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

Donald Trump could dismantle net neutrality

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 248 posts

Re: Donald Trump could dismantle net neutrality

#71

Post by ajross »

curt15 wrote: post #53
ajross wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a Heritage piece (republican think tank, and not even one with a particular philosophical lean: Heritage is a straight ticket republican mouthpiece) written in the days before the 2004 election when it looked like Bush was going to lose the popular vote again like he did in 2000. That's, like, the precise opposite of a measured review of the subject. Seriously?

This comment simply attacks the source while doing nothing to actually refute its arguments.

First: Yes, it does. Because it was presented as an "explanation" for problems with popular vote, and it's literally the opposite: it's an advocacy piece, and readers need to know that before clicking on the link.

Second: my response wasn't to Heritage, but to skirunman above, who didn't explain any of this stuff either. If you want to ding me for attacking the source, you need to cop to the fact that the whole subthread is an appeal to authority. And that authority is pretty suspect.

Re: Donald Trump could dismantle net neutrality

#73

Post by logmeout »

ZeroGravitas wrote: post #47
skirunman wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

The US is a democracy. It is also a constitutional republic. There's no conflict between the terms. The Heritage Foundation is smart enough to realise the EC favours Republicans and therefore the policies it promotes and so will spin anything to make that seems like a good idea, because the will of the people being enacted would work against their goals. Finally, and more a reply to the parent comment, even a popular…

The US is not a democracy it is a democratic republic.

Re: Donald Trump could dismantle net neutrality

#74

Post by cheetos »

throwaway729 wrote: post #39
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 t…

> Why should the power of your vote depend on where you choose to lay your head down at night?

Because it turns out that has a very strong effect on the power of your vote :)

The electoral college exists to balance the voices of citizens in cities vs. "the country." It checks the power of highly dense populations who are more likely to vote for pro-city federal policies, so the needs of those in "the country" are not ignored.

I didn't support Trump and live in a super-blue city, but when the EC was explained to me this way, it made sense. I don't want to see the US further turn into a place where you can only succeed if you live in a city.

Re: Donald Trump could dismantle net neutrality

#75

Post by charonn0 »

skirunman wrote: post #40
dcposch wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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...

Whatever else it means, "republic" doesn't mean minority rule.

Re: Donald Trump could dismantle net neutrality

#76

Post by Natsu »

throwawayIndian wrote: post #7
dominotw wrote: post #4

Wapo king of fake news[1]. Also, Title edited for maximum click bait. 1. http://original.antiwar.com/thomas-knapp/2016/11/20/washingt...

> Wapo king of fake news[1] WaPo has been central to a lot of real news in recent history. Why do you say that it is fake? No matter which side you're on it is in our interest to not let net neutrality go down without any resistance.

Dunno what they think, but Wikileaks has this:

https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/2699

Note the subject of this thread is "WaPo Party."

Anu Rangappa is a senior DNC adviser is writing to DNC national fundraiser director Jordan Kaplan on September 22, 2015 saying:

"They aren't going to give us a price per ticket and do not want their party listed in any package we are selling to donors. If we let them know we have donors in town who will be at the debate, we can add them to the list for the party."

Kaplan then replies with: "Great - we were never going to list since the lawyers told us we cannot do it."

Re: Donald Trump could dismantle net neutrality

#77

Post by vmarsy »

seibelj wrote: post #35

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 w…

You might have a wrong definition of net neutrality. What the consumer-facing ISPs want is more something like tier levels: basic tier gets only 2mbps, platinum tier get 250mbps for instance (and other tiers in between) . So if I'm Spotify and I pay platinum , it is extorting other players, especially small ones as they can't afford paying platinum level. This is even more true if ISP decide that only one music app can be platinum, forcing all music services to bid for that platinum spot, raising the cost for it even more.

In the meantime, Backbone providers still provide Pandora, deezer, iA theoretical counter argument would simply say: but in that case free market would penalize that ISP as consumers would choose a different one. But I think that's a naive answer because : some people don't see/know the issue, Spotify is good enough, as lycos search and MySpace were good enough at their prime. and more importantly it's a fact that 3 out of 4 Americans do not have a choice in high speed broadband provider. And for those who do, they're sometimes locked in because they still want that cable TV bundled with it. (hypothetically, This would be even more true if that bundle TV provided HBO at 250mbps where regular HBO would be deprioritezed because they didn't pay the platinum level, instead Netflix got it. HBO was business savvy enough to get prioritized via the bundle story.)

Re: Donald Trump could dismantle net neutrality

#78

Post by meric »

ZeroGravitas wrote: post #54
throwaway729 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> for the Trump supporter this is not a bad thing, per-se This is a bad thing for all consumers, period.

I think they mean, this will not damage Trump, as it will be spun as a success, even as it causes damage to the average person. Probably applies to many, if not all, of his policies.

He has implemented zero policies and net neutrality is not a topic even currently discussed. It is strange to see people make up something they think is bad, accuse the person they don't like for doing it in the future despite having no indications whether that person will actually do it, and then say that persons supporters are stupid enough to support said action. I think most Trump supporters are watching closely at Trump making sure to fulfill his existing promises like the wall and why Trump backed away from investigating Clinton than thinking about net neutrality, let alone excusing Trump for disabling it (he hasn't), but that's just my observation.

Re: Donald Trump could dismantle net neutrality

#79

Post by logmeout »

seibelj wrote: post #35

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 w…

You can't make a logical case on a liberal site like HN for anything. It's not allowed by the liberal elitists. Liberal here defined not as true liberal but progressive (destructionist) liberal.

Re: Donald Trump could dismantle net neutrality

#80

Post by throwaway729 »

cheetos wrote: post #74
throwaway729 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 t…

> Why should the power of your vote depend on where you choose to lay your head down at night? Because it turns out that has a very strong effect on the power of your vote :) The electoral college exists to balance the voices of citizens in cities vs. "the country." It checks the power of highly dense populations who are more likely to vote for pro-city federal policies, so the needs of those in "the country" are not…

> The electoral college exists to balance the voices of citizens in cities vs. "the country

That is the effect of the electoral college in modern politics, but it is not at all why the college exists.

Post reply on HN