neuterlize

10 ms·

1.
Ask HN: Why is comment throttling so aggressive?
1 points by neuterlize 9y ago|1 comments
2.
by neuterlize 9y ago
> Auction-based prioritization of bandwidth. That's a really, really contrived example. Firstly, it assumes that bandwidth is scarce, which it isn't in the access network. Secondly, the incentives don't align. Everybody wo
3.
by neuterlize 9y ago
> doesn't allow any paid prioritization, even if such prioritization isn't anti-competitive. Please give an example of paid prioritization that isn't anti-competitive.
4.
by neuterlize 9y ago
Upgrading your infrastructure to meet the demand your customers place on it isn't a cost of regulatory compliance. It's the cost of doing business. Where in the network neutrality order did the FCC impose censorship on the Interne
5.
by neuterlize 9y ago
With what money and what political capital?
6.
by neuterlize 9y ago
Yes, we had NN before 2015. It was the default state and how the Internet was originally built. We used to have competition for Internet services (dialup and DSL), now we don't (most people access the Internet through cable which is a
7.
by neuterlize 9y ago
> If we want something for the public good, it should be publically funded. That's just a silly argument. If we are going there, let's first have the ISPs vacate all public rights of way and return all government subsidies.
8.
by neuterlize 9y ago
> The planned order hasn't even been released! Be that time it'll probably be too late. > On the one hand, I can see why monopolistic powers in the hands of ISPs would be bad, but I like that the order would restore "po
9.
by neuterlize 9y ago
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. Killin