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

Startups Seek Tech Solution to Net Neutrality Repeal

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 71 posts

Re: Startups Seek Tech Solution to Net Neutrality Repeal

#61

Post by runako »

turc1656 wrote: post #38
runako wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ISPs can trivially prioritize content from preferred providers while throttling all other traffic, including VPN traffic. VPNs do not solve this problem.

yeah but all your internet traffic would then be throttled. Not just certain services. Using a VPN essentially takes away everything from them and reduces their only tool to a hammer and forcing everything to look like a nail. There is no granularity. All your traffic goes to one location. They can't see what it is or what the final endpoint is because of encryption. So they can't use it to build a profile/data on yo…

That's true, but in practice most consumers wouldn't notice. That's because the whitelisted services would most likely include those data-hungry services used most frequently by consumers: Netflix, Hulu, YouTube, Facebook, etc. which are operated by big providers. This was how Comcast operated in ca. 2013.

The bet is ISPs would be very comfortable throttling traffic, as long as whitelisted services were not affected. (They see this as a revenue generator, because they can sell fast-lane access to companies who don't want their customers' bandwidth throttled.) ISPs that go this route will likely offer a (consumer-paid) option to allow VPN traffic to use the fast lane.

Re: Startups Seek Tech Solution to Net Neutrality Repeal

#62

Post by SmirkingRevenge »

wav-part wrote: post #51
turc1656 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or fixing an already solved problem. Using a VPN addresses basically everything they are trying to fix.

Even without vpn, if non-preferred takes most of the bandwidth for a user, it will be apparent to him that he is getting less speed than what he paid for.

And per the new (lack of) rules, all they have to do is carve out exceptions for vpn traffic in their consumer SLA. The FCC cant do anything nor can the FTC, so long as they aren't blatantly falsely advertising.

What are you going to do if you don't like it? Switch providers?

They aren't going to let such am easy work around get in their way.

Re: Startups Seek Tech Solution to Net Neutrality Repeal

#64

Post by briandear »

thaumaturgy wrote: post #39
Danihan wrote: post #2

Isn't the solution just more ISP competition?

A local ISP in a semi-rural area has been putting their business on the line for over a decade now to build out broadband in the area. They're targeting under-served, denser housing swaths of the region where there is little to no broadband competition. The price tag for the initial stage of the build out is in the several millions of dollars. The first-stage service area would be under 1,000 homes. They hope to char…

A startup like Mattermark raised 17 million simply to aggregate data about startups. Surely investors would be interested in an actual business with a clearly defined business model — or any business model for that matter. There’s a graveyard of startups that were able to raise a lot of money and not do basically anything other than raise more money. Didn’t Leap raise a billion dollars for a VR headset thingy that hasn’t even shipped? Surely there’s 50 million for an ISP startup.

With the ability to be something beyond a common utility, there is going to be interest in investing in ISP innovation — especially tech that provides fiber speed without ripping up the landscape.

Re: Startups Seek Tech Solution to Net Neutrality Repeal

#65

Post by turc1656 »

SAI_Peregrinus wrote: post #60
turc1656 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i don't believe that's true. they won't be able to see what you are accessing other than the VPN as long as you are routing all traffic through it (which you should be). so it's all or nothing for them. They can't really pick and choose what to prioritize because they can't see what it is due to the encryption.

They can easily choose what to prioritize. VPNs won't be prioritized, so any traffic over them will get slowed down.

Right, I think we're talking about two different things. Yes, they can choose to not prioritize the VPN traffic. But they won't be able to, for example, slow down Netflix because they have a competing on-demand service because they won't be able to see the traffic. So it's all or nothing when on the VPN. All of your traffic is throttled or none of it will be.

Re: Startups Seek Tech Solution to Net Neutrality Repeal

#66

Post by briandear »

Chaebixi wrote: post #9
Danihan wrote: post #2

Isn't the solution just more ISP competition?

That's easy to say, but there's the well-known last mine problem. How many separate companies will be willing to run cabling to your home just to compete bitterly with an incumbent? And even if that may happen in your neighborhood, will it happen nationwide? What about rural areas where you're lucky to have one fast ISP?

Perhaps we should be innovating in that last mile problem.. Surely there are smart people working to engineer tech to avoid running cable.

Re: Startups Seek Tech Solution to Net Neutrality Repeal

#67

Post by decebalus1 »

g09980 wrote: post #55
decebalus1 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stop spreading disinformation, the regulations from 2015 and reclassification is just legislative juggling. Net neutrality was an issue from way before that (1). See numerous violations (2) and try to assert what changes does a startup have if they are in direct competition with a service which the ISP offers along with internet. (1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality_in_the_United_S... (2) https://www.free…

That source (Free Press) is an advocacy organization, so it by definition presents one side of a story. The pros without the cons, or something. I'm in the boat where I trust companies more than I trust the government, and believe that the original NN regulation was a path for the government to start actively censoring the internet, China-style. Want to see more debate (even if devil's advocate) along these lines ins…

> That source (Free Press) is an advocacy organization, so it by definition presents one side of a story. The pros without the cons, or something.

That doesn't make it wrong. You can research each instance and find it documented in other sources too.

> I'm in the boat where I trust companies more than I trust the government, and believe that the original NN regulation was a path for the government to start actively censoring the internet, China-style.

This belief is flawed or misdirected for the following reasons:

1. Revolving door policy, lobbying and elimination of PAC contribution limits for corporations has unified the two and for all intents and purposes there is absolutely no difference between government and companies when it comes to who should be trusted.

2. the government doesn't need to censor the internet anymore. For years, deliberate propaganda using sockpuppets has been proven way more effective in influencing public opinion than straight-up censorship, especially in western societies. Also, if you're looking at censorship, look no further than companies with no backbone but with a lot of greed, not the government (1) (2) (3).

3. Censorship is a different matter. I hate it when people bring it up to oppose NN as it diverts the conversation. NN is about regulating a public utility and limiting monolopies, not necessarily free speech or free internet (whatever the hell that means as I don't know anymore after the republicans use it to define exactly the opposite of what the common understanding would be). Regardless of regulation, referring to censorship, look at Comcast passing the buck (4): "We do not and will not block, throttle, or discriminate against lawful content. " Who decides what's lawful or not? If the Government deems far-left/right or any other website opposing something which the government/military-industrial complex deems as unlawful, how does that work with\without net neutrality rules? Just look at what happened to Wikileaks. Overnight, censorship and corporate economic boycott was in full effect, regardless of laws or regulations.

(1) http://money.cnn.com/2017/08/24/technology/business/cloudfla...

(2) http://blog.dilbert.com/2016/10/03/the-week-i-became-a-targe...

(3) https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/30/opinion/sunday/the-blog-t...

(4) https://twitter.com/comcast/status/933394263689351175?lang=e...

Re: Startups Seek Tech Solution to Net Neutrality Repeal

#68

Post by SmirkingRevenge »

turc1656 wrote: post #65
SAI_Peregrinus wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They can easily choose what to prioritize. VPNs won't be prioritized, so any traffic over them will get slowed down.

Right, I think we're talking about two different things. Yes, they can choose to not prioritize the VPN traffic. But they won't be able to, for example, slow down Netflix because they have a competing on-demand service because they won't be able to see the traffic. So it's all or nothing when on the VPN. All of your traffic is throttled or none of it will be.

Right. So in other words a VPN isnt actually a work around at all.

Re: Startups Seek Tech Solution to Net Neutrality Repeal

#69

Post by decebalus1 »

decebalus1 wrote: post #67
g09980 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That source (Free Press) is an advocacy organization, so it by definition presents one side of a story. The pros without the cons, or something. I'm in the boat where I trust companies more than I trust the government, and believe that the original NN regulation was a path for the government to start actively censoring the internet, China-style. Want to see more debate (even if devil's advocate) along these lines ins…

> That source (Free Press) is an advocacy organization, so it by definition presents one side of a story. The pros without the cons, or something. That doesn't make it wrong. You can research each instance and find it documented in other sources too. > I'm in the boat where I trust companies more than I trust the government, and believe that the original NN regulation was a path for the government to start actively c…

I forgot one thing. I would definitely be in favor of no regulation what-so-ever on the internet, but only in the context of a healthy ISP ecosystem. I get where you're coming from with your opinion, I really do.

What I'm not in favor is giving an existing oligopoly (which came to power mainly due to point 1. in my previous post) an unbalanced ratio of power over its relationship with the consumer (I include here end-users such as us and small/large companies which leverage internet access to sell their services) on the premise of the 'free market' and the promise that corporations won't do any harm. I don't trust that at all.

Historically, Verizon and AT&T haven't lived up even to their commitments which were made when corporate mergers were approved. Why should I trust that they will not do unethical market practices with the nuclear bomb that the republicans put in their hands? Why won't the legislature eliminate FBAR reporting for individuals making less than $1M/yr on the promise that I won't move all my money out of the country to avoid taxes? I promise I won't do it but if you catch me, there will be no legal repercussions, right? I would call this the 'Financial freedom bill, reverting the draconian fiscal regulations for the common man'

Me, particularly, I was stuck with Comcast as my only option for about 5 years (couple years ago, now I have 2 ISP to choose from). They jacked up my prices for no reason and there was nothing I could do. Absolutely nothing. Why should I trust them now to NOT throttle my content or make me pay extra now that they legally can do whatever they want? Doing so will be cataloged as a 'free market' practice now and if I don't agree, I should change carriers, right? Change it to the other member of the same lobbying group which made this deregulation possible which will in turn throttle content.

Re: Startups Seek Tech Solution to Net Neutrality Repeal

#70

Post by Chaebixi »

nawitus wrote: post #23
Chaebixi wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's easy to say, but there's the well-known last mine problem. How many separate companies will be willing to run cabling to your home just to compete bitterly with an incumbent? And even if that may happen in your neighborhood, will it happen nationwide? What about rural areas where you're lucky to have one fast ISP?

In other countries there are laws which force the cable owner to rent the last mile to any ISP.

I'd guess countries with that kind of sensible regulation also can manage net neutrality regulations...
Post reply on HN