Slashdot Mirror
More Than 40 ISPs Across the Country Tell Chairman Pai to Not Repeal Network Neutrality (eff.org)
An anonymous reader shares a report: One excuse FCC Chairman Ajit Pai regularly offers to explain his effort to gut net neutrality protections is the claim that open Internet rules have harmed ISPs, especially small ones. During a speech earlier this year, he stressed that 22 small ISPs told him that the 2015 Open Internet Order hurt their ability to invest and deploy. In reality, though, many more ISPs feel very differently. Today, more than 40 ISPs told the FCC that they have had no problem with the Open Internet Order (PDF) and that it hasn't hurt their ability to develop and expand their networks. What is more, that they want the FCC to do its job and address the problem Congress created when it repealed the broadband privacy rules in March.
Telling Mr Pai that the rules have not been cumbersome to them, is not the same as telling him to not repeal those rules.
Can we please stop with this notion that "net neutrality" as exists in law is not the same as "net neutrality" as the slashdot crowd thinks of it?
Pai said this back in May: "Just last week, we heard from 22 small ISPs, companies that nobody has ever heard of in towns very few people will ever visit, and what they told us is, look, we are being inhibited." As far as I know, Pai has never named the ISPs nor shared the communications. Whereas this week 40 ISPs through the EFF signed a letter stating the opposite. I'll let you decide who is not telling the whole truth.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Except these companies don't have high-paid lobbyists so he's unlikely to care.
"...they want the FCC to do its job and address the problem Congress created when it repealed..."
This is a grossly false assertion.
The FCC's job is to implement the law as directed by Congress, not the other way around.
Next thing you'll expect this administration to respect checks and balances. Hahahaha.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
They should also tell him that allowing ISPs to sell user data is a blatant violation of privacy that no company should be allowed to do.
But hey, small victories.
Amit Pai is that he is a Republican. That equals liar and hypocrite for those of you keeping track at home.
And ruin everyone's fun?
Not saying this isn't important news..but 40 is not a lot.
"Can we please stop with this notion that "net neutrality" as exists in law is not the same as "net neutrality""
How so?
Look at his record of the things he's done so far. ALL of them favor big ISPs, and NONE of them favor the consumer.
The man is completely bought. He has absolutely no business heading the FCC, which is all about regulating communications and the PUBLIC airwaves.
I don't understand why so many people in this country, especially those who aren't wealthy, continue to support politicians that not only don't work for the people, but are so BLATANTLY and OBVIOUSLY corrupted by big corporate money and influence.
This is quite possibly one of the stupidest things ever said, and a complete inverse of what Net Neutrality actually does.
Hey, now, it's complete bullshit that telesurgery users can buy priority transit. My cat videos are just as goddamn important.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Except these companies don't have high-paid lobbyists so he's unlikely to care.
Net Neutrality hurts the big corporate overlords such as Comcast and Mr. Pai's former employer, Verizon, and that is the only thing that matters.
He, and his Republican Commrades, had already made up their minds about this before he was appointed chairman of the FCC. Anyone who thinks this will have any impact on his decision is completely delusional.
It seems that those in government -- generally of both parties but, lately, more specifically Republicans -- listen more to ideologies than ideas. Remember people, you get for whom you vote.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
Even though it is illegal!
The fact is that these little guys do not matter, only the ones that stole the most through underhanded tactics matter. Like Spectrum!
They just make you see the light of why you should or should not join them rather than properly doing business because they think they feel what they see.
Ya no shit, turn a wrench you cunt whores.
They even go as far as under employing or paying your employees, what a quality system!
That really is how it is.
Why create another account to login and forget as well as apply more forgetfulness to my good passwords? Oh yea, cause Spectrum and other large company employees need to fix their password problems for the nth time.
At the risk of feeding the trolls, this is incredibly misguided.
Net Neutrality means anyone with internet access can access whatever they want, regardless of "connection tier", income, gender, race, sexual preference, generations in the U.S., or whatever other nonsense segregation you can come up with. It's what stops ISP's like Comcast from promoting only their stuff. It allows the cheapskates to avoid cable and opt for Netflix instead.
The only racism I can see in Net Neutrality is it's the old, stuffy, technologically inept, pro-business white guys that want it.
The FCC's job is to implement the law as directed by Congress, not the other way around.
Which is how you get lawyers that don't understand technology setting technology policy. The FCC understands tech (at the lower, non-polcy levels) but the administration of FCC oversight is set by politicians.
Let's put it like this: How's that repeal and replace going for ya? They've been saying for 7 years this is job one, and here it is, 150 days into a majority Republican administration (and soon SCOTUS). The key fact here is not the health care policy itself, it's the fact that it doesn't really matter who is in power - it's all screwed up, and that swamp might be getting drained, but the sewage back fill is a higher flow rate than the swamp water outflow.
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
So sue me!
Their "Job" now is to serve their regulatory captors at the expense of the rest of the People.
Begin by blocking all political donation sites to all the congress critters that support the repeal of net neutrality. That's a fun start but you can take it to some weird extremes.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
For one thing, will "net neutrality" mean they will stop blocking incoming port 80 (web server) to my home network, unless I buy the expensive "business class" service?
Just change for changes sake is just plain ignorant. If there is something better... describe desired objectives, define how we meet them, how we will pay for it, and what benefit it will have to all. And then it makes sense. Same thing for healthcare. The compulsion to repeal something ... just because, ... is just shallow and pedantic (thanks Peter Griffin ) or at least mean spirited. Maybe Mr Pai can tell us how its going to benefit you and I. The people he serves. Should we start a new tradition of thought and discussion preceding action?
Time for a new Political party in the US (or two!) One is off the rails Other cant pony up a leader.
Sorry, your comment assumes the final decision has not already been made. It has. He is just waiting for the time limit to expire and then the "decision" will be posted.
Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
Not sure that's a net neutrality issue 'as exists in law', but I get the impression it might not be if your ISP blocks port 80 for all it's residential consumers.
Does anyone else think "Chairman Pai" sounds like an Asian dictator's name?
"Here we have Chairman Pai, Chairman Mao's lesser-known cousin..."