Hacker News Reader

Comment by jakeogh | Hacker News Reader

Power wanted "net neutrality". It's a stepping stone to the same ends, more rules regulating the internet. Once you convince people it should be regulated, the sky is the limit. Standard incrementalism tactic. I mean... who likes "hate speech" anyway?

I could post a wall of similar links: http://www.businessinsider.com/sen-al-franken-calls-for-vigo...

View on HN

No it’s the other way around. Net neutrality is itself a regulation. Removing the government regulation turns it into a Wild West with less rules and allows other powers to slap us around.

"Net neutrality is itself a regulation"

Correct, that's exactly what I said. NN is gov enforced regs. This thread is about bad _gov_ regulation. Companies cant make or enforce law. Gov can. Gov is therefore much more powerful, as we see here. You can leave FB, you cant leave your gov (well... easily).

From the perspective of Joe & Jane Average, there is no difference between a contract and a civil (rather than criminal) law: Break the rules you didn’t read and you get a fine you might not be able to afford.

Contracts are civil law... I'm not sure what you are getting at. What contracts are you thinking about? If you are thinking about TOS, that's not a contract. The uni-party would love to change that though. I forget which one it was... SOPA/PIPA/ACTA/CISPA/TPP etc etc. NN is civil law since it's FCC regs, but that's not all that important since large corps cant hide from the process server. They would follow it regardless or get their accounts "directed un-deposited" from eventually.

There’s a reason I wrote “From the perspective of Joe & Jane Average” rather than omitting it.

Surveys have shown some people think they have access to Facebook but not the internet. You and I know they’re wrong, but makes no difference to their experience: if they lose their Facebook account for a rules violation, they suffer for it. From their POV, Facebook rules are civil laws.

Remember that normal people record clips of their favourite shows to YouTube with descriptions like “no copyright intended”. Normal people don’t know how the law works in their own country, never mind internationally like the websites themselves. They might not know what a civil law is, but I expect they would describe categories that roughly match criminal and civil laws, and put EULAs, bank account overdraft fees, etc. into the later.

So treat them like fools? That never works. It makes them fools. I disagree with your "average Joe" assessment, it's pretty typical of the elitist mindset we technical folk seem to have a problem with. I guarantee my dead grandpa could easily understand this in heartbeat, and I know my elderly neighbor already does.

Surveys are often garbage. I would be happy to look at them, but I make good money betting against polls.

Feedback teaches, remove the feedback and... next thing you know you are arguing against free speech.

No, I propse the system is simplified. I want the legal system to be simple enough that almost everyone knows almost all of their rights and obligations. Without that, I claim that although ignorance of the law must not be an excuse, it de-facto is an excuse.

This isn’t just a problem for Joe & Jane Average, it’s a problem for The Elites, too: I asked a lawyer if anyone knew all of UK law, he just laughed. From the way they act, I don’t even have reason to believe lawmakers understand the laws they pass (for example, the Australian government accidentally made half of itself ineligible for office without noticing).

The average person might be able to understand a decent subset of the laws if they are explained to them, but firstly they are not explained, and secondly there are too many for any human to understand all of them. Most people do not read EULAs, based on how long they spend on that screen — they should be simple and clear enough that people chose to do so.

> You can leave FB, you cant leave your gov

That may not stay true forever. For what it's worth, I know more expats than people who truly left Facebook.

You can leave your government (in most places), but it involves not then sixty seconds of moving your fingers.

Not following how NN is connected then. It's good regulation. It's essentially the first amendment of the internet.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com