Hacker News Reader

Comment by LeoJiWoo | Hacker News Reader

I don't like his argument.

I think we should regulate ISPS,DNS providers, Social media, and other parts of the Internet Ecosystem to be neutral.

Though I agree full with Pai's statement:

“what I know is not the right answer is that a cabal of ten tech executives with names like Matthew, Mark, Jack, . . . Jeff are the ones choosing what content goes online and what content doesn’t go online.”

I don't like this will be used probably successfully as a wedge to destroy net neutrality.

View on HN

No, instead it should be a cabal of ten tech executives with names like Brian, Lowell, Marcelo, Thomas, and John - you know the good ol' boys who have made Pai rich and have jobs lined up for him as soon as he retires from the FCC. Those silly new-age-tech guys don't understand how the game works, and think that the constitution has any place in our "Democracy".

> Those silly new-age-tech guys don't understand how the game works, and think that the constitution has any place in our "Democracy".

What part of Pai's actions go against the constitution? Unilateral actions by the executive can also unilaterally be undone by the executive.

More durable change rests with congress or the courts.

>Amendment I. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

If ISPs are allowed to put up a tollway preventing or slowing my access to the press - at their own discretion, that is absolutely a violation of the constitution.

That so-called “cabal” determines what content exists on their network of connected machines, not what content goes online. The nature of the Internet is such that it is not one machine, nor a small group of machines, that decides what content is accessible.

I think concern over censorship on dominant, privately-operated platforms is fair, but Pai’s statement reflecting those concerns is simply untrue.

He makes a good point that a small number of gatekeepers for what is accessible online isn't good but are we really at the point of being openly racist and sexist? It's not like it would suddenly be okay if the names were Aliyah, Marcus, Cho, and Katie.

Maybe it was lost in translation of the quote, I believe those were references to the names of actual executives: Mark (Zuckerberg), Jeff (Bezos), Jack (Dorsey)

I give him points for cleverness but saying 'names like' is still not so subtly saying that it's because they're white men.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com