Net Neutrality Rollback Faces New Criticism From US Congress -- And 16 Million Comments (techcrunch.com)
An anonymous reader quotes TechCrunch's newest update on the FCC's attempt to gut net neutrality protections:
10 Representatives who helped craft the law governing the FCC itself have submitted an official comment on the proposal ruthlessly dismantling it... The FCC is well within its rights to interpret the law, and it doesn't have to listen to contrary comments from the likes of you and me. It does, however, have to listen to Congress -- "congressional intent" is a huge factor in determining whether an interpretation of the law is reasonable. And in the comment they've just filed, Representatives Pallon, Doyle et al. make it very clear that their intent was and remains very different from how the FCC has chosen to represent it.
"The law directs the FCC to look at ISP services as distinct from those services that ride over the networks. The FCC's proposal contravenes our intent... While some may argue that this distinction should be abandoned because of changes in today's market, that choice is not the FCC's to make. The decision remains squarely with those of us in Congress -- and we have repeatedly chosen to leave the law as it is."
In another letter Thursday, 15 Congressmen asked FCC Chairman Ajit Pai to extend the time period for comments. They note the proposed changes have received more than 16 million comments, more than four times the number of comments on any previous FCC item. The Hill reports that the previous record was 4 million comments -- during the FCC's last net neutrality proceeding in 2014 -- and "the lawmakers also noted that the comment period for approving net neutrality in 2014 was 60 days. Pai has only allowed a 30-day comment period for his plan to rollback the rules."
"The law directs the FCC to look at ISP services as distinct from those services that ride over the networks. The FCC's proposal contravenes our intent... While some may argue that this distinction should be abandoned because of changes in today's market, that choice is not the FCC's to make. The decision remains squarely with those of us in Congress -- and we have repeatedly chosen to leave the law as it is."
In another letter Thursday, 15 Congressmen asked FCC Chairman Ajit Pai to extend the time period for comments. They note the proposed changes have received more than 16 million comments, more than four times the number of comments on any previous FCC item. The Hill reports that the previous record was 4 million comments -- during the FCC's last net neutrality proceeding in 2014 -- and "the lawmakers also noted that the comment period for approving net neutrality in 2014 was 60 days. Pai has only allowed a 30-day comment period for his plan to rollback the rules."
I trust Trump to do the right thing to make America great again. Down with Obummers failed lieberal policies.
I reviewed all of them and not a single one mentioned FIRST POST m'ladies
I'm going to sit back and enjoy Slashdot commenters having an internal war over whether to support net neutrality (which has been pretty much universally approved of here before) of their BFF Trump who wants to destroy it. Let's watch!
Net neutrality sounds great until you have congestion, then the Internet breaks.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Differentiated_services
It seems that Ajit Pai is the most openly corrupt government official that I've seen in United States politics. Am I missing something?
Keep in mind, I'm not saying he's the most 'corrupt,' but rather the most open about it. And when I say 'corrupt' I just mean pandering to special interest groups.
The instant he was appointed he basically said, "We're going to hand the Internet over to big corporations, and smile while we do it." Then just laughed whenever anybody said that it's contrary to what everyone wants. For example, the comments thing, "We nominally have a comment period, but we've decided to just ignore them."
I just don't get it. I'd expect speeches trying to justify what he's been doing, or trying to convince people to come around to his way of thinking...but really it seems like he just doesn't care. On one hand, that's kind of refreshing in a 'no bullshit' kind of way, but on the other hand, I don't agree at all with how he's handling the situation.
--Welcome to the Realm of the Hawke--
The way to get net neutrality is to convince Republicans that it is important, not cater to the 0.01% of the population who might actually change their votes over this.
then the story is worthless.
The way to get net neutrality is to convince Republicans that it is important, not cater to the 0.01% of the population who might actually change their votes over this.
A very insightful post.
One of the problems with the current implementation is that a) it isn't what most people think of, and b) it was an FCC overreach of jurisdiction that should have been done by a different department.
This whole thing could be solved instantly by a law passed by congress. That way there would be no arguing, and the administration would be required to implement it.
If the law isn't passed because you don't have the majority, then you can base the upcoming elections on the merits of that law (among other meritorious issues). You could use it as a policy plank to help drive your party's elections.
I'm astonished that no one is trying anything *constructive* to fix this.
This is what happens when you try to fight the good fight of deregulation and battling the forces of big government. The SECRET cabal of forces, arrayed like demons across our nation, working against the PRODUCTIVE members of society and imposing their evil liberal will upon us.
We finally, FINALLY almost got the yoke of so-called net "neutrality" pulled off our gasping, struggling industry and here we are facing "criticism" from what, exactly? The remnants of the Obama/Clinton deep state kleptocracy? What the ever lasting FUCK?
It's entirely possible that he expects to get a niche cushy no-show "consulting" job at Comcast or some other telco, or perhaps at a "think tank" when his term at the FCC ends.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
Net Neutrality: A young black student studying hard at home can't access Wikipedia because the richer white neighbors are hogging all the bandwidth with their elite-level internet plans to download pirated movies and games.
NO to Net Neutrality!
...it just seems pretty strange that FCC is repealing a law it has no authority to repeal.
FCC doesn't make the law, it is not up to them to decide if they want to follow it or not, which is exactly the congress guys point?
why bother with congress making any laws if fcc doesn't follow them anyways?
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
I mean, you've got Dick Cheney for raw, open corruption. And the stuff that gets done on the local level would make even him blush. I remember reading a story of a land owner that wanted some land that had some endangered goats. Couldn't have the land because of the goats. So he bought some nearby land, but up some broken, rickety fences and stuck sheep with syphilis on the land. The goats jumped the fence and the sheep, died of syphilis and blammo, he got the land. City turned a complete blind eye to the entire scheme.
There's still a small chance Pai's drinking his own Kool-aid. Those city reps and the goats? No chance whatsoever.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
The article doesn't say as much, but looking every person up, they are Democrats. Glad to see the liberals are being liberal, but FWIW they still aren't the ones in control, so this could amount to nothing more than posturing. :-(
Bullshit Detected. Please don protective gear!
"Fake news" referred to something which happened during the election. There were sites which generated names similar to the legitimate new sites, had short-lived domains which looked vaguely respectable. They would fabricate headlines, with clear political motives, and their links would be shared through political echo-chambers like Facebook endlessly.
The term was quickly co-opted by certain political groups to dilute the meaning and de-legitimize criticism by the mainstream media. It's not the "fake news" people were talking about.
As for alternative news, beware the sites which produces news with shock DJ-like banter, expanding fabrications into sensational rants which go on for hours. Their headlines are engineered to echo the worst fears of their supporters and drive them into a tizzy of rage (and ad impressions, subscription increases). The fake news sites were modeled to pander to these bases and draw their immediate attention.
Fuck you congress. Until we have healthcare i'm not listening to you anymore.
And you better get your shit together or 2018/2020 will be the end of your time in congress.
I may be wrong, but congressional intent is also worthless. If they intended something else, they should have written a better law. That's why the courts exist. They determine if the interpretation was correct or not. Congress may be law maker, but they are not law enforcers.
Pizzagate WAS fake news.
In what way was it NOT???
Why did you start out with the asinine ass-cover and then bull ahead with something you thought could be bullshit that *was* bullshit?
So the question to ask is why are you making such blatantly false claims?
Even if you're bleating BS about it being some convoluted DNC conspiracy (and, what? Alex Jones is in on it?!?!?!?!), it is STILL fake news.
To "summarise" you claim "It's not fake news because it was made up!!!"
Dumbass.
Don’t blame me, your the one who fell for it.
Podesta emails – actually leaked online – contained much incriminating info about many things – its the real story that was not covered.
pizzagate – shiny object used to distract the public from the emails and to discredit the actual story.
A very old trick.
Prisons should only be used for violent people that must be separated from civilized society.
How do you propose to deal with guys like Bernie Madoff then? He robbed people of a lifetime of hard work - made it all mean nothing. Just because he didn't use violence to achieve his ends makes him no less worthy of separation from society. In a way I fear guys like him more than a thug who tries to beat me up.
For everyone else, there are more constructive punishments. For instance, Ajit could wear an ankle tracker will cleaning bedpans in nursing homes everyday for the next 10 years.
How is tracking his whereabouts going to matter? We already know where he is and it's not stopping him from being an asshat. Plus I've cleaned bedpans. While not fun work it isn't nearly awful enough. If you want to do creative punishments you need to get a lot more creative.
The Democrats really need to figure out how to start winning some elections.
They need to gerrymander the way the republicans have for the last 20 years or even better, get rid of gerrymandering altogether. The party in charge on the years we do the census gets to decide how the political districts are drawn in most of the US. The republicans by happenstance or luck have won the majority in the elections during these years and so they got to draw districts largely favorable to them. Honestly they've been very clever about this and I think they caught the democrats sleeping about the importance of this.
There are other problems too of course but gerrymandering is a HUGE part of the reason the democrats struggle to win elections.
Now that Trump TV has gotten off the ground, and we have our first official state-run media outlet, there is no longer a need for net neutrality, which is so 2015.
http://www.marketwatch.com/sto...
You have a monopoly controlling all media in the US which despises everything except the extreme leftist view, and worry about TrumpTV which has never aired a show? 98% of CNN's coverage is negative, and refusal to air non-leftist positions for nearly a decade, MSNBC at 97% and the same. NYT and WAPO both openly stated last summer that they would no longer have a neutral position and would try to destroy Trump, promoting fabricated news just like CNN to further their leftist ideology. And to be sure we don't limit censorship and bias to print and TV, Google, Facebook, and Twitter have all been censoring opinions from the right and promoting far Leftism as well.
Hell, even Fox which gets accused of supporting Trump has 52% negative coverage and a whole slew of far left wing progressive shows where no right wing opinions are allowed and even centrist opinions are discouraged.
You are worried about some Station that is new and never aired a show while nearly everything you get is propaganda? Good grief!
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Slashdot readers don't seem to really give a shit.
This "information service" bullshit by the FCC has been going on a lot longer than since Trump/Pai took over. Where were you, Congress? Why you give the FCC even a penny in the government budgets to keep the lights on, until they complied with the law?
Congress should have bitchslapped the FCC a decade ago. Explain why you didn't.
Heh.
Truth is not a troll. Read the study from Harvard, which is not a "right wing" organization. Slashdot Admins need to address this chronic shit moderation by people who despise facts found harmful to extreme leftist ideology and start promoting unbiased moderation. Read your own fucking moderation guidelines!
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.