Hacker News Reader

Comment by Mithaldu | Hacker News Reader

Maybe they're hoping to inspire others to join them in this action, possibly leading to a key player treating the FCC like this. What's Google's stance on net neutrality nowadays?

View on HN

That worked for SOPA because a few congressmen were in highly contested districts already, and even losing 0.5% of their voters next election could ruin their chances of reelection.

The FCC chairman is not elected. Nor is he appointed by Congress. They can all genuinely claim that they had little or no control over his decisions.

So it does not matter if everyone pulls a stunt this time.

Besides, if the man isn't lying and he somehow subverts state laws that prohibit municipal networks, then that more than makes up for any other wrong he has committed. I can sure as hell influence my city council more easily than I can influence the federal government.

"Prior to working at the FCC, Wheeler worked as a venture capitalist and lobbyist for the cable and wireless industry, with positions including President of the National Cable Television Association (NCTA) and CEO of the Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association (CTIA"

What's your point? Instead of trying to make a logical argument, your comment seems designed to inspire some vague outrage.

Just FYI, Congress does not appoint anyone. They confirm the President's appointments.

Generally the electorate is happy to punish their rep for anything the government is supposed to do. If Wikipedia.com, google.com, etc says your rep. isn't helping protect net-neutrality and to call them, then people will call. Enough calls, and congress drags in the FCC, starts passing laws, etc.

That's exactly my point. I don't think just throttling the FCC employees is the best approach to taking a stance on net neutrality, regardless of the size of the 'key player'. I would argue that throttling consumers (with explanation) would be more effective.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com