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

President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

whitehouse.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 449 posts

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#81

Post by philbarr »

thenmar wrote: post #67
xnull2guest wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or you need competition (see how ISPs work in Britain and some places in Europe). Or you need socialization (see how ISPs work in South Korea). Regulation isn't the only solution.

Isn't the competition in Britain only possible because regulations require companies to share infrastructure?

Yes, British Telecom is forced to lease out the lines so that other companies can act as ADSL based ISPs.

However, if you want cable into your house you only have one option: Virgin Media. Since they paid for and created all the cable in the first place.

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#82

Post by cryoshon »

wylee wrote: post #38
yc1010 wrote: post #6

I am not American (feel free to ignore my opinion) but this is just a bad joke from someone who seems to be an utmost failure. Especially in light of last week FBI/NSA/DHS undermining TOR and killing its utility for any dissidents and free speech in authoritarian states. Under his watch the surveillance state has expanded and has become downright creepy 25 years after the fall of the Berlin wall we should be saying "…

I'm not a huge fan of Obama, but do you really think the surveillance state was created during his presidency? This type of thing has been going on... well, probably forever. It's gotten more sophisticated in the Internet age, but that started before Obama too.

Compare the Bush-era level of surveillance intrusiveness with the Obama-era level.

You'll find that what Bush started, Obama has drastically developed, distributed, and expanded.

Under Bush we had increasing levels of surveillance which were undesirable, but the veneer that it was still all about terrorism could at least be believed. Now, we know it's targeted specifically at us for the purposes of exploitation and domination of us.

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#83

Post by [deleted] »

mpweiher wrote: post #30
sejje wrote: post #19

This headline is in such stark contrast to the other, which reads "President Obama calls for a free and open internet." Which reads more like the actual intent? Edit: The two submissions got merged, so my comment is now outdated.

They are the same thing: in order to protect net neutrality (the free and open internet), you need strong regulation, it doesn't happen by itself.

[deleted]

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#84

Post by rayiner »

stephengoodwin wrote: post #65

The current Chairman for the FCC is Tom Wheeler. He is a former lobbyist for two telecommunications associations: * National Cable & Telecommunications Association (NCTA) (from 1976 to 1984, becoming president in 1979)[1] * Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association (CTIA) (from 1992 to 2004, serving as CEO)[1] [1] http://www.fcc.gov/leadership/tom-wheeler

And most recently he was an MD at a VC firm that invests in early stage internet companies: http://www.core-capital.com/portfolio.aspx.

It's pretty disingenuous to note his lobbying for cable companies in the 1970's and 1980's, before they even entered the Internet service business, while ignoring that his most recent connections are to Internet companies that ride on the infrastructure built by the telecoms.

Also, CTIA represents wireless carriers, which are under a different regulatory umbrella than telcos or cable. To the extent you can infer bias from Wheeler's work, the strongest inference is in favor of a bias towards Internet companies, not a bias towards telcos. Of course, I wouldn't characterize him as biased, but rather as someone with experience with the "full stack."

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#85

Post by coob »

thenmar wrote: post #67
xnull2guest wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or you need competition (see how ISPs work in Britain and some places in Europe). Or you need socialization (see how ISPs work in South Korea). Regulation isn't the only solution.

Isn't the competition in Britain only possible because regulations require companies to share infrastructure?

Yes.

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#86

Post by ctdonath »

antocv wrote: post #24
AndrewHampton wrote: post #9

Here's the thing that bothers me the most about a lot of the talk about net neutrality by government officials: > If a consumer requests access to a website or service, and the content is legal, your ISP should not be permitted to block it. Specifically "and the content is legal" is what raises a flag for me. I've seen similar phrases in nearly everything I've read coming from any government official regarding net ne…

Which is the whole point of net-neutrality, that ISPs must not accountable for what flows through the network, or to block "illegal" messages.

Not quite the "whole" point. It's not so much about accountability as not demanding customers pay more based on content; not being accountable for content is a consequence of not analyzing that content for whatever reason. It's about customers getting the bandwidth they pay for by not throttling the content they're requesting.

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#87

Post by [deleted] »

yc1010 wrote: post #6

I am not American (feel free to ignore my opinion) but this is just a bad joke from someone who seems to be an utmost failure. Especially in light of last week FBI/NSA/DHS undermining TOR and killing its utility for any dissidents and free speech in authoritarian states. Under his watch the surveillance state has expanded and has become downright creepy 25 years after the fall of the Berlin wall we should be saying "…

[deleted]

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#88

Post by adventured »

Shivetya wrote: post #28
xpose2000 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure where you are going with this. Classifying the internet as a utility is a huge step towards net neutrality. This is what we want.

however it is quite possible it will encumber providers and such with all sorts of new rules, forced compliance, etc. Forced compliance, as in "You are a utility and all such utilities must comply with NSA/CIA/FBI/ABC requirements" Maybe they will be brand it under some title like "Internet Bill of Rights" and watch as people don't read the fine print. All I know is, if I waited for the regulated utility known as the…

One thing that is guaranteed to occur, is that the US Government will regulate the Internet to a greater degree every year that goes by. It's what they do with all segments of the economy, and that regulation has been accelerating for decades. Tech had been largely spared, but the Feds have been increasingly pushing their nose into every area of tech the last decade.

What will ultimately happen, is the government will regulate the Internet so tightly, it will become extremely difficult, time consuming, and costly to create a start-up (while the technology cost will continue to fall). This process will not be fought by the existing tech giants, because they will think they benefit from it by limiting competition with artificial barriers. It's the exact same thing that has played out in every other major segment of the economy, and it's exactly what is about to happen to the Internet. These days will be viewed as the unregulated wild west, when you could spend $50 and create a start-up without hardly a concern.

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#89

Post by DominikR »

higherpurpose wrote: post #4

Since I have zero trust in Obama these days, I'm waiting for the other shoe to drop - or to see what's Obama's angle in this. Is he doing it because he already knows a Republican-backed Congress and FCC have already made up their minds against net neutrality - and he just wants to be remembered that "he tried"? Or is he supporting full net neutrality because that would give the government much more control over the I…

I am distrusting him to such an extent that I'd even say he calls for open internet so his spying and subversion agencies have a better chance at creating unrest and chaos in other societies.

Re: President Obama Calls for a Free and Open Internet

#90

Post by 300bps »

revscat wrote: post #55
yc1010 wrote: post #6

I am not American (feel free to ignore my opinion) but this is just a bad joke from someone who seems to be an utmost failure. Especially in light of last week FBI/NSA/DHS undermining TOR and killing its utility for any dissidents and free speech in authoritarian states. Under his watch the surveillance state has expanded and has become downright creepy 25 years after the fall of the Berlin wall we should be saying "…

Let me explain a few things about the American government. The most important thing to understand is that the ability of the executive to influence the direction of the government is limited. The reasons for this are several, but I will try to elucidate a few here. First, it is commonly believed that because of the ability to hire/fire people the President can more or less do whatever he wants in regards to the direc…

The President can nominate candidates for various positions, but these positions must be approved by Congress.

President Obama was inaugurated January 20, 2009. At that time, his Democratic party controlled both houses of Congress decisively[1]. It was not until 2011 that his party lost the house. And in fact, his party still retains the Senate but will lose it in January 2015. But it is only the Senate that approves appointments and his party has controlled it the entire time he has been President. And if you look at the make up of his cabinet, you will see that he has been able to fill it with people that are reviled by the opposing party [2]. To say that he hasn't gotten his way on the vast majority of cabinet appointments just isn't true.

Second, the government itself is made up largely of agencies which are outside of the ability of the democracy to affect. This includes the military

The President is the Commander in Chief of the military. He exercises complete authority over them. [3] All the heads of the other agencies you listed are appointed by the President including the Federal Reserve.

Your comment is typical of the current rhetoric surrounding attempting to "debunk" the thought that the President has substantial power. The fact is the President does have substantial power and saying otherwise is merely attempting to excuse the performance of Obama that so many people are disappointed with.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_divisions_of_United_State...

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cabinet_of_the_United_States

[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commander-in-chief#United_State...

Post reply on HN