Please don't turn HN threads into partisan fights. That leads to information heat death, something we're all here to avoid.
This topic is already highly partisan, of course, so it's all the more important not to make it more so. This is very much a collective responsibility.
Yes I tried to mitigate that in my child comment. It is, as you mentioned, a highly partisan matter though and has been beaten to death on this forum and others. I don't know how else to approach the subject when there is such clear malfeasance coming from one side of the debate. Perhaps "not at all" would be the correct choice.
Maybe, or maybe there's a different way to do it if you're patient enough to wait for a new idea. I know how hard that is; I deal with it every day myself.
There's literally nothing partisan about this topic. The technical and academic worlds are virtually unanimous on the support of net neutrality. Even political support for net neutrality is around 83% across both parties. Don't shut down discussion because you personally feel ashamed that your party is complicit in this thing. It's not political.
It's surreal to read comments like this, because it makes one realize how much of what people see in each other is pure imagination.
I don't have a party, and net neutrality is one of the few political issues Hacker News has officially done something for, including quite recently. I don't fault you for not knowing that, because most people see only a tiny slice of what passes through here and no one sees all of it. But the dynamic of jumping to a view of someone as your enemy is a thing we all need to work on.
Most people don't fit into either party's value system. I hardly think boiling it down to R vs D is going to help anyone, we need to inform our populous.
Despite how my above comment appears, I really don't want to turn this into partisan shit-flinging. I am no Democrat, I fall well to the left of where they live, and I disagree about gun rights and a number of other things.
That being said, I think it's pretty clear that more harmful policies proposed in recent times have come predominantly from a single source, and I think it's more important to work in opposition to that harmfulness than to find a group that perfectly represents you. Especially with a first past the post electoral system in which fractiousness dilutes the value of your vote.
Amen, may the ranked ballot reign supreme one day. First past the post always trends towards Bicameralism, and if we could rank our options on the local, state, and national level I think we would see a lot more accurate reflection of our ideals in our representative government. Ranked Ballot Choices means no more wasted votes. Thanks for your comment, these are strange and exciting times. May peace prevail
Yes but any Republican would have taken this action. Pai was appointed because by convention (or possibly requirement) the commission is composed of two Democrats and two Republicans, and is chaired by a commissioner of the President's choosing.
Saying Pai is Obama's fault is disingenuous, because he had to appointment a Republican, and any Republican chair would implement Republican policy.
Saying this is the Republican's fault is just as disingenuous as saying it was Obama's fault. Quite literally this was caused by Obama by the appointing of Ajit, who then was promoted by Trump. Ajit, as we know has been spearingheading this whole thing.
So Republicans don't have any agency? They don't have any accountability for making this part of their platform?
That's pretty rich for being the "party of personal responsibility".
Ajit Pai has the confidence of Republican leadership and was appointed by Obama at McConnell's behest, again because of requirement. I'm sure if Obama could have appointed a political ally he would have.
Ajit Pai certainly is responsible for this, but he is acting on behalf of the GOP and has their full backing. I think it's fair to hold them accountable for that.
Attempting to blame Republicans or Democrats for this collectively is silly. The point is that both are responsible (by differing, unquantifiable amounts), as noted by the fact that Pai was appointed by Obama, a democrat and promoted to a point where he could influence Net Neutrality by Trump.
