4 ms·

Your arguments don't make much sense. Network neutrality is not Ma Bell style regulation. NN will not freeze things. Don't know which oligarchs you are referri

Your arguments don't make much sense. Network neutrality is not Ma Bell style regulation. NN will not freeze things. Don't know which oligarchs you are referring to, but any NN laws are unlikely to stop them 'garching. Killing NN is unlikely to kill all the small players. In fact they might rather thrive by using NN as a competitive tool.

cobbzilla 9y ago
The "NN regulations" that the FCC adopted specifically classified Internet services as Title II "telecommunication services", subject to 1930s-style telecom regulations. Yes, these are "Ma Bell" style regulations. I presume you don't believe in the existence of selective enforcement in industries where the government holds massive regulatory power? Why does it seem somehow that the most powerful incumbents are never punished, but smaller upstarts are crushed (or not even started) due to the regulatory burden? NN makes this worse. Pai merely proposes to move things back to the way they were since the beginning of Internet Time to 2015, way back when the Internet was a Title I "information service", subject to much less formal regulation by the FCC. This is met with furious uproar.
- unityByFreedom 9y ago
  > Pai merely proposes ... This is met with furious uproar His proposal would enable ISPs to make access to some content slower, or more expensive, than others. His proposal does nothing to resolve existing broadband monopolies. Many people like the way the internet works today and do not want Pai's policies to pass. We don't want more silos or limited access to content. People are making their voices heard because they feel strongly about this issue.
  - cobbzilla 9y ago
    Do you not fear that regulatory capture would leave us with the worst of both worlds?
    - unityByFreedom 9y ago
      We're in a state of regulatory right now and it is a worse world. It's not hypothetical
      - cobbzilla 9y ago
        are you implying that despite the regulatory capture that has already occurred, somehow further regulations will not subsequently be captured? there is a saying about the person who does the same thing again and again expecting a different result.
        unityByFreedom 9y ago
        > are you implying that despite the regulatory capture that has already occurred, somehow further regulations will not subsequently be captured? there is a saying about the person who does the same thing again and again expecting a different result. Are you implying that even after you solve a problem, there are still other problems, so the best thing to do is to do nothing? There is a word for people who do nothing and criticize those who act.
        cobbzilla 9y ago
        I never implied that there were no problems, please do not put words in my mouth. My point was merely that centralizing control of the Internet is exactly what the oligarchs want, and you are carrying water for them. Why is the EFF against NN while AT&T is for it? Thanks for helping the multi-billion dollar company, I'm sure they appreciate it.

cobbzilla 9y ago

The "NN regulations" that the FCC adopted specifically classified Internet services as Title II "telecommunication services", subject to 1930s-style telecom regulations. Yes, these are "Ma Bell" style regulations. I presume you don't believe in the existence of selective enforcement in industries where the government holds massive regulatory power? Why does it seem somehow that the most powerful incumbents are never punished, but smaller upstarts are crushed (or not even started) due to the regulatory burden? NN makes this worse. Pai merely proposes to move things back to the way they were since the beginning of Internet Time to 2015, way back when the Internet was a Title I "information service", subject to much less formal regulation by the FCC. This is met with furious uproar.

unityByFreedom 9y ago
> Pai merely proposes ... This is met with furious uproar His proposal would enable ISPs to make access to some content slower, or more expensive, than others. His proposal does nothing to resolve existing broadband monopolies. Many people like the way the internet works today and do not want Pai's policies to pass. We don't want more silos or limited access to content. People are making their voices heard because they feel strongly about this issue.
- cobbzilla 9y ago
  Do you not fear that regulatory capture would leave us with the worst of both worlds?
  - unityByFreedom 9y ago
    We're in a state of regulatory right now and it is a worse world. It's not hypothetical
    - cobbzilla 9y ago
      are you implying that despite the regulatory capture that has already occurred, somehow further regulations will not subsequently be captured? there is a saying about the person who does the same thing again and again expecting a different result.
      - unityByFreedom 9y ago
        > are you implying that despite the regulatory capture that has already occurred, somehow further regulations will not subsequently be captured? there is a saying about the person who does the same thing again and again expecting a different result. Are you implying that even after you solve a problem, there are still other problems, so the best thing to do is to do nothing? There is a word for people who do nothing and criticize those who act.
        cobbzilla 9y ago
        I never implied that there were no problems, please do not put words in my mouth. My point was merely that centralizing control of the Internet is exactly what the oligarchs want, and you are carrying water for them. Why is the EFF against NN while AT&T is for it? Thanks for helping the multi-billion dollar company, I'm sure they appreciate it.