[wallace_f]

People aren't perfect, and some are terrible, so it makes sense to have government. However, it is reasonable to be critical of government removing your rights to work. Actually, it is a civil duty. I am not sure where the line should be drawn, but it has certainly gone too far. Should you need gov approval to download an IDE, or sell an app? What about to braid hair?[1]

I would bet that as soon as government begins infringing on the rights to work which affect HN usere, suddenly everyone here would be a civil libertarian.

1-https://www.theroot.com/tennessee-has-fined-residents-almost...

[freehunter]

You don't own the radio spectrum. Neither do I. No one individual does. We can license it, but since there's such a great opportunity for harm, it's controlled by the government.

You're against the government deciding on "removing your right to work", but the alternative is your neighbor or your competitor making that decision for you and overloading "your" spectrum. And you have no recourse to complain, all you can do is push more power, which impacts more people. And your competitor pushes more power, so you push more power and now no one gets to use it.

Libertarian ideas always seem to end in a corporate power struggle while everyone else gets locked out. That doesn't sound like a good outcome to me.

[wallace_f]

Yea, if you see the other comment I replied to, I tried to make it more clear that this case is obviously to the benefit of everyone. What you describe is a simple tragedy of the commons market failure, which need be regulated, and is not unique to radiowaves.

I think the point I was trying to make is missed. Should someone, the OP, criticizing the FCC's role for doing this be downvoted/ridiculed? No, I think it's an important job, because we should always question when rights are taken away from the people and handed over to government.

Maybe it's all too far gone and this is a better discussion to have for a Mars colony, but I still have faith.

[kakarot]

What does any of that have to do with launching satellites and distributing radio bandwidth, both of which need regulation in order to provide safety for the masses?

[wallace_f]

I'm sorry, but it's completely self evident. The point was that the natural right to perform/produce a service/product should be the null hypothesis (as opposed to government removing that right and granting it at their discretion) in any such case; and while on the extremes the answers may seem obvious (launching communication satellites vs braiding hair), it's often not always so. Finally, I concluded that people should ideally care about this before it adversely affects them. In other words, the OP's post was not without reason.

[kakarot]

I'll ask again, what does any of that have to do with launching satellites and distributing radio bandwidth?

[wallace_f]

I can't think of a better way to explain it. Maybe you should re-read the comment chain to help you understand this conversation.

[macintux]

I can't speak for anyone currently in the chain, but overall the thread is quite confusing.

[wallace_f]

Can you help me understand where the confusion arises?