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

F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

981–990 of 1001 posts

Re: F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules

#981

Post by crimsonalucard »

hueving wrote: post #841
crimsonalucard wrote: post #791

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Republicans don't support deregulation per se. That's just the cover story. Republicans just support big business, that's it. If regulations make businesses better? Why the hell not?

If you're going to make blatant conspiratorial statements about the motivations of nearly half of the US population you are going to need to back that up with evidence. That would be the biggest 'cover story' in the history of humanity

Sorry, not referring to voters. I'm referring to republican political leaders.

Re: F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules

#982

Post by jzshen »

jpao79 wrote: post #690
juris wrote: post #135

This wouldn't be a problem if ISP's weren't de facto monopolies. If there was competition in this space, then there would be incentive to improve the infrastructure and Internet speeds. However, ISP's kill competition by making legal arrangements with local governments to only do business with them, and by cutting competitors' cables. Since we have no way to guarantee reasonable speeds to small time websites now, we…

There's a microwave based ISP in SF called Monkeybrains. From their about us page: "Monkeybrains is primarily a WISP (Wireless Internet Service Provider). What this means is Monkeybrains uses microwave technology to create a wireless network covering much of San Francisco. We deliver internet service to individual locations by placing an antenna on the roof. This antenna picks up an encrypted wireless signal from one…

I live in SF and I used to use Monkeybrains, but I switched to Comcast about 12 months ago. It felt like using MB was taking the moral high road, but there are some things that a wired connection just does better. MB would have very spotty signal during rainy days. A few of us play competitive games (eg Overwatch) and MB had too many latency spikes.

Re: F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules

#983

Post by dang »

lakechfoma wrote: post #389
paiisgod wrote: post #375

The Federal Communications Commission just ended net neutrality by a 3-2 vote despite a security threat that temporarily disrupted the proceedings. All this does is return things to the way they were back in 2015. You would think that with all the hysterics coming from the Jews, Silicon Valley and a variety of Marxist terrorists that this was the end of the world. It is not the end of the world. In fact, it is better…

can someone flag this please...

Instead of posting like this, flag it yourself by clicking the comment's timestamp to go to its page, then clicking 'flag' at the top. In egregious cases like the above, you're quite welcome to alert us at hn@ycombinator.com too. We catch up with the flagged comments eventually, but email is the hotline.

Re: F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules

#984

Post by dang »

berbec wrote: post #63
wtf_is_up wrote: post #20

Finally, something good came from the Obama administration. Appointing Pai to the FCC was probably their greatest accomplishment.

Obvious troll is obvious.

That comment broke the HN guidelines but so does this one, as you'll see if you read https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html. The better thing to do is flag; how to do this is at https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html.

Re: F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules

#985

Post by dang »

wtf_is_up wrote: post #109
berbec wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obvious troll is obvious.

>if you don't agree with me you're an obvious troll

If you don't restrict yourself to civil, substantive comments from now on, we will ban you. Any good-faith view you have is possible to express thoughtfully, and that's what you owe to the community here in exchange for the right to post.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html

Re: F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules

#986

Post by null000 »

alexpetralia wrote: post #387

Can someone clarify this for me? Perhaps my assumptions are incorrect: > 1. Bandwidth is limited > 2. Real-time streaming services, such as video, consume much more bandwidth (by sending more packets through the pipeline) than non-streaming services > 3. Net neutrality guarantees that each packet is delivered with the same priority Say Netflix takes up 20% of the bandwidth through its streaming services - each packet…

Networks drop packets once they become over-saturated. You can either drop specific packets (e.g. netflix) or you can drop packets indiscriminately (e.g. everyone, including netflix, experiences degraded service). This is a pretty normal, planned-for part of the internet - it's one of the main problems TCP/IP tries to solve (it intentionally slows down traffic if it notices packets are getting dropped) and hasn't been a problem so far in the xx years the internet has been a thing.

Net neutrality covers that, and then also charging for use of some services but not others (imagine Comcast charging for bandwidth to netflix, which it does not own, but not Hulu, which it has a sizable stake in - there are a handful of examples of this having happened before the NN regulation went into place) and blocking certain traffic (see: Verizon blocking facetime) and allowing services of large companies to pay for prioritized traffic.

The end game NN proponents fear is something similar to Cable now, where you have to buy access to websites or protocols ala cart. I don't think that's necessarily going to happen, but I'm 100% sure ISPs will start abusing their monopoly/duopoly to further their vertical integration efforts by favoring content they own or news sources that cover them favorably over indirect competitors or detractors.

Re: F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules

#987

Post by clarky07 »

analog31 wrote: post #858
tptacek wrote: post #127

The voters elected a Republican government. That a Republican-led FCC would err on the side of under-regulating telecommunications companies is about the least surprising outcome you can imagine. Anybody who told you that lobbying the FCC was going to make a difference here was, whether they meant to or not, selling a bill of goods. As someone who respects but mostly profoundly disagrees with principled Republican la…

>>> The voters elected a Republican government. Not precisely. The proportion of people who voted in a gerrymandered electoral system with potentially widespread voter suppression produced a preponderance of Republican legislators and an outcome of the electoral college that produced a Republican president. I'm not sure that this qualifies as an "elected" government.

Those same gerrymandered districts and electoral college elected Democrat Congresses and a Democrat president for the last 8 years. To suggest that it's completely rigged when they lose the following election is absurd. This coming from someone who also hates the current outcome, but come on now. If the Democrats ran someone who most of the country didn't hate, they would have won easily. If they hadn't fought themselves in the primary and nominated a much better candidate, they would have won.

We've had this same electoral college in place for a long time, and everyone knew the rules ahead of time. It certainly has flaws, and you can argue a popular vote would be better, but it is the system we have and everyone knew it going into the election. It absolutely qualifies as an elected government.

Re: F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules

#988

Post by berbec »

dang wrote: post #984
berbec wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obvious troll is obvious.

That comment broke the HN guidelines but so does this one, as you'll see if you read https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html . The better thing to do is flag; how to do this is at https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html .

Sorry, baser instincts got the better of me. I did not know how to flag; I thought I had not reached the Karma threshold. I appreciate the link with instructions.

Re: F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules

#989

Post by analog31 »

clarky07 wrote: post #987
analog31 wrote: post #858

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>> The voters elected a Republican government. Not precisely. The proportion of people who voted in a gerrymandered electoral system with potentially widespread voter suppression produced a preponderance of Republican legislators and an outcome of the electoral college that produced a Republican president. I'm not sure that this qualifies as an "elected" government.

Those same gerrymandered districts and electoral college elected Democrat Congresses and a Democrat president for the last 8 years. To suggest that it's completely rigged when they lose the following election is absurd. This coming from someone who also hates the current outcome, but come on now. If the Democrats ran someone who most of the country didn't hate, they would have won easily. If they hadn't fought themse…

I'm willing to take the risk that creating a better electoral system would not benefit my party. Even if we ended up with exactly the same government, I think it would be preferable if that government could credibly claim legitimacy.

Re: F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules

#990

Post by tehaugmenter »

blunte wrote: post #876
tptacek wrote: post #127

The voters elected a Republican government. That a Republican-led FCC would err on the side of under-regulating telecommunications companies is about the least surprising outcome you can imagine. Anybody who told you that lobbying the FCC was going to make a difference here was, whether they meant to or not, selling a bill of goods. As someone who respects but mostly profoundly disagrees with principled Republican la…

1. voters did not elect a Republican government. Gerrymandering has given Republicans wins in many places where Democrats would have won in any other universe. Likely rigged electronic voting machines that have no audit trail have given Republicans votes they would not have had. *Targeted voter suppression campaigns have prevented people from voting who would have tipped the scales in favor of Democrats. 2. Republica…

"The purest form of insanity is to leave everything the same and the same time hope that things will change." -Albert Einstein.

I mean, to be frank, I think that both major parties are playing a role in this illusion that you, the voter, have control over the government without grabbing pitchforks and heading to their office in your preferred form of communication. We live in a country where you can decide your own fate. You can work for what you want, no one will stop you. The government seems to have forgot what "govern" means. They get their hands into things they shouldn't be in, and then make the every-man look like a criminal. Why do we continue to rely on a capitalistic fascist society? One that pays us in non-backed currency as well. This is literally alchemy and everyone buys into their bullshit.

Post reply on HN