Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

FCC Refuses To Release Text of More Than 40,000 Net Neutrality Complaints (arstechnica.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the pain-in-the-ass dept.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: The Federal Communications Commission has denied a request to extend the deadline for filing public comments on its plan to overturn net neutrality rules, and the FCC is refusing to release the text of more than 40,000 net neutrality complaints that it has received since June 2015. The National Hispanic Media Coalition (NHMC) filed a Freedom of Information Act (FoIA) request in May of this year for tens of thousands of net neutrality complaints that Internet users filed against their ISPs. The NHMC argues that the details of these complaints are crucial for analyzing FCC Chairman Ajit Pai's proposal to overturn net neutrality rules. The coalition also asked the FCC to extend the initial comment deadline until 60 days after the commission fully complies with the FoIA request. A deadline extension would have given people more time to file public comments on the plan to eliminate net neutrality rules. Instead, the FCC yesterday denied the motion for an extension and said that it will only provide the text for a fraction of the complaints, because providing them all would be too burdensome.

64 comments

  1. Too burdensome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    So hard to copy the whole folder so I'm going to manually hand pick a few. So I'm going to do the same action many times and act like that easier than doing it once to the whole folder...
    Incompetent fool should be fired.

    1. Re:Too burdensome by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 1

      So, they refuse to release the text of complaints that nobody actually wants to read, and someone is complaining.

    2. Re:Too burdensome by hackwrench · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes because picking and choosing what someone wants to read should not be their job.

    3. Re: Too burdensome by dougdonovan · · Score: 1

      the fcc refuses. give it a few days... it'll leak.

    4. Re: Too burdensome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      CP $(Grep -rvlP 'undesirable|phrases') for_public/

    5. Re: Too burdensome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Didn't the White House release a ton of comments from voters about voting fraud concerns, complete with personal data? If that's not too much trouble to release...

    6. Re:Too burdensome by parkinglot777 · · Score: 1

      So, they refuse to release the text of complaints that nobody actually wants to read, and someone is complaining.

      You assume that "nobody" actually wants to read. That's a very dangerous assumption in most cases because of "there exists" cases...

    7. Re:Too burdensome by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 1

      So, they refuse to release the text of complaints that nobody actually wants to read, and someone is complaining.

      You assume that "nobody" actually wants to read. That's a very dangerous assumption in most cases because of "there exists" cases...

      How is it dangerous in this particular case? Do you really think there is something contained in 40,000 complaints that hasn't already been pounded to death? I'm just being realistic. Who wants to read them?

    8. Re:Too burdensome by parkinglot777 · · Score: 1

      So, they refuse to release the text of complaints that nobody actually wants to read, and someone is complaining.

      You assume that "nobody" actually wants to read. That's a very dangerous assumption in most cases because of "there exists" cases...

      How is it dangerous in this particular case? Do you really think there is something contained in 40,000 complaints that hasn't already been pounded to death? I'm just being realistic. Who wants to read them?

      You have proven my point (see bold).

    9. Re:Too burdensome by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 1

      So, they refuse to release the text of complaints that nobody actually wants to read, and someone is complaining.

      You assume that "nobody" actually wants to read. That's a very dangerous assumption in most cases because of "there exists" cases...

      How is it dangerous in this particular case? Do you really think there is something contained in 40,000 complaints that hasn't already been pounded to death? I'm just being realistic. Who wants to read them?

      You have proven my point (see bold).

      No, your point is based on YOUR erroneous assumption that I assume people don't want to read complaints in most cases, or even in any other case. I never said so. So if you want to make assumptions and prove yourself right, no need to involve me.

    10. Re:Too burdensome by rhazz · · Score: 1

      The comments submitted are likely to contain personally identifying information. Each one would have to be vetted and potentially redacted to be released to the public - this takes time and resources. If they released them in their entirety as-is, they would get sued by many people. Any incompetent fool that did that would be fired.

    11. Re:Too burdensome by dave420 · · Score: 1

      This is the correct answer.

  2. popular opinion lies within by Revek · · Score: 1

    Popular opinion to us and lies to them.

  3. Too Burdensome? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    To run a script that only pulls the comment on a data set and then zip it?

    1. Re:Too Burdensome? by PPH · · Score: 1

      This.

      40,000 files is a light day surfing porn.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    2. Re:Too Burdensome? by Vrekais · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yeah, I'd love for that to get brought up in court.

      Judge: "How are the comments stored?"
      FCC: "Digitally in a database system fed by an online submission website"
      Judge: "What part of rertrieveing comments from this system is burdensome?"
      FCC: "We've only got one computer than can access it."
      Judge: "How is that a burden?"
      FCC "It's in the basement, in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door that says beware of the leopard." "And it runs Windows 98"

    3. Re:Too Burdensome? by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      Judge: "No towel for you! NEXT!"

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    4. Re:Too Burdensome? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and we all know, the bathroom server is used exclusively to process Hiliary's classified emails.

    5. Re:Too Burdensome? by SeattleLawGuy · · Score: 1

      To run a script that only pulls the comment on a data set and then zip it?

      The FCC is saying that they would have to go through and have staff members redact all personally identifiable information in the comments.

      https://transition.fcc.gov/Dai...

      --
      Real lawyers write in C++
    6. Re:Too Burdensome? by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      To run a script that only pulls the comment on a data set and then zip it?

      The FCC is saying that they would have to go through and have staff members redact all personally identifiable information in the comments.

      https://transition.fcc.gov/Dai...

      Which is of course bullshit. I've made public comment to government agencies and it is exactly that - public. Those comments and identifying information including names and emails are right there posted on a government web site for all to see. For example : http://csrc.nist.gov/publicati...

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    7. Re:Too Burdensome? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is that based on a specific law, that any comment provided to a government agency is public? I would think a lot depends on the privacy policies in place where and when the information was gathered. It's not hard to believe that your example was collected under one policy (indicating information is completely public), while the FCC collected it under a more strict policy. Also who says that just because your example contains personal data, that it shouldn't have been redacted?

    8. Re:Too Burdensome? by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      I don't know my way around FCC policies and I didn't comment there. I was showing a counter example of a department with a policy of publishing public comment. In that case the subject matter wasn't a political football and I think most of the contributors have met at the NIST workshops. Publishing the comments is very useful and helps us make progress.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
  4. ...and? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So what? The FCC refuses to release lots of stuff.

  5. Fraction of the complaints by sit1963nz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The fraction supplied will however be carefully culled to put the best light on the FCC plan. All that time "selecting" that few leaves no time to supply everything.

    1. Re:Fraction of the complaints by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The fraction supplied will however be carefully culled to put the best light on the FCC plan.

      All that time "selecting" that few leaves no time to supply everything.

      1. Program an AI to read them and them score each one with how much they support the current propaganda.

      2. select message from messages where score > 50 UNION select message from messages where score 50 Limit 10

      3. Send those.

      Of course they could just dump them all with something like
      call csvwrite('c:\temp\messages.csv','select * from messages order by date') but that would be too hard.

      Or if they wanted to be really thorough they could filter the IPs by removing any non american and known bots, plus make sure the IP is distinct, which would likely be just another sql query.

      Could the government be lying to us about the difficulty?

    2. Re:Fraction of the complaints by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The FCC has absolutely no intention of allowing the public any say whatsoever in this decision. They have a plan, and they intend to carry it out, and that's it.

    3. Re:Fraction of the complaints by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      No kidding. They sure as hell didn't have a problem releasing the 58,000+ fake comments submitted by some anti-net-neutrality company's bot net. Those had personal information included, which is how they were revealed as fake. Reporters started calling the people who had supposedly made the comments, only to be met with total confusion because no one had actually submitted them.

  6. Vote with your wallets, libertardians. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Hey, don't you silly Americans say nobody needs regulations, you can vote for your wallets. You make fun of European consumer protections laws.

    Well, vote with your wallets, cancel your ISP accounts. They need you more than you need them, right?

    And most of all, enjoy your free country with it's freedom from all these burdensome regulations, where everyone if free to squeeze every penny of profit they can as they squeeze the life from the corpse of their once great country.

    Make American Great Again. Yeah right. You're living in the land of profit for free, suffering for most.

    1. Re:Vote with your wallets, libertardians. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's right! The Free Market will cure everything! Ditch your slimeball ISP. Oh, wait, the other local ISPs - if any - are also slimeballs. So vote with your wallet, Oh wait, you have one vote and there are 10 million customers who annoyingly aren't co-operating by doing likewise.

      No Worries! Someone will come along and address that market need for a non-slimeball ISP. Oh wait, no one did!

      No Worries! Just create your own ISP! All it takes is a few million for capital equipment and staff. Or maybe just form a company big enough for you and your friends. Doesn't matter - the cost to hook into the Internet backbone is the same high price - or maybe a little more, whether you have 100,000 customers or 10. And if you're lucky, the nearest backbone provider will be - guess what - an established slimeball ISP!

      Libertarian fantasies are great, but like Communism, they fail to allow for human nature. They expect people to be educated and rational when most will fight tooth and nail for the right to be neither, and they assume that you can become competitive in any industry with whatever small change you can dig out of your pocket as long as the damn gubmit don't get in the way.

    2. Re:Vote with your wallets, libertardians. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Libertarianism (as opposed to authoritarianism, not the Libertarian Party) is a great thing. On an individual level a generous but not unlimited dose of libertarianism is the only ethical choice. The problems come about when libertarian philosophies are applied to groups equally to individuals under the premise of "groups are composed of the choices of individuals, therefore groups should be treated like individuals." Group dynamics among humans cannot be granted the same rights as the composition of the group. Groups of individuals are run by a small portion of the individuals in the group and individuals in the group are pressured, sometimes via threats of bodily harm, into conformity with a subset of the group. In the worst case this can mean that a group of 10,000 individuals being given the weight of 10,000 individuals is actually a single individual being given 10,000 times the weight their views actually hold in the group.

      Or, as another example, this could mean that Ajit Pai's voice doesn't represent what a million ISP customers would actually want if they were allowed to make an informed decision, but Ajit Pai is being given the power to decide what a million voices get to say anyway.

      As always, broad concepts don't map cleanly to all of society, yet we can all agree that Ajit Pai is aggressively mocking us and needs to be ripped from his high political horse.

    3. Re:Vote with your wallets, libertardians. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Look at your first responses. You're bad at this.

    4. Re:Vote with your wallets, libertardians. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The opposite of Authoritarianism is Anti-authoritarianism not Libertarianism.
      I think that the problem is power accumulation, economy has too much power and where is power corruption lingers, this is an example: They are using ecnomic resources to produce social changes in favor of a few.

    5. Re:Vote with your wallets, libertardians. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Libertardians want nothing less than the absolute death of society and everyone in it. If you believe otherwise, you're a total idiot.

      In this case, the Libertardian point of view isn't that the FCC is deciding policy for the million customers but that the million customers are free to choose an ISP and the ISPs are free to shape traffic as they see fit. It's not Ajit Pai choosing for anyone, but everyone free to choose for themselves. Forcing net neutrality is taking away choice, so anti-libertardian.

      Libertardians believe there should be no roads (how dare you tax me to build a road my impoverished neighbour can freely use). They believe the air should be toxic (how dare you stop my factory from pumping what ever toxic waste I want into the air, I have my right to free profits -- if my neighbour wants to breathe they can important their own damn canned air from Canada, and damn you to hell if you think you'll tax me to buy them air). Libertardians don't think their should be any policing or national defence. How dare you tax me to hire cops and soldiers. If I have something worth protecting, I'll buy my own damn gun.

      Broad concepts don't map directly. But this libertardian view that regulation is automatically bad is a grotesque cancer on society. And this issue is a great example. The pathetic American excuse for health care is another.

      The funny part I see as a non-American is that the dumbass Americans see themselves as the greatest country on Earth while the rest of the world is ignorant barbarians. The reality is that rest of the world sees America as middle-of-the-pack for a third world country in how you treat your own people and below that for the sheer ignorance if your own people.

    6. Re:Vote with your wallets, libertardians. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HEY! I AM a wISP and I am not slimy. We do not give one crap about what you do online. All we care about is that pay up and we will deliver you the mb/s package you paid for.

    7. Re:Vote with your wallets, libertardians. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Great idea. I'll cancel my Comcast account and switch to... um... Oh! I heard about this new Xfinity thing.

      (Yes I know AT&T exists and a handful of other DSL providers. But none of them are going to provide me anywhere near broadband speeds)

      So yes... wallets. (Yes I know the OP was trying to be sarcastic.)

    8. Re:Vote with your wallets, libertardians. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Waiting for the SpaceX internet to come online first.

    9. Re:Vote with your wallets, libertardians. by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      This kind of ruthless, hateful attitudes are why so many Americans are questioning why we're allied with Europe. Why should we defend a bunch of jerks who despise us and laugh while they refuse to defend themselves? Jerks who take great joy in the suffering of others? I can't imagine why nobody wants to defend your ungrateful, hypercriticial asses.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    10. Re:Vote with your wallets, libertardians. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The opposite of Authoritarianism is Anti-authoritarianism not Libertarianism.

      Not really. Anti-authoritarianism is by definition opposition to Authoritarianism, but opposites are mutually-opposing and those two concepts aren't necessarily so (an instance of Authoritarianism can hypothetically be indifferent or even sympathetic toward Anti-authoritarianism).

      The opposite of Pro-Authoritarianism is Anti-Authoritarianism, as they are mutually-opposing and lie on opposite extremes of the "opinion of Authoritarianism" axis.

      Similarly Libertarianism and Authoritarianism lie on opposite ends of the "extent of government authority" axis ("Government has authority wherever it feasibly can have authority" vs "Government relinquishes authority wherever it feasibly can relinquishes authority").

    11. Re:Vote with your wallets, libertardians. by danbert8 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Seriously mods? An Anon Coward modded up to +3 Insightful for what is obvious trolling?

      --
      Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?
    12. Re:Vote with your wallets, libertardians. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A better example of ruthless and hateful would look something like taking healthcare away from 20-30 million people to pay for tax breaks for the wealthy or relaxing regulations that protect vital drinking water resources from coal ash or allowing the creation of and refusing to deal with an Opiod drug crisis that will kill more people this year than all US soldiers who died in the thousand day conflict that was 'Nam.

      "I can't imagine why nobody wants to defend your ungrateful, hypercriticial asses."

      You mean nobodies like Trump and his fooled followers? It seems quite hypocritical for the president or anyone to question the western world's willingness to defend their values while at the same time admitting unwillingness to defend those very values at the same time...European values are as much western values as US values are. If we are unwilling to defend those who are on our side over petty disagreements then all hope of ANY western culture surviving has been lost.

      The majority of Americans understand the critical importance of defending our allies and leading the post-WW2 western world we created.

    13. Re:Vote with your wallets, libertardians. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously mods? An Anon Coward modded up to +3 Insightful for what is obvious trolling?

      Agreed with the other AC. The AC gp explain the definition of Libertarian the way it is. Also, the post describes how common American people are -- having self-confidence of the greatness without looking around to others further away from just your own group of people. There is no modesty in Americans but rather braggers. You and the same kind of people should start breaking out of your own glass box. I hope one day the glass box will shatter and that will teach you what "humble" and "modesty" mean.

    14. Re:Vote with your wallets, libertardians. by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      the western world's willingness to defend their values

      What values, slavery? Colonialism? Capitalism? Give it up, we suck. We start wars and make profit from suffering. Europe wants to be allied with such vile people? What does that say about them?

      all hope of ANY western culture surviving has been lost.

      After that's over and done with we can finally start moving forward towards a world that is socially just. That can't happen while the concept of "billionaire" still exists in so-called civilized countries.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    15. Re:Vote with your wallets, libertardians. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No Worries! Someone will come along and address that market need for a non-slimeball ISP. Oh wait, no one did

      No no, Google started bringing fiber to the masses. Viva la competition! The Free market works! WOOO CAPITALISM!!!

      Oh wait, the telecom oligarchy sued them wherever possible, threw up roadblocks to use public utility poles their cable is going across, and then bottomed out the price of cable in the cities where they finally did manage to get service to (offset by their monopoly prices elsewhere). Google hasn't been making money and hasn't expanded to a new city forever.

      If a giant powerhouse business like Google can't break into the industry, then no one can.

    16. Re:Vote with your wallets, libertardians. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Avoid painting anti-net neutrality as a libertarian issue. Most libertarians have no idea what they support.
      My uncle who blathers on and on about politics once announced that he was a libertarian and I told him libertarians were pro-marijuana reform.

      He said no libertarians weren't against "good" laws. Mind you my uncle admits to using supposedly lots of marijuana.
      He is also pro-corn subsidies.

      I've had similar discussions with other "libertarians" most of them have their own idea how far and where the government should be rolled back and they would never agree on it if you put them in a room together and didn't allow some advertising agency to direct their values.

      Just like 100% of americans they have a set of laws they don't like the thing that makes them unique is that they cry about it.

      So if you paint the FCC's stance as libertarian their mind will be instantly made up and there will be no changing it.

    17. Re:Vote with your wallets, libertardians. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Fuckoff snowflake.

    18. Re:Vote with your wallets, libertardians. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Americans question their European alliance because the rest of the world is totally different than a good slice of americans believe.

      Trump is a fine example. His misconceptions about the real world from the mainstream media were so inaccurate that he accused our intelligence agencies of lying because their reporting on the true state of the world was so far off from what he'd been made to believe.

      Yes I'm an american and I'm rich and I'm white and a veteran. I'm exactly who republican voters like to pretend they are.

    19. Re:Vote with your wallets, libertardians. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously mods?

      Yes. Not modding in this case, though, so I can respond to you instead.

      An Anon Coward modded up to +3 Insightful for what is obvious trolling?

      Modded up to +5 Insightful now, for what was an insightful post, although ridden with a tad too many spelling and grammar errors, but I will allow some leniency for someone who is likely not a native English speaker. Like myself.

      In short, not trolling at all.

      You may feel inclined to believe it was trolling due to the contents hitting a bit too close to home. You may want to ponder that a while. You may find it to be ironic.

      Then again, you probably will not, since your ability to see your own flaws are probably quite limited.

      Sorry for the attack on your person, but some people, like you, need that now and then.

  7. I assume this will go to court next by Kernel+Kurtz · · Score: 1

    The FCC has starving lawyers to feed.

    1. Re:I assume this will go to court next by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unfortunately Ajit Pai isn't one of the starving.

  8. the 40k 'missing' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

    just happen to be the ones that best reflect the *actual* thoughts from *actual* people, where over 80% of the population wants network neutrality-powered big dumb pipes and for the current fcc 'leadership' to 'fuck off'.

    1. Re: the 40k 'missing' by nt2ldap · · Score: 1

      I think Stalin also had a problem with the whole popular will thing. I suppose our overlords think we should be grateful that they're simply ignoring us.

  9. Re: You know what has been released? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm not sure why this was modded down, I suspect it's a good representative sample of the complaints they received.

  10. Too 'burdensome' by MistrX · · Score: 1

    When I give this argument to my supervisor, he'll make sure I got tonnes of more burdensome stuff to do.
    But as any parent would also tell you: 'Shut up and get to work ya lazy bum!'.

  11. god damnit by schleimkeim · · Score: 1

    I really wonder how long it will take before the american public realizes how much they and their government get effed in the ass by big companies.

  12. FOIA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Shouldn't those complaints be a matter of public record? What's the rationale for holding back the release of the texts of those complaints?

  13. Telling an uncomfortable Truth is not Trolling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Seriously mods? An Anon Coward modded up to +3 Insightful for what is obvious trolling?

    It may read like trolling to you, but as an American who currently lives here, and has lived abroad in both Europe and Asia, I would say it's actually rather kindly put. We have no idea how far off the rails we've gone, how utterly ignorant and stupid we are, and sound, to everyone else, and how far we're falling behind the rest of the developed world in just about every metric (except willful ignorance and engineered stupidity). And that's nothing to what's coming in the next year or so.

    We've earned this label. If we don't like it, maybe we should grow up, grow a brain, and stop acting the fool

    1. Re:Telling an uncomfortable Truth is not Trolling by HeckRuler · · Score: 1

      Calling them "Libertardians" is flamebait at best.

      You have some good points, but they're wrapped in a shit-blanket and served by pure anger. Ease up Francis.

      and how far we're falling behind the rest of the developed world in just about every metric

      And GDP.

  14. When will the indictments come for Ajit Pai? by thunderclees · · Score: 1

    What should be obvious for anyone with eyes is that Ajit Pai, the FCC Chair is on the take and is feathering his nest for a cushy job at one of the service providers after he is done destroying privacy and gilding the Internet at the FCC. He needs to be kicked out of the FCC and investigated for fraud.

    1. Re:When will the indictments come for Ajit Pai? by volkris · · Score: 1

      If you read the FCC's proposal, which I'll link below, you'll see that it's about getting the FCC out of micromanaging the Internet itself while promoting stronger privacy protections for consumers.

      Quoting from the proposal:
      Historically, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) protected the privacy of broadband consumers, policing every online company’s privacy practices consistently and initiating numerous enforcement actions. When the Commission reclassified broadband Internet access service as a common carriage telecommunications service in 2015, however, that action stripped FTC authority over Internet service providers because the FTC is prohibited from regulating common carriers.

      We propose to return jurisdiction over Internet service providers’ privacy practices to the FTC, with its decades of experience and expertise in this area.

      https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_pub...

  15. Don't Worry. The Text Got Leaked. Here It Is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Man: I want to complain.

    FCC: You want to complain! Look at these shoes. I've only had them three weeks and the heels are worn right through. If you complain nothing happens, you might as well not bother. Oh my back hurts, it's not a very fine day and I'm sick and tired of this office.

  16. The Notice and Comment Process isn't About Voting by volkris · · Score: 1

    In the US the notice and comment process isn't about voting or voicing opinion. It's about identifying specific concerns and then making sure they've been accounted for in finalized regulations.

    Since this isn't a voting process, giving more people time to comment is not a relevant goal.

    In short, since the notice and consent process is about identifying problems, it doesn't matter whether one person or one thousand bring up an issue. It's still only one issue. If a thousand people mention the one issue, then it's only a waste of resources as workers have to sort through and identify the duplicate comments.

    All in all, the FCC is on the right side here, and the special interests trying to make political hay out of the formal process are at best misleading the public.

    I really wish more Americans knew how these elements of their government actually worked.

  17. Re:The Notice and Comment Process isn't About Voti by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, why not a text dump? I mean, 50 _million_ comments can fit in less space than a typical HD movie, even without compression. Weren't almost all of the comments done electronically?

    Let the crowd waste their time trying to sort through them all. XD