Slashdot Mirror
How President Trump Could Destroy Net Neutrality (vice.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Motherboard: Donald Trump's presidential election victory could have dire consequences for U.S. internet freedom and openness, according to several tech policy experts and public interest advocates surveyed by Motherboard on Wednesday. The Republican billionaire will likely seek to roll back hard-won consumer protections safeguarding net neutrality, the principle that all internet content should be equally accessible, as well as a host of other policies designed to protect consumers, ensure internet freedom, and promote broadband access, these experts and advocates said. In the wake of Trump's election victory, FCC Chairman Wheeler is likely to step down before the billionaire reality TV star is inaugurated in January. Incoming presidents traditionally have the prerogative to select the leader of FCC, which has broad regulatory power over the nation's cable, phone and satellite companies. It's unclear whom Trump might nominate to lead the FCC, but Ajit Pai, the Kansas-born Republican FCC commissioner and former Verizon lawyer, is likely to be a contender. Trump has tapped Jeffrey Eisenach, a conservative scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, to lead his telecom policy transition team, according to Politico. Eisenach is a well-known figure in right-wing telecommunications policy circles, with a reputation as a "crusader against regulation." One immediate consequence of Trump's election is a dimmer outlook for ATT's proposed $85 billion buyout of entertainment giant Time Warner. Last month, Trump vowed to block the deal, warning that it would result in "too much concentration of power in the hands of too few." Trump's ignorance about tech and telecom policy was on full display throughout the election season. For example, Trump blithely compared net neutrality to the FCC's old Fairness Doctrine, a bizarre and ignorant assertion for which he was roundly mocked. The Fairness Doctrine, which was eliminated decades ago, required media outlets to afford a "reasonable opportunity" for the airing of opposing views on major issues. Net neutrality has nothing to do with the Fairness Doctrine, but rather ensures that consumers have open, unfettered access to the internet. Net neutrality can't be torpedoed overnight. The FCC rules prohibiting online fast lanes and discriminatory broadband practices are now U.S. policy, and they can't be dismantled at the whim of an authoritarian president. But a Trump-backed, Republican-led FCC could simply stop enforcing the net neutrality policy, rendering it essentially toothless. That could unleash the nation's largest cable and phone companies, including Comcast, AT&T and Verizon, to expand controversial practices like "zero-rating" that are designed to circumvent net neutrality.
As the missiles descend and all the major metropolitan areas are bathed in nuclear hellfire, the neutrality of the Net will cease to be a concern as the former infrastructure drifts across the land in a radioactive cloud.
The Republican billionaire will likely seek to roll back hard-won consumer protections PERIOD.
FTFY
I doubt that the Congressional Republicans can agree among themselves what they want to do with running the government. They haven't been able to do that under Obama for eight years. As a moderate conservative, I expect some bloodletting between the different factions.
"surveyed by Motherboard " is all I needed to hear. This is through-and-through FUD. To best of my knowledge Trump is rather anti-media, and all big players that would benefit from NN repeal are also happen to be media.
I'm not understanding how blocking the proposed takeover between AT&T and Time Warner would hurt net neutrality. It seems to me that blocking that (a deal between a telecom and content producer) would help net neutrality.
He hasn't even been sworn in yet, but the hand-wringing and pearl-clutching has gone to DEFCON 5 already...
Not a Trump supporter, but I'll start. From the summary:
Trump's ignorance about tech and telecom policy was on full display throughout the election season.
I guess this is supposed to be weighed against Clinton's tech acumen - "Like with a cloth?"
We've had a good year to get used to Trump and listen to his promises about what to do when he's elected.
Ill tell you what the dems should work with trump the way the GOP worked with Obama. Fair is fair right?
Messing with TV service
Yeah, the reaction from the blue collar people who elected him into office would be very bad.
Clinton did not know how to use a desktop computer
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
Projections like this aren't helpful at all. He hasn't even taken office yet and people are trying to do their best to destroy him. Nice of you.
If Trump says so much stupid shit his staff took away your twitter access then 'people' don't really have to do much to destroy him other than listen up and repeat the stupid shit the man said.
The sky isn't falling, the four horsemen aren't riding across the moors, just give it a fricking rest!
What happened to News for Nerds? Is it now Fear for Nerds?
Maybe we just need to start a "What Trump COULD do" thread and let the rest of us get on with life.
As the Beaverton reports:
"Donald Trumph, America's first sociopath president"
"Is this America's 9/11?"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Canadian humour
These predictions brought to you buy the same types of people who swore Trump wouldn't be the Republican nominee, and wouldn't be elected president. So take them with a grain of salt: everyone has been completely wrong about Trump so far regarding every material prediction.
If net neutrality would last exactly until a Republican gets in office... I mean, did you think there would never again be a Republican in office? Like, ever?
Valuable takeaways from the summary include:
"It's unclear whom Trump might nominate to lead the FCC"
and
"Trump blithely compared net neutrality to the FCC's old Fairness Doctrine"
It's reasonable and probable that Trump has barely thought about the issue.
The internet needs to be forked for the purposes of non-profit, non-competitive use.
Every "news" article that begins with "How" is a puff piece, and I refuse to read any of them, including this one.
Among all the things Trump can screw up, net neutrality is not the first one.
Sent as ripples into the electromagnetic field. No single photon has been harmed in the process.
I wish stories like this included a disclaimer. No one on the planet is opposed to network neutrality. Lots and lots of us are opposed to Network Neutrality, Inc.(TM) - a government overreach brought to you by corporate sponsors to use against their corporate opponents and customers which may or may not involve networks and certainly contains no neutrality.
Part of the reason we all hate the media so much is that they tend to switch back and forth between the concept and the instance in an intentionally deceptive way. Please, slashdot editors, for each story like this, insist that the submitter pick a meaning, tell us which, and stick to it.
See that "Preview" button?
The GOP platform specifically states that it is against net neutrality
Freedom of the internet
FOR HIM
is one of the things that got him elected.
he does not care about anyone else
Why was Net Neutrality considered an FCC/executive issue in the first place, instead of a problem for Congress? Was it just because the FCC was more responsive and Congress was dragging their feet, or is there some more principled justification?
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
Amazing how easy it is to get hens to vote for foxes these days. Just point out some connection, any sort, no matter how tenuous, between a candidate you want to defeat and some unpopular entity, and you can write off their entire voting record no matter how long it is. So we can write off that Clinton has always been one of the leading sponsors of net neutrality, including being a cosponsor of the Internet Freedom Preservation Act of 1996 and having voted for every net neutrality bill while she was a Senator.
No, just point out that Viacom donated money to an international charity that her husband founded and which she does not work for, and all of the sudden, forget about how she actually, consistently voted - instead, vote for the guy who literally promises to overturn net neutrality.
I wish it was just this one issue, but the whole campaign has been like this on virtually every issue.
It's times like this I wish I had a friend named 'The Professor'.
There will never be any net 'neutrality' until we can work around the ISP problem with real ad hoc P2P networking.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
I hope so.
I don't have to live in America, but I do have to share the world with the rest of you, and I'm not looking forward to your guy nihilistically firebombing it. If he comes to the decision to simply listen to the rest of the Republican party and puts in place standard conservative policies ... hey, another George Bush, we survived the last one. If he starts tearing down every major international institution on economics and security alliances? The potential chaos is almost unlimited.
It's times like this I wish I had a friend named 'The Professor'.
Who are you speaking to about foreign policy, Trump?
"‘I’m speaking with myself, I have a very good brain’." - Trump
Between who would hire experts to make proper decisions and who thinks he knows the things he doesn't know, I know who I'd side with.
"Old man yells at systemd"
You keep using that word, I don't think you know what that means.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
I'd like to see a presidential candidate that was :
Tech Savvy.
Pro-environment.
Pro-life.
Pro-small business anti-multinational conglomerate.
Pro-states rights
Pro-immigration and Pro-immigrant.
Anti-torcher , Anti-war. Pro-military, pro-police, pro-civil rights, pro-black lives matter.
Not Anti-Muslim just anti-terrorist.
And willing to stop shoving all kinds of liberals or conservative agenda's down the throats of people who don't want them.
But the democrats didn't give me that one nor the republicans so I had to pick someone less then optimal. The internet won't be destroyed, maybe less useful, or useful in different ways. Still a few of the things on that list ranked as more important then net neutrality to me.
âoeTolerance applies only to persons, but never to truth. Intolerance applies only to truth, but never to persons.
I guess this is supposed to be weighed against Clinton's tech acumen - "Like with a cloth?"
Tech *policy* acumen. We need them to understand net neutrality, not IT drudgery.
Trump could destroy Net Neutrality.
Trump could invite Obama and Putin on a "The Bachelor" style third-wheel date
Trump could drop trou during his inauguration and moon the nation
Trump could do a lot of things ... but I wouldn't count on any of the things I listed.
First off, it wasn't an Obama thing, it was an FCC thing. So his decree to erase Obama's legacy won't matter here. Secondly, Trump is smart. Scary smart. Or he has some ridiculously smart advisors to whom he pays very close attention. His entire run was by the book. "Which book," you ask ... the book. Sun Tsu: Art of War (note, this post was made 8 months ago.) All that stupidity, all the sound bites ("mexican rapists"), all the vague promises ("Make America great again") ... it was all 100% intentional and by design.
"First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win." -Mahatma Gandhi
That said, Trump and/or his advisors are smart enough to know that killing Net Neutrality doesn't really get them anywhere. He didn't make any promises regarding it, so there's no reason for him to focus any attention there. And really, he's going to have his hands full building a wall and repealing health care. Comcast v Netflix is small potatoes that won't even register on his radar.
This signature is false.
Since when did Trump start cheerleading for the GOP platform? He may cherry pick and agree with a few items but he is certainly not beholden to the GOP.
Until this election a Presidential candidate needed the full support of his or her party. Trump was elected without any appreciable support from the GOP. There may have been a couple of supporters but even they jumped from insulting Trump one week and then claiming he is not really that bad the following week.
Trump is the first Independent President since the founding of the country. He could be bad or good but he has already did something no other politician has been able to and that is sideline both major parties. All the big money Clinton supporters will be getting no ROI this time. All the big money GOP supporters wasted all their money on other GOP candidates in the primaries.
The mainstream media folks also over played their hand during the election. The level of bias they demonstrated was breath taking. If they think Trump was belligerent to the Press during the campaign they have not seen nothing yet. He has already broken with tradition and refused to allow the press to travel with him on his first trip to meet with Obama. The mainstream media has been effectively sidelined just like the two political parties.
He has already created a new reality where the entrenched and traditional power brokers in the US government just got kicked in the balls and are laying on the ground trying to catch their collective breath. Now we need to see if all the losers in this election start working to re-invent themselves and try to understand why they lost.
Electing Trump is like letting the fox into the henhouse commonly known as Congress. Feathers and blood may fly but those worthless and spineless morons deserve every bit of grief Trump throws at them.
... https://www.greatagain.gov/ser... This is a breath of fresh air if real. Anyone know this was coming? Trump's gotta know this will get FOIA'd eventually to see who he did or didn't hire. Dude's got balls.
anybody need a job...?
When the king heard the words of the Book of the Law he tore his robes.2Kings22:11
Just look at the posted quote! Trump is so evil he's already destroyed Motherboard's ability to use paragraph breaks. That bastard! Will have to add this to the list of reasons to burn things in the street this Saturday night.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
All funny and true ...
except the "first sociopath" part . Come on ... L.B.J., Theodore Roosevelt, probably Kennedy and lots more.
They're not all bad.
Yeah - and I thought we (general audience on slashdot) wanted that deal blocked.
It's strange seeing my liberal brethren suddenly want a larger more powerful corporation - and ATT no less!
This is just speculation, but not completely unfounded given that we know that Trump used to espouse much more liberal views in the past, and the fact that he was tricked into accepting Pence as VP - also given what is now confirmed about the Russian influence.
A well informed acquaintance of mine thinks Trump is under duress, make of it what you wish:
Well it is speculation. But there was quite a change politically about five years ago as specified by that informant. And I can't explain the look in his eyes sometimes. He just looks terrified. Like, I don't really want to be here, terrified. And something odd. When he went off about "Mexican rapists" and then tried to qualify that with that awkward "and I'm sure some of them are good people" that was almost like he was reluctant to say what he had just said about them. I was sort of bizarre. And he never did that again. Gestapo spank. I just don't think he controls anything. Who picked his VP? Bannon. And the first appearance trump had with him was just bizarre. Almost like he had no say in it. By all accounts he was tricked by Bannon into even meeting with him. And this was the guy he had foisted off on him because it would bring in the Evangelical vote and when exactly has the Trump Monster been even remotely religious? Or actually bought into their point of view. A Kremlin diplomat today finally admitted that they had been in contact with the trump campaign during the campaign.
Why? According to reports, Bannon has actually been running his campaign from day one. Behind the scenes. Why? Why wasn't he openly running the campaign and why was Manafort the front man?
To me, there is a direct connection from Putin, to Manafort to Bannon. Maybe they do have something on him and it would ruin him. I don' know, he really just doesn't seem to be actually enjoying himself or give the air of any real commitment to what his doing or be really in charge of anything. I think it is the Bannon/Pence administration and he is just the card board cut out they need to reassure the public. And quite often, I swear to God, he has this weird terrified, unhappy look in his eyes.
You want them to do what they said the republicans should not have been doing?
It would show them as even more hypocrites than they already are. Alternatively, it would justify what the republicans did.
And - outside of SCOTUS - they barely slowed Obama down. He just switched to executive orders. That said, it will make it easier for Trump to reverse what Obama did since he won't need congress to undo an executive order.
True - otherwise the narrative would have just been what the mainstream media set - which has been demonstrated by wikileaks to be controlled (or at least heavily influenced) by the Clintons.
Some of which overran any net neutrality features that might otherwise have benefitted consumers.
Between the two Trump is an uncertainty. Clinton has a congressional voting record to answer for. The point is neither was a good option and now we've gotten the candidate who is percieved as worse but is unknown enough that he *COULD* be better. Sort of a schroedinger's cat of negativity. He'll probably be bad, but we can't be certain until he's sworn in as president. Clinton was more like a previously observed cat whose state was known.
Why would he want to destroy it. Freedom of the internet is one of the things that got him elected.
Democracy got H*tler elected. So surely he's going to defend it. :P
I'd much rather see innovation instead of government regulation. I didn't vote for President Trump. However, on this issue, I hope we can be a bit more flexible in what ISPs and various information providers can do.
Every other national politician has come up through the ranks and is driven by a quest for Power to control Policy. trump never has cared about policy unless it directly affected his plans. In older, pre 2016 interviews he would answer policy question without thought and tended towards what he likely heard on the NYC TV news - mildly liberal. He does not have a policy bone in his body. He really does not care about policy or politics. Like every other con man he sells you what ever you want. He is a narcissist who is driven to make money to be a bigger man. I believe the reason he ran for the presidency is to make money. To a great extent, the President and VP are exempt from most conflict of interest laws. Trump is not putting his wealth into a trust lake every other present has done for decades. It is perfectly legal for him to propose having the federal government buy the block across from trump tower, tear down what is there and put in a national park to increase the value of his tower. There is noting illegal from trump threatening republican congressional leadership with putting Elizabeth Warren on the supreme court unless they build such a park for him. Let me take a flyer and say that trump's plan is to use the presidency to become the first trillionaire bythe end of his first term. That means he has to make $684,931,506 per day. That is a lot of money to shake the county down in a day, but heck he is a hard worker. This guy is going to be like Silvio Berlusconi on a yuge dose of steroids. There is the whole social security trust fund that can be channeled into a new trump security investment company, because who would be smarter to mange the money??? I do think the republicans in congress will get their way with policy as they have leverage, but so does trump to get paid for every bill they want signed. I fear that in four years we will have an empty treasury and and caveman republican policies with supreme court seat sold to the highest bidders. Want a supreme that likes patents, no problem, just make the highest bid.
I console myself with thoughts of Schadenfreude. Because the idiots, deplorables, racists, etc. who voted for Trump are precisely the ones he will likely betray. Tax cuts to the rich, taking away healthcare for the poor, running up deficits, they are the ones who will fare the worst, and they deserve it.
How white average Joes think someone as truly corrupt as Trump (tax shenanigans, real estate dealings, non-payment to workers/contractors, Trump U) will help them just goes to show how plain STUPID they are. I hope they continue killing themselves with drugs or suicide, they deserve to be wiped out.
Trump is going to be like Bush, claim to be for the everyday person to get the presidency, forget it once he becomes president, feel overwhelmed with actually governing and hand over the reins to unscrupulous handlers, and do one monumentally stupid thing during his term. Bush's was Iraq, Trump probably won't attack another country, but probably will get hoodwinked by Russia or China into doing something stupid.
Seriously? The big news in tech for the next few weeks is "what is Trump going to do about issue X in tech" and you expect slashdot to ignore it?
There are other stories to read and comment on.
no, dems should not work with republicans.
dish out some of what they have been doing and see if they like the taste.
gridlock is our only savior at this point.
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
Those you mentioned seriously fucked some things up - faking an attack to drag the USA into a petty French colonial war, getting taken hook line and sinker by Stalin at Yalta and the incredibly fucking stupid brinkmanship that resulted in the Cuba missile crisis.
Look, we need a president that can run the death-camps like a business!
Hail God Emporor Trump!
Progressivism: Parasites helping parasites to help themselves - to other people's stuff.
If you are hysterical over the election, please keep your mod points to yourself. Your personal feelings do not change the facts in this post.
No candidate is perfect, no president is perfect. Trump was not my first or even second choice. He is not a politician and he does not have much of an internal filter. That said, the hysteria on the left is ridiculous. People need to realize that he is only 1/3 of the government, he has no more power that Obama took and used with his phone and his pen. As long as you are not actively breaking any laws, you will be fine. If you are breaking laws, well, you have made that choice. (Criminals are ~5x more likely to be Democrat than Republican, which makes sense seeing Dems want criminals to be treated as if they are ill or at worst just made a mistake, whereas Republicans want to protect society from criminals, and if that means a long drop at the end of a short rope, thems the brakes for the criminal.)
We who did not vote for Obama have suffered through 8 years of his mismanagement and assaults on our constitutional rights. He has repeatedly attempted to infringe on 1st amendment free speech, and the 2nd amendment. The middle east is on fire, ISIS is on the rise, Europe is being invaded, the country is bankrupt with $19,190,000,000 in debt ($10.6T when Obama took office, but he called Bush un-American after Bush incurred $5.8T due in large part to 9-11 and the subsequent war on terror). Obama the dove was one bloodthirsty president, he has killed 3,491 people abroad by direct order using drone strikes.
Domestically there are 42% more people on food stamps than when Obama took office, home ownership is as low as it was in the 70's, we have the lowest labor participation rate (real unemployment) in 38 years (94,044,000 people not working). 1 in 5 households have no one working (just think about that for a minute)! Welfare enrollment is up 30% under Obama as well. Obamacare has turned out to be a colossal lie and everyone now knows that it is a massive indirect tax on the middle class to give insurance to the non-productive/uneducated/economically unproductive class in exchange for votes.
Bush inherited the war on terror from Clinton and Bush dealt with the 9-11 economic impact and took the fight to the terrorists. He did not blame Clinton and whine like a 4 year old.
Obama inherited the housing market crisis and a pacified, free Iraq and Afghanistan from Bush. Obama blamed Bush for 8 years, he took the real solution that had been crafted to deal with the housing market crisis (the government was going to buy up distressed properties in foreclosure and then slowly re-sell or rent them out to the residents as the housing market improved, which would have recouped most of the money laid out by the taxpayer). Instead Obama pissed it away on corporate give aways to his cronies (Solyndra/Tesla/NRG/etc. 75% of all stimulus money went to Obama supporters) which left the housing crisis largely un-solved and 5 years later had created zero new jobs directly from the stimulus. Obama compounded our economic problems with Obamacare, more environmental regulations, and the destruction of our coal industry. Obama left Iraq for political reasons, and EXACTLY what Bush said would happen in the power vacuum happened. Obama created ISIS and now we have over 4000 troops back in Iraq and Syria and ISIS has spread to 40 countries. Obama has presided over the weakest economic recovery since the great depression. Median household income is down thousands of dollars since Obama took office.
We on the other side have had a pretty bumpy 8 years, so suck it up, act like an adult and judge your new president by his actions and the new jobs that will likely be coming your way. Trump may truly want to improve the country for everyone, give him the chance to show you one way or the other before you become apoplectic.
If you disagree, please post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like
...forget about how she actually, consistently voted - instead, vote for the guy who literally promises to overturn net neutrality.
I wish it was just this one issue, but the whole campaign has been like this on virtually every issue.
Similarly people wanted the benefits of Obamacare, such as subsidies, no lifetime caps, must accept everyone, no insane prices if your sickly, etc, etc. I know my father had heart then lung problems for the last probably twenty years of his life. Our health insurance was insanely expensive, and you just had to pay it or you would probably not get it again. Now that will probably be back. As far as my own health insurance goes, the impact is likely none, since my company provides it.
The Trump voters who hated Obamacare seem to be one of two groups. The first were mainly just the deadbeats. They hated it because they now had to pay for insurance or get a fine, and it wasn't even a big fine. I'm embarrassed to say that I have a half sister like this. She just uses emergency rooms and stiffs them on the bill. The second group was the one that acted shocked at the premium increases. People from the first group decided that the fine wasn't high enough, so they were not going to contribute and the hell with the consequences, hence the risk pool was smaller, hence the fees went up. They forget that before Obamacare fees also went up every year like clockwork. I suppose you could add a third if you add the low IQ trolls who believe it is the worst thing since malaria just because of frequent lies used in talking points and fake news stories, but you gotta write them off and hope they don't reproduce.
Selling across state lines is no magic cure either. States establish minimum standards which Obamacare also mandated. Sure people will be able to buy junk policies again, and worse they will be able to buy policies that are probably little better than toilet paper. Said people will love and treasure their wonderful and super cheap health insurance, right up until they get sick then go bankrupt. At this point I have no sympathy for those people, unless they voted against Trump. If they voted for Trump, get sick, and go bankrupt, well they deserve it.
Actions have consequences, and it is past time our policies reflect that. Those who can afford health insurance but instead waste the money on crap, and then stick us ultimately with the bill are leeches on society, and I suspect a great many of them were Trump voters. I'm not even sure hospitals should be forced to pay in those cases. In fact, if they were to just remove the fine on Obamacare, but also remove your right to emergency room care for failing to pay said fine, then that would seem fair to me, or at least fairer.
Another action that has consequences is the love of tax cuts. The ones in Bush's era ballooned the deficit under Obama. Now the ones in Trump's era will balloon the deficit even farther. If I had a kid, I'd be worried. Fortunately it just doesn't matter to me. As a software engineer, Canada will probably take me, if I get desperate :)
... hey, another George Bush, we survived the last one.
Well, most people did, although a million or so people were not so lucky.
But you are right, his policy platform (what we know of it) reads like a reset to the Bush era. Which is ironic, given that it's the children of Trump's supporters who will be coming home in body bags when he and the other neo-neocons move to broaden their business interests overseas.
Requiring "Net neutrality" requires regulation which by definition limits freedom. The internet has succeeded so spectacularly because it was unregulated. Regulations stifle innovation and limit progress and consumer choice. Net neutrality limits not only the freedoms of the companies providing access to run their business as they see fit, but the consumers ability to choose the type and quality of services they can demand. Maybe my provider wants to charge Facebook a premium for a premium delivery. That is their right. If I don't like it, I can switch providers. Maybe I want to pay a premium for premium delivery of Netflix. I should have that option. What really boggles me is that we think it is a good idea to allow the FCC to regulate the internet in exchange for "neutrality" The fracking FCC!!!! They regulate communications by radio (spectrum allocation), television, wire (telephone), satellite and cable. These are NOT the regulatory models we want applied to the internet. Maybe people have forgotten, but these are crappy distribution networks the internet was intended improve upon and replace. Asking the FCC to regulate the internet on behalf of the consumer is like asking the fox to guard the hen house on behalf of the eggs.
Don't worry. Buzzfeed will tell you what you want to know. Just know it before those jack booted right-wing death squads come for you.
Om, nomnomnom...
The GOP platform specifically states that it is against net neutrality
You know, net neutrality is not actually a partisan issue. It's been made to look that way so you don't consider who is really behind it. It's actually members of the US Chamber of Commerce like Comcast, AT&T and Time Warner that have lobbied the government. They'll influence anyone they think will favor their position to strong arm citizens into arrangements to pay them more money for their respective boards of directors.
We'll make great pets
GOP establishment also didn't want Trump as president. I wouldn't take the GOP platform as a guide to what Trump will do, the senate and house perhaps but not Trump.
Trump just got elected after fighting against the mainstream media and the establishments of both parties. All of the big media establishments bashed Trump, and he bashed them in return. Trump and the people who voted for him hate companies like Comcast, Time Warner (CNN), and AT&T. Plus he didn't take money from them and doesn't owe them any favors, which is usually how these shitty law get passed. It's makes absolutely no sense for him to further consolidate power in the hand of his enemies.
Public reactions to Trump may hound him out of the presidency even before he takes the oath of office. First all loyal Americans must avoid using any Trump owned properties such as golf courses or hotels. Next we will want to investigate in persistent, unending, close inspection of any individual involved with Trump including their family members. After all, money gets moved around through family members, relatives and supporters so getting into their lives with a magnifying glass is important. Total stonewalling and obstruction as well as massive marches on Washington sufficient to shut down the city should be frequent. We can make this jerk so miserable that he quites before he begins. And that rape trial for the 13 year old that he is accused of raping should be very, very public as well. Some of the women he groped may well bring forward criminal charges as well. A sled ride to hell awaits Trump. Can we impeach before he takes the oath?
lol, I got downvoted for that? She's a former Senator that didn't even get democratically elected, and a former Secretary of State. She's currently none of those, and holds no elected office. I can't imagine how the post above mine was marked as "Informative" when the discussion is about the incoming president. It should have been marked as "Off-Topic"
Clinton was elected as Senator in 2000. I don't know why you're claiming otherwise. She defeated Rick Lazio, 55% to 37%. She was then re-elected in 2006 by a larger margin.
The GOP platform specifically states that it is against net neutrality
The term - Net Neutrality - regardless of what it actually is, seems to suggest that it's about regulating the Internet so that the contents/coverage are balanced b/w Left and Right. So people on the Right see this as an attempt to censor them in case the coverage weighs out heavily in their favor. The big communications companies - the Comcasts, the AT&T's, et al see this as an opportunity to sabotage the attempts to force them to deliver all content via any of their channels. Like if you don't have a TV but just an Internet connection, you should be able to watch the Super Bowl w/o having to subscribe to their TV services. That is something that rank & file GOPers wouldn't have a problem w/, but the idea of content regulation, which is what the term 'net neutrality' suggests, leaves them w/ a more sinister impression of what it is about
If the proponents of Net Neutrality want it to succeed, they should segregate the part about content being even from the part about access being available regardless of whether someone subscribes to broadcast TV or Internet only
Trump probably won't attack another country,
I'll take that bet. War is the only consistent US policy.
Cheap storage VM.
Another piece of the Obamacare puzzle is the ban on "Cadillac" plans. To people who are accustomed to $5 copays and no worries about Rx, this was a shock. To actually worry about the increasing costs? I think this was a big part of the Blue Collar pushback against obama care, I'm not certain why it was included, maybe a give away to big corps who had poorly negotiated with unions in the past?
Cheap storage VM.
I wonder if I can just slap Trump on anything now, kind of like Reagen, it's no longer a "private" brand, it's America's now.
Cheap storage VM.
So the Republicans have now deteriorated to the point where they actively pursue policies that would undermine the US's internet economy, which is leading the world and spurs innovation globally and should be one of the prides of the nation. It's astounding to think that the GOP once used to be the quintessential pro-business party, whereas these days the majority of business leaders support the Democratic Party, if only for the fact that they seem to churn out fewer religious bigots and all-around numbnuts.
President-ELECT Trump cannot do anything until he is inaugurated 20 Jan 2017. Get some (any!!) facts. This entire post is an insult to ALL liberals && conspiracy-theoristsl The use of "could' and "likely" is easier to use than links to actual quotations, public records, and events.
The only thing new in this world is the history that you don't know.[Harry Truman]
As long as the throttling also affects internet telephony, I'd say that throttling everything equally doesn't violate NN.
Amazing how easy it is to get hens to vote for foxes these days
There is no such thing as a political election where the voters aren't hens, and the candidates aren't foxes. Replace "these days" with "since the beginning of time", and you're good to go. It's completely natural, even guaranteed, that the people interested in gaining coercive authority over others are the same people who would use that power for their own self-interest.
What is with all the speculation that he will do the worst that anyone can imagine in every situation before he has even taken office? This is all by the same media that was found to be completely full of shit the entire race. Now that it's over am I supposed to accept their bullshit once again and act like they are just reporting the news, not pushing an agenda. For fucks sakes! We have ADHD of history now where people learn nothing from the past or want to ignore it. It is utterly mind boggling how you can put the evidence in some ones face on something and they will go out of their way to ignore it and on other things they are all in and accept it as truth with little more than hearsay. WTF? Does no one research anything any more or look to seek out the actual truth on matters any more? It's like everyone has become like the people in the hospital at the end of 50 first dates.
Do you really think the protests are anywhere near what the media has claimed they are? They wouldn't even tell the truth about how many were showing up at Hilary rallies but I am suppose to think this time they are factual?
Which group do you think the swing voter will feel more disposed to joining?
The bulk of the Trump stories here have been political, not tech related
And her IT staff risked contempt of Congress, wiped the server using BleachBit in defiance of a subpoena, and took the Fifth, all w/o her knowledge, let alone her directives
Ill tell you what the dems should work with trump the way the GOP worked with Obama. Fair is fair right?
GOP did work w/ Obama. Like on Gang of 8. But they are under no obligation to work w/ Obama when the latter does stupid to borderline criminal things like the Iran deal, or shipping billions of $ in cash to Iran in defiance of US sanctions