5 ms·

John Oliver, College Humor, and some comedian are featured heavily. You're going to need to do more than give liberal millennials something to feel smug about,

John Oliver, College Humor, and some comedian are featured heavily. You're going to need to do more than give liberal millennials something to feel smug about, if you actually want to win this political battle. I don't know where I stand on net neutrality, but this is certainly not going to convince me.

wvenable 9y ago
This single image is really all you need: http://www.wordstream.com/images/what-is-net-neutrality-isp-package-diagram.jpg http://www.wordstream.com/images/what-is-net-neutrality-isp-...
- stephengillie 9y ago
  Humans see censorship, paywalls, etc as damage, and route around. Why wouldn't we just mix-up the domain names and IP addresses for a while? If it costs extra to goto Reddit.com, then Reddit can add another domain (e.g. Greendit.com) and continue operating with no embargo. This paradigm served the warez/anime/torrent community for decades.
- nthcolumn 9y ago
  But that isn't what is proposed, the ISPs can't regulate which services you get to just how fast they serve? If youtube wanted to paywall they could easily.
- ericras 9y ago
  That image has existed for years now. But even without government Net Neutrality regulation... it hasn't happened!
  - laughinghan 9y ago
    We do have Net Neutrality regulation, but it's under threat of repeal. That's what this article and the gray bar at the top of Hacker News are about.
  - jhasse 9y ago
    In Germany (no net neutrality) you can pay some ISPs extra to get unlimited mobile data to WhatsApp or Spotify.
heartbreak 9y ago
Allow private companies to impose regulations on internet traffic and you don't have a free and open internet. Block private companies from imposing regulations on internet traffic and you don't have a free market for ISPs. You're losing one free market or the other. Which is worth more to you? This is a gross simplification and neither are ever going to be free markets, but you get the idea. There is no avenue that doesn't involve some institution imposing their will on a marketplace.
- nthcolumn 9y ago
  So I would have no problem I don't think with a certain mandatory minimum amount of guaranteed bandwidth unlimited free (as in beer as well as bird) data being provided subsidized I suppose by people who want to stream 3DHD entertainment (say half/third the highest speed the ISP offers). A free and open internet guaranteed and the ability for ISPs to offer VIP services to paying customers/businesses. Everyone is happy or am I just a smug liberal looney left millenial whatever that other guy said... or merely mistaken somehow?
  - marcoperaza 9y ago
    Why should it be free? Internet access is very affordable.
    - nthcolumn 9y ago
      Can't somebody explain why I am dead wrong here? I have a gut feeling it doesn't stack up. But to answer your question: Free because cost is a barrier to the other free - free speech. And yes it is very affordable - especially to ISPs, should not be a problem at all for them to provide completely gratis universal access. This way people who cannot afford it - and there are currently people who cannot afford it - get access to the internet and therefore education, so they can get better jobs thereby alleviating poverty so in the end they can afford those sweet high bandwidth charges. The American Dream. (the nice one where you work hard and become successful - not the one where your dad leaves you billions and then when you lose it all you get the enemy to hack you rich and powerful again)

wvenable 9y ago

This single image is really all you need: http://www.wordstream.com/images/what-is-net-neutrality-isp-package-diagram.jpg http://www.wordstream.com/images/what-is-net-neutrality-isp-...

stephengillie 9y ago
Humans see censorship, paywalls, etc as damage, and route around. Why wouldn't we just mix-up the domain names and IP addresses for a while? If it costs extra to goto Reddit.com, then Reddit can add another domain (e.g. Greendit.com) and continue operating with no embargo. This paradigm served the warez/anime/torrent community for decades.
nthcolumn 9y ago
But that isn't what is proposed, the ISPs can't regulate which services you get to just how fast they serve? If youtube wanted to paywall they could easily.
ericras 9y ago
That image has existed for years now. But even without government Net Neutrality regulation... it hasn't happened!
- laughinghan 9y ago
  We do have Net Neutrality regulation, but it's under threat of repeal. That's what this article and the gray bar at the top of Hacker News are about.
- jhasse 9y ago
  In Germany (no net neutrality) you can pay some ISPs extra to get unlimited mobile data to WhatsApp or Spotify.

heartbreak 9y ago

Allow private companies to impose regulations on internet traffic and you don't have a free and open internet. Block private companies from imposing regulations on internet traffic and you don't have a free market for ISPs. You're losing one free market or the other. Which is worth more to you? This is a gross simplification and neither are ever going to be free markets, but you get the idea. There is no avenue that doesn't involve some institution imposing their will on a marketplace.

nthcolumn 9y ago
So I would have no problem I don't think with a certain mandatory minimum amount of guaranteed bandwidth unlimited free (as in beer as well as bird) data being provided subsidized I suppose by people who want to stream 3DHD entertainment (say half/third the highest speed the ISP offers). A free and open internet guaranteed and the ability for ISPs to offer VIP services to paying customers/businesses. Everyone is happy or am I just a smug liberal looney left millenial whatever that other guy said... or merely mistaken somehow?
- marcoperaza 9y ago
  Why should it be free? Internet access is very affordable.
  - nthcolumn 9y ago
    Can't somebody explain why I am dead wrong here? I have a gut feeling it doesn't stack up. But to answer your question: Free because cost is a barrier to the other free - free speech. And yes it is very affordable - especially to ISPs, should not be a problem at all for them to provide completely gratis universal access. This way people who cannot afford it - and there are currently people who cannot afford it - get access to the internet and therefore education, so they can get better jobs thereby alleviating poverty so in the end they can afford those sweet high bandwidth charges. The American Dream. (the nice one where you work hard and become successful - not the one where your dad leaves you billions and then when you lose it all you get the enemy to hack you rich and powerful again)