master Switch [0] which investigates the history of communications (with an American focus), describes how each industry start out open to all (farmers using fences for telephone, independent radio broadcasters), and each o…

This Net Neutrality issue sounds similar to the issue America faced in the late 1800s with the railroads. Some shippers (Standard Oil) wanted to monopolize the rails or at least they wanted rebates for shipping their freight. Others argued that the rails should offer the same rates to all shippers since they were using eminent domain in some cases to obtain property and they should exist as a shared resource.

AT&T is rapidly becoming what it once was, especially if the TW merger goes through.

We’d be renting Wi-Fi cards, access and with additional fees by the second and byte if they had their way.

Re: FCC plan would give Internet providers power to choose the sites customers see

#559

Post by himom »

skywhopper wrote: post #387
dmix wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The problem is that ISP shills that make these decisions don't care about public opposition But they do care most about making money from the public and no one has convinced me that filtering internet packages by website makes any technical, marketing, or business model sense at all. This has proven to be incredibly unpopular idea with the public for over a decade as well, whenever it has come up in the press. It w…

You're assuming that most people have access to more than one ISP (they don't), or that statements by ISPs about what they intend to do or not do are truthful (they aren't). Specifically statements promising they would never do anything that would break net neutrality rules, while arguing against the imposition of net neutrality rules, would not make sense. Why oppose something you have no intention of doing?

Very true. Rural folks have it worst: monopoly or no access at all. If a company like Sinclair also owned the broadband, only payola TV would work, YouTube access and bandwidth could a tiered add-on, they’d block whichever company didn’t pay the extortion protection money with no means of recourse.

Also, for everyone, billing would become more complexified, obscured to extract more money from consumers and thwart cost calculation and comparing with (the few remaining, if any) competitors.

Post reply on HN