Slashdot Mirror
FCC Refuses Records For Investigation Into Fake Net Neutrality Comments (variety.com)
"FCC general counsel Tom Johnson has told the New York State attorney general that the FCC is not providing information for his investigation into fake net-neutrality comments, saying those comments did not affect the review, and challenging the state's ability to investigate the feds." Variety has more:
The FCC's general counsel, in a letter to New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, also dismissed his concerns that the volume of fake comments or those made with stolen identities have "corrupted" the rule-making process... He added that Schneiderman's request for logs of IP addresses would be "unduly burdensome" to the commission, and would "raise significant personal privacy concerns."
Amy Spitalnick, Schneiderman's press secretary, said in a statement that the FCC "made clear that it will continue to obstruct a law enforcement investigation. It's easy for the FCC to claim that there's no problem with the process, when they're hiding the very information that would allow us to determine if there was a problem. To be clear, impersonation is a violation of New York law," she said... "The only privacy jeopardized by the FCC's continued obstruction of this investigation is that of the perpetrators who impersonated real Americans."
One of the FCC's Democratic commissioners claimed that this response "shows the FCC's sheer contempt for public input and unreasonable failure to support integrity in its process... Moreover, the FCC refuses to look into how nearly half a million comments came from Russian sources."
Amy Spitalnick, Schneiderman's press secretary, said in a statement that the FCC "made clear that it will continue to obstruct a law enforcement investigation. It's easy for the FCC to claim that there's no problem with the process, when they're hiding the very information that would allow us to determine if there was a problem. To be clear, impersonation is a violation of New York law," she said... "The only privacy jeopardized by the FCC's continued obstruction of this investigation is that of the perpetrators who impersonated real Americans."
One of the FCC's Democratic commissioners claimed that this response "shows the FCC's sheer contempt for public input and unreasonable failure to support integrity in its process... Moreover, the FCC refuses to look into how nearly half a million comments came from Russian sources."
They're covering up their fraud by saying "It wasn't important" - but that's not going to fly.
So they are making their own. Freedom for the few and higher cost for the masses.
Either we break up the companies doing this, fine them, and punish the individuals (why isn't regulatory capture a federal felony?) - they will just keep attacking the foundations of the internet every chance they get.
The FCC guy is right, though. Millions of fake comments had no bearing on the outcome at all, which was preordained.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
It doesn't matter here. What matters is that the NY AG is investigating a criminal impersonation and the FCC is obstructing justice.
There was never even a need to do more than have a period for public comments. A lot of the spam is from adversarial interests against the general American population, such as ISPs, Russia, etc. I've seen all the recent interviews with Ajit, the guy looks like a sociopath just dribbling brain diarrhea hoping to muddy the waters just enough to flee with the illicit billions about to be reaped from America. The man has stone cold glee in his eyes, there was never a sideways fart given about non legal tender arguments. The real damage, though, is the anti-competitive, anti-trust no consumer protection, content and provider monopolies, and freedom to censor anything nonsense that is likely to follow. It won't end until they are held accountable, so at this rate never.
Can you provide a quote to support your assertion that NY state has suggested what you claim they have?
It appears to me that they've likewise pointed out the rules under which the state as well as federal agencies are legally obligated to operate.
Do you have any idea how much of that infrastructure is on public land or on land taken by eminent domain? For that matter, do you know how much of it is paid for by tax dollars? The telecoms are very, very happy to take everything they can get "for the public good", but somehow people like you come out of the woodwork screeching about grubby communists!
Get a grip. Infrastructure can be "nationalized" by simply getting rid of the various laws directly granting monopolies to various telecom companies and building separate competing infrastructure with open access policies. Heck, in some cases, do you think maybe, just maybe, it might be fair play to use eminent domain to take back some of the stuff that was taken from private citizens via eminent domain and given to the telecoms in the first place?
> 2) Once it is gone, internet service prices will immediately go up, and performance will immediately drop. Don't assume that. All the ISPs have to do is wait, and not very long, and people will fail to associate the loss of net neutrality with an increase in prices or a drop in service. It's smaller internet startups who are going to feel the brunt of this for the immediate future, and that's invisible to the public.
The FCC won't comply with FOIA. They just ignore it. The only way to get the comments is to subpoena them ...
Depends. Does the FCC have the same management style as Georgia Election officials?
A server and its backups, believed to be key to a pending federal lawsuit filed against Georgia election officials, was thoroughly deleted according to e-mails recently released under a public records request.
The new e-mails, which were sent by the Coalition for Good Governance to Ars, show that Chris Dehner, one of the Information Security staffers, e-mailed his boss, Stephen Gay, to say that the two backup servers had been "degaussed three times."
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
More accurately, the only comments that matter to Pai are the ones from his future employer.
Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea — you have your "worker's paradises" to move to.
And Sweden, Finland, Norway, Switzerland, Canada. . .
Almost all infrastructure runs through the government anyway, no matter what country you live in. For someone who comes from a "Communism-destroyed" country, you have a poor grasp on what communism really is. You also shouldn't apply some bullshit golden age fallacy to America's past. This country was one of the last to abolish slavery. We had government sanctioned racial segregation until the 1960s. There are neighborhoods known as "food deserts" because you literally can't buy healthy food. I'm glad America's worked out for you, but it doesn't work out for everyone.
"From the depths of my skeptical and rationalist soul, I ask the Lord to protect me from California touchie-feeliedom."
"No, the scandal is that the FCC under Obama put an executive policy into place that was directly at odds with the specific wishes of congress"
The wishes of the republican controlled congress at the time was "Veto anything that black man puts in front of our desk."
It's pretty much the same with Trump who's primary aim is "undo anything that black man managed to get done."
It doesn't matter here. What matters is that the NY AG is investigating a criminal impersonation and the FCC is obstructing justice.
I agree. Sure the FCC doesn't have to care about the comments. That is the result of losing an election.
Still, if there is an investigation into fraud then they should cooperate. Even if the low life political appointment at the FCC honestly don't give a damn about the comments, if people's identities have been stolen, then you have to assume that the thieves are going to continue to use those identities for bad purposes.
Basically Trump's government is now aiding and abetting crime by obstructing justice. Nothing new there I suppose. Maybe Mueller can tack on another charge.
Then again, I don't think this Senate, nor any Senate we are apt to get in the next three years is likely to convict and remove the chief criminal, though perhaps if enough charges are brought and enough actual facts are pointed out, maybe we can be sure this crap ends, for a little while at least.
Let's face it- the fix is in.
Net neutrality is going to be removed because doing so will allow large corporations to make a shitload of money, AND because it will stifle the free exchange of information (including important political news and information).
Politicians HATE the fat that ordinary people can use the internet to help track what our government does. They HATE the fact that millions of people can instantly find out what they're doing, and band together to try and effect some change.
This benefits NO ONE except the mega-corps and politicians, and so they're going to do it no matter what we mere mortals want.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
And yet, we are still richer than most of those Socialist paradises you listed.
For all your disdain for the collective and praise for the individual, I find it odd that you measure wealth based on GDP rather than the spending power and economic freedom of the poorest of the poor. Socialized medicine frees. Capitalist medicine makes one a slave to their own health. Market regulations free consumers from predatory lenders and inhumane working conditions.
I save citations for research papers and extreme claims. Nothing I claimed warranted such a waste of time. However, you may want to read more carefully before you waste your own time refuting something I didn't say (there's a huge difference between "one of the last to abolish slavery" and "the last").
The fact that you believe the U.S. is an example of a laissez-faire country demonstrates your ignorance. Have you ever heard of the U.S. Postal Service? Do you know what a grant is and how they have propped up higher education and are the main reason U.S. innovation was unsurpassed in the twentieth century? Social Security? Medicare? The who article is about the FCC, A REGULATORY AGENCY.
Laissez-faire is a myth. It's never existed and never will. Just like communism. All countries are socialist, they just have unique ways of structuring it. Your equivocation of all collectivism and the U.S.S.R. is a silly fallacy. That's why no serious intellectuals take Ayn Rand seriously.
"From the depths of my skeptical and rationalist soul, I ask the Lord to protect me from California touchie-feeliedom."