News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on 80% of the 22M comments on net neutrality rollback were fake.

Re:80% of the 22M comments on net neutrality rollback were fake by jimmygrapes on Thursday May 06, 2021 @08:11PM (#27070406)
I am of the 20% I guess. My argument, which I can go into more (but only on demand: I believe I am shadowbanned so I need some proof otherwise before putting forth such effort), is that the Net Neutrality advocates did not recognize that existing regulation already addresses the concerns.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:80% of the 22M comments on net neutrality rollback were fake by yummypaint on Thursday May 06, 2021 @10:15PM (#27071202)
You are not shadowbanned, people probably just disagree with you
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:80% of the 22M comments on net neutrality rollback were fake by bigzyg33k on Thursday May 06, 2021 @08:22PM (#27070493)
I don’t think you’re shadowbanned - at least, I can see your comment
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:80% of the 22M comments on net neutrality rollback were fake by whateveracct on Thursday May 06, 2021 @10:37PM (#27071377)
everyone can lmao
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:80% of the 22M comments on net neutrality rollback were fake by jjeaff on Thursday May 06, 2021 @08:24PM (#27070508)
If existing regulations already solved the issues, then you wouldn't see existing ISPs giving unlimited data as long as you are using their special pet services or partner services.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:80% of the 22M comments on net neutrality rollback were fake by jimmygrapes on Thursday May 06, 2021 @10:37PM (#27071379)
But not to the explicit exclusion of other data streams, which was the primary concern of most proponents. And the mechanisms for implicitly excluded providers does already exist for them to challenge any such exclusion, were it to be proven.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:80% of the 22M comments on net neutrality rollback were fake by jjeaff on Tuesday May 18, 2021 @12:52AM (#27191369)
That wasn't the only concern. If you only give free data for certain services because they are a) already very popular or b) have enough money to pay for it, then you create a huge moat for the incumbents and make it much more difficult for any new, better alternatives to compete.
[ Parent | on HN ]