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

FCC won’t delay vote, says net neutrality supporters are “desperate”

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 206 posts

Re: FCC won’t delay vote, says net neutrality supporters are “desperate”

#91

Post by masklinn »

dawnerd wrote: post #75
masklinn wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Strong state and local laws protecting the right to form municipal ISPs would be a good start. Those seem to scare Comcast & friends the most. If corporate ISPs become significantly restrictive, I think we'd see a big upsurge in interest for municipal broadband. Yeaaah about that? The GOP is no friend of muni. Not that Democrats love it[0], but Obama's FCC did try to defend muni against state restrictions alongside…

If the red states want to have a crippled internet let them. They’re all for states rights so let’s just have our states put in their own net neutrality (which will likely happen on the west coast in some form).

You're assuming ISPs won't try attacking muni federally.

> They’re all for states rights

If you actually believe that I've got a great bridge called "Fugitive Slave Act of 1850" for sale I'm sure you'd enjoy it.

Re: FCC won’t delay vote, says net neutrality supporters are “desperate”

#93

Post by masklinn »

c3534l wrote: post #36
imgabe wrote: post #31

If ISPs are going to gut net neutrality, we need a way to introduce real competition into the market. I wouldn't care if Comcast wanted to sell me access to 5 websites for $99 or whatever crap they're trying to pull if I had the option to switch to a better deal somewhere else. Strong state and local laws protecting the right to form municipal ISPs would be a good start. Those seem to scare Comcast & friends the most…

Telecommunications tend to form a natural monopoly. It's a bit like roads and railroads, only you're transporting information rather than people. I looked online and it's got all the common characteristics: there are few close substitutes, the product is non-storable (although, maybe if it gets bad enough in the US we'll start seeing services that mail us USBs full of last week's Hacker News posts), supply is all abo…

Oh no, don't you read mises and vood^H^H^H^HAustrian Economics? Natural monopolies don't exist: https://mises.org/library/myth-natural-monopoly

Re: FCC won’t delay vote, says net neutrality supporters are “desperate”

#94

Post by HuggableSquare »

darkstar999 wrote: post #57
artursapek wrote: post #34

Honest question, what changes can we expect as ISP consumers if this happens? A follow up, if all it is is them charging customers more for using more bandwidth, how is that any different from any other fundamental resource like water, electricity, etc? Why should I pay as much money for my SSH and Hacker News as the guy down the street streaming Netflix all day?

I would also like to hear a rational answer to this. For example Comcast claims that they support "sustainable net neutrality protections" for their customers. Then why are they fighting so hard to dismantle it? What are they going to change?

The arguments I've read is that ISPs would like to investigate traffic priority solutions. e.g. I'm a business that needs low latency (maybe I'm League of Legends or something similar), so I could pay Comcast to prioritize my packets.

Opponents would argue that it's pretty much the same as a "slow-lane" by virtue of the fact that everyone else gets de-prioritized. Proponents would argue that companies like Netflix already put their hardware in ISP's data centers to get that advantage, so this is just a more accessible way to do the same thing.

Re: FCC won’t delay vote, says net neutrality supporters are “desperate”

#96

Post by FilterSweep »

arca_vorago wrote: post #71
FilterSweep wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't downvote you. I fail to see a Betsy Devos type character in either the Bush or Obama admin. She even wrote in a tax benefit to her neocon college in the Northeast.

I disagree. She was appointed for two primary reasons that I see from my admittedly limited perspective. One, to shore up support of the evangelicals. Two, because of donations made by her brother and similar people. Once in office, abusing her position to give favors to those who get her appointed seems little different to me than bankers donating and getting bankers cabinet positions and then those people doing sim…

well, between neocons and bankers there's only one group that actively wants certain Americans out of their own country.

Re: FCC won’t delay vote, says net neutrality supporters are “desperate”

#97

Post by colordrops »

doubt_me wrote: post #76
colordrops wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every last bit of the spectrum will be privatized and they will eventually make it illegal to use the Mesh.

How about the future? Sound like someone who doesn't want to be apart of the future. Or anything really. Good luck to you fellow HNer.

I don't really understand your comment.

Re: FCC won’t delay vote, says net neutrality supporters are “desperate”

#98

Post by Facemelters »

omginternets wrote: post #24
Delmania wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He doesn't. Ignoring the public comment period and making comments like demonstrate he's not acting in the interest of the consumer. There's a good chance a federal judge will strike this down.

>There's a good chance a federal judge will strike this down. Is there any historical precedent for this? I'm trying to assess the resemblance between this case and such a hypothetical case. I want to believe...

Yes. The notice and comment period is intended to prevent arbitrary or capricious decisions by agencies.

Re: FCC won’t delay vote, says net neutrality supporters are “desperate”

#99

Post by doubt_me »

BFatts wrote: post #86
doubt_me wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its now December 2017. Everybody knew about his plan the day he was sworn in as chairman. Between the resources at Google/ Yahoo/ FB/ Ycombinator alone they have the money, lawyers, know how, and have had since November of last year to do something about this, anything. anything at all. Actually, any fortune 500 company. Not a single whisper from wall street. not a single whisper from the private sector. Obviously in…

"Between the resources at Google/ Yahoo/ FB/ Ycombinator alone they have the money, lawyers, know how, and have had since November of last year to do something about this" They did. They petitioned, used their own money, tried to convince Pai that his changes were bad. They did their part and Pai ignored them - flat out ignores them as if they don't matter. So... what about your argument works? Pai was "hired" to scr…

Petitioning works as a PR stunt and you know it.

Everybody blacked out for SOPA/ PIPA?

It needs to be more public, an actual movement from within to change something that will not end well for the vast majority.

Trying to convince isn't enough either, they shouldn't have to convince Pai of anything they know why he was appointed.

Why haven't they tried convincing their own users?

Would be wonderful to have a majority of the countries engineers rally overnight and protest by not showing up to work. It would literally take 1 day, less than 48 hours to permanently change the course of history forever. Wont happen of course, mainly because everybody is to busy planning on how to benefit from the repeal.

Re: FCC won’t delay vote, says net neutrality supporters are “desperate”

#100

Post by bo1024 »

koolba wrote: post #47
slouch wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We've only had the rules for two years, and this only shows that the next administration can also pull and about-face. The lawsuits might not even be settled by then.

Not only that, I haven't seen any improvement to consumers in the two years that we've had FCC oversight on this. The only places I see improvement are in markets that have managed to create competition between providers. And that tends to only come from municipal players entering the market as the large ISPs (Comcast, Charter, ATT) generally avoid entering markets that have an established player as they'd actually h…

> Not only that, I haven't seen any improvement to consumers in the two years that we've had FCC oversight on this.

That's because net neutrality was already the status quo (though enforced via other means than Title II classification up till 2014).

The FCC oversight wasn't supposed to bring improvements -- it was supposed to prevent negative changes (I'm sure we'll see what kinds within the next six months). As for improvements in amount of service, and pricing, and infrastructure, these will require far more intervention.

Post reply on HN