Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by danjoc 3113 days ago
Pai focused primarily on those in his comments today. From Mr. Pai's comments:

https://www.recode.net/2017/12/14/16777356/full-transcript-a...

"The main complaint consumers have about the Internet is not and has never been that their Internet service provider is blocking access to content. It’s that they don’t have access at all or enough competition. These regulations have taken us in the opposite direction from these consumer preferences. Under Title II, investment in high-speed networks has declined by billions of dollars. Notably, this is the first time that such investment has declined outside of a recession in the Internet era."

"The impact has been particularly serious for smaller Internet service providers. They don’t have the time, money, or lawyers to navigate a thicket of complex rules."

"the Wireless Internet Service Providers Association, which represents small fixed wireless companies that typically operate in rural America, surveyed its members and found that over 80% “incurred additional expense in complying with the Title II rules, had delayed or reduced network expansion, had delayed or reduced services and had allocated budget to comply with the rules.” Other small companies, too, have told the FCC that these regulations have forced them to cancel, delay, or curtail fiber network upgrades. And nearly two dozen small providers submitted a letter saying the FCC’s heavy-handed rules “affect our ability to find financing.”"

"a coalition of 19 municipal Internet service providers—that is, city-owned nonprofits—have told the FCC that they “often delay or hold off from rolling out a new feature or service because [they] cannot afford to deal with a potential complaint and enforcement action.”"

1 comments

Pai's comments are not "an example".
There are specific examples in the comments I quoted. Mr Pai named more specific examples in the transcript I linked to. You seem to be in a state of blind rage and unable to read anything.

If you'd like a deep dive level of information, you could try contacting some of the named companies and associations, like

http://www.wispa.org/

I'm sure they'd be happy to fill you in, if you're willing to listen to them.

This is the signal. Startup ISPs are where the action is starting today.

> You seem to be in a state of blind rage and unable to read anything.

This is not how you do discourse on the internet — asserting the emotional state (or ability to read) of people on the other side of the screen. I'm quite calm, thanks; I simply reject Pai's agenda-serving statements as anything but agenda-serving (and also a little bit "appeal to authority", but I'm not feeling terribly inclined to chase that notion down the fallacy rabbit hole when I have so much work to do I'm only now breaking for lunch, so whatever).

Please do what you've repeatedly been asked in this thread and cite examples, not propaganda.

>cite examples

I did, in the post you are responding to.

>>>>Do you have any examples? Or any reason to believe that the startup ISPs will bother with anyone outside of a major metro area?

>>>the Wireless Internet Service Providers Association, which represents small fixed wireless companies that typically operate in rural America

>>http://www.wispa.org/

I really don't find a lobbyist organization's web site to be any more compelling than Pai's comments, sorry. They're going to offer just as much cherry-picked, agenda-serving propaganda as he is, and won't discuss the issue honestly or transparently either.