Slashdot Mirror


FCC Chair Ajit Pai Falsely Claims Killing Net Neutrality Will Help Sick and Disabled People (vice.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Motherboard: One popular claim by the telecom sector is that net neutrality rules are somehow preventing people who are sick or disabled from gaining access to essential medical services they need to survive. Verizon, for example, has been trying to argue since at least 2014 that the FCC's net neutrality rules' ban on paid prioritization (which prevents ISPs from letting deep-pocketed content companies buy their way to a distinct network performance advantage over smaller competitors) harms the hearing impaired. That's much to the chagrin of groups that actually represent those constituents, who have consistently and repeatedly stated that this claim simply isn't true. Comcast lobbyists have also repeated this patently-false claim in their attempt to lift the FCC ban on unfair paid prioritization deals.

The claim that net neutrality rules hurt the sick also popped up in a recent facts-optional fact sheet the agency has been circulating to try and justify the agency's Orwellian-named "Restoring Internet Freedom" net neutrality repeal. In the FCC's current rules, the FCC was careful to distinguish between "Broadband Internet Access Services (BIAS)," which is general internet traffic like browsing, e-mail or app data and "Non-BIAS data services," which are often given prioritized, isolated capacity to ensure lower latency, better speed, and greater reliability. VoIP services, pacemakers, energy meters and all telemedicine applications fall under this category and are exempt from the rules. Despite the fact that the FCC's net neutrality rules clearly exempt medical services from the ban on uncompetitive paid prioritization, FCC boss Ajit Pai has consistently tried to claim otherwise. He did so again last week during a speech in which he attempted to defend his agency from the massive backlash to its assault on net neutrality.
"By ending the outright ban on paid prioritization, we hope to make it easier for consumers to benefit from services that need prioritization -- such as latency-sensitive telemedicine," Pai said. "By replacing an outright ban with a robust transparency requirement and FTC-led consumer protection, we will enable these services to come into being and help seniors."

4 of 207 comments (clear)

  1. Will also save children and fight terrorism by gweihir · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And, who knows, maybe also stop drug use, illiteracy, stop global warming and fix the infrastructure.

    It is fascinating what utterly despicable failed human beings make it to the top in the west today. Having people with zero honor and zero personal morals in charge used to be a privilege of the developing world. Not anymore.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  2. Re:I hope this does not spread world wide! by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Informative

    I wonder who is paying him under the table?

    Nobody is being paid under the table. That is not how the system works. The political donations by the telecoms to Republican politicians are perfectly legal and done openly ... as are the media industry's donations to the Democrats.

    FYI, I'm in Australia.

    That explains your misunderstanding. In most countries corruption is illegal. In America, it is not.

  3. Artificial Scarcity by nickmalthus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Artificial scarcity is the core motivation behind the Network Neutrality repeal. They are about to roll out 5G technologies with 10gbs download speeds which is more bandwidth than most everyone will need. With cable cutters and plunging market prices the telecoms are in a panic and thus they are calling on their inside man to protect their interests. He is looking forward to his future “Pai Day” for his loyal service.

    If network prioritization were a true problem then senders and receivers, the customers, should have full control of prioritization using existing Quality of Service (QoS) network features. However by giving telecoms unabated control of prioritization they can distort traffic and resume charging premiums for video and voice.

    The FCC chairman has been unequivocally clear in is objectives; increased network investment (read profit) for the ILECs and absolute hands off regulation until there is a complete “market failure” (read unavoidable regulation due to universal outrage over telcom censorship and exorbitant prices).

    Finally his talking point about regulatory burden on telcom technology is a joke. It is impossible for telcoms to transfer data beyond the speed of light so the only thing they can do is slow it down or block it. Providing financial incentives to enact artificial scarcity, censorship, and surveillance is the complete opposite of promoting “Free Market” ideologies.

    --
    If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be-T J
  4. Re:I hope this does not spread world wide! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative