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

U.S. FCC chairman plans fast-track repeal of net neutrality: sources

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 108 posts

Re: U.S. FCC chairman plans fast-track repeal of net neutrality: sources

#81

Post by ersii »

doctorshady wrote: post #2

Is there anything that can be done here? Pai and his little buddy O'Rielly have an easy majority on the FCC here, and I doubt they'll listen to any comments. Short of like, the Trump government being dismantled before then, how do you get rid of such a transparently corrupt head of a federal agency?

> How do you get rid of such a transparently corrupt head of a federal agency?

In principle, you can not corrupt something that doesn't exist.

If the FCC would get dismantled, it wouldn't be possible to corrupt it anymore.

Re: U.S. FCC chairman plans fast-track repeal of net neutrality: sources

#82

Post by [deleted] »

coldpie wrote: post #79
wfo wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Specifically, all non-Clinton voters and non-voters in a tiny number of relevant states. For everyone else, their votes never counted. To blame it on Stein specifically is of course insane and purposely incendiary without any other purpose really; the number of non-voters who just let it happen or "are not into politics" is orders of magnitude more significant and they are much more responsible. Stein voters at least…

> For everyone else, their votes never counted. Yes they did. Sure, it was one vote out of three hundred million, but so was every one else's.

[deleted]

Re: U.S. FCC chairman plans fast-track repeal of net neutrality: sources

#83

Post by SamLevin88 »

dang wrote: post #45
facetube wrote: post #35

You were warned. You repeatedly claimed this wasn't the place for politics, that the reaction to Trump's Russia-assisted election was an overreaction. Here it is: it's on your shore, and it will rapidly intrude on your career and livelihood. I hope you're happy.

Please don't post inflamed political rants here. If you have a substantive point to make, please make it thoughtfully. Otherwise please don't comment here.

How is that not relevant, though? Are you the comment police or something?

Re: U.S. FCC chairman plans fast-track repeal of net neutrality: sources

#84

Post by [deleted] »

wfo wrote: post #52
Paul-ish wrote: post #21

Isn't this what happens when you do everything through the executive, rather than legislative, branch? If net neutrality were required by law, the FCC chairman would to some degree be compelled to enforce it.

Weird, I seem to remember the legislative branch repealing some regulations that nearly all Americans support exactly on party lines in order to make the Internet worse recently... It doesn't matter at all in this particular instance because the people who want to remove NN own both branches and can do it just as easily no matter where the rules come from. The only things that can persist in the face of a 1 party loc…

[deleted]

Re: U.S. FCC chairman plans fast-track repeal of net neutrality: sources

#85

Post by meddlepal »

kablaa wrote: post #14
saboot wrote: post #6

Kind of depressing how easily all that past effort and public campaigning gets brushed aside for Telecom concerns

For every bill we manage to push back, they just make another one with a slightly different name. They are taking advantage of the fact that people can only get up in arms so many times.

This is the futility of modern activism. The political process is so completely broken now that it's not worth spending time to fix anything.

Re: U.S. FCC chairman plans fast-track repeal of net neutrality: sources

#86

Post by nashashmi »

When it comes to net neutrality, all I can think of is what Jimmy Wales once said about the lesson he learned from Neupedia: "Don't make rules people are not breaking."

No one has really broken net neutrality principles yet. But there are ideas out there and innovation out there, where this net neutrality is turning out to be a hindrance to it all.

Why cannot cable company provide cable TV over cable Internet? Because of net neutrality! Why cannot T-mobile provide TV experience on its network for everyone without breaking its network? Because of net neutrality. Why cannot Verizon offer free stuff for its customers over its network? Because of net neutrality.

Net neutrality was not supposed to prevent ISPs from doing great stuff. It was supposed to prevent ISPs from making alliances with certain companies and enemies with other companies. It was supposed to prevent ISPs from harming innovation. It was supposed to prevent ISPs from hurting content providers and content types.

Yet, now it is preventing ISPs from offering better services.

Re: U.S. FCC chairman plans fast-track repeal of net neutrality: sources

#87

Post by dawnerd »

coldcode wrote: post #78
dzdt wrote: post #65

Cable television periodically has "channel blackouts" where the cable operator feuds over price with the content provider. I guess we can expect to see this now for internet. Imagine going to Netflix to find an error 5xx instead: unavailable until they agree on payments to the cable company.

Perhaps we should suggest a new http error code.

Kinda already have one. 451. Although stated for legal reasons I could see it's use here as well.

Re: U.S. FCC chairman plans fast-track repeal of net neutrality: sources

#88

Post by dawnerd »

natoliniak wrote: post #74
aanm1988 wrote: post #60

Can we have another day without most common internet sites? No facebook/google/netflix/amazon/youtube. 2 days if necessary. Show a video explaining what net neutrality is and why many of the arguments it are so dumb.

these are the incumbents and even though these companies would not have been build without net neutrality, they can afford loosing net neutrality and paradoxically it might be in their interest. Loosing net neutrality will hurt startups and small sites who won't be able to afford payments to ISP's "fast lanes."

Bingo. It'll only be a minor cost to the large companies that'll end up writing it off anyways. And they'll probably end up signing more peering deals to make their content even faster.

Re: U.S. FCC chairman plans fast-track repeal of net neutrality: sources

#89

Post by dragonwriter »

tchock23 wrote: post #71

Part of the problem 'net neutrality' faces is its name. The average US citizen has no idea what 'net neutrality' means when they hear it, and can't be bothered to learn about it. If it had been branded 'internet freedom' then we wouldn't even be having this discussion because it would be toxic for politicians to mess with something called 'internet freedom.' Source: Sat through way too many focus groups testing commu…

> Part of the problem 'net neutrality' faces is its name.

"Net Neutrality" isn't even the name the name the pro-neutrality group at the FCC used: that was Open Internet.

Which, honestly, would be a better name for advocates to use, as well, though "net neutrality" is perhaps more precise.

It would get a lot more attention with headlines of "FCC chairman plans fast track repeal of Open Internet."

Re: U.S. FCC chairman plans fast-track repeal of net neutrality: sources

#90

Post by falcolas »

nashashmi wrote: post #86

When it comes to net neutrality, all I can think of is what Jimmy Wales once said about the lesson he learned from Neupedia: "Don't make rules people are not breaking." No one has really broken net neutrality principles yet. But there are ideas out there and innovation out there, where this net neutrality is turning out to be a hindrance to it all. Why cannot cable company provide cable TV over cable Internet? Becaus…

> No one has really broken net neutrality principles yet.

Whew. It's good to know that mobile carriers aren't charging more for access to video providers than their own offerings. I knew that was all heresay.

Or limiting Netflix bandwidth (while promoting their own pay-2-view channels) while blaming it on Level3.

It's great to know such rules are not necessary.

Post reply on HN