Slashdot Mirror
FCC To Officially Rescind Net Neutrality Rules On Thursday (reuters.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Reuters: The U.S. Federal Communications Commission is expected to publish on Thursday its December order overturning the landmark Obama-era net neutrality rules, two sources briefed on the matter said Tuesday. The formal publication in the Federal Register, a government website, means state attorneys general and advocacy groups will be able to sue in a bid to block the order from taking effect. The Republican-led FCC in December voted 3-2 to overturn rules barring service providers from blocking, slowing access to or charging more for certain content. The White House Office of Management and Budget still must sign off on some aspects of the FCC reversal before it takes legal effect. Congressional aides say the publication will trigger a 60-legislative-day deadline for Congress to vote on whether to overturn the decision. U.S. Senate Democrats said in January they had the backing of 50 members of the 100-person chamber for repeal, leaving them just one vote short of a majority. The December FCC order will be made public on Wednesday and formally published on Thursday, the sources said.
This should be more evidence that there are real and substantial differences between the Democratic and Republican parties. Yes, there are a small number of Democrat senators who aren't in favor of net neutrality, and there are a small number of Republican senators who are in favor, but the vast majority of each group have taken positions exactly as expected. There are real differences between the major political parties.
Even though a Presidential veto and a Republican-dominated House would stand in the way of a 51 vote Senate rejection, the "one vote shy" premise is heartening on the surface... unless you consider these claims don't get held to any scrutiny.
The Democrats are saying, "Look we are trying!" while accepting campaign contributions as fast as the Republicans from ISPs.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
You have only been here too long when you pour hot grits down Natalie Portman's trousers.
We need to blame the Hillary supporters too. I mean Trump horrible, but if the election were today, I'd still vote for him over Hillary. The 2-party system is a major culprit and nobody is even questioning that.
Yep, what one fool rams through--bypassing Congress--via his pen and his phone, the next fool can undo with his pen and his phone. A wise man once said “Elections have consequences, and at the end of the day, I won.”
We've lost, right?
Comcast will be charging those goats extra to show you the good part.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
That's a Beowulf cluster of hot grits, you insensitive clod!
"Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
Comment removed based on user account deletion
It's the End of Days, queue Mass Hysteria - we'll look back on these days wistfully, with a tear in our eyes for the liberties lost when the FCC stopped it's nearly thousand day watch over a briefly Neutral Net...
Ken
The sad part is the Trump voters are the ones who are getting screwed, not the "libtards". The "libtards" tend to be upper income, so they benefit financially from corporatist policies. It is the Trump voter who gets screwed, but they are too dumb to realize it. They are going to freak out when Trump bans bump stocks.
Okay, but we're not talking about Putin here.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
I think there are far more people who voted for him but are afraid to speak up. Not out of remorse but of fear of ostracization.
A wise man once said “Elections have consequences, and at the end of the day, I won.”
What a coincidence - a complete idiot said the exact same thing!
Thank the Democrat's Super Delegate system which all but forced the "Entitled" candidate to win the primaries, denying the Democrat voters their preferred choice in the 2016 Election, Sen. Bernie Sanders. In 2016 the democrats learned the lesson the Republicans mostly learned in 2008 with Sen. McCain (it was his turn, though few Republicans were enthusiastic about him as their candidate), and finally learned in 2012 when the party was divided over the religion of their candidate Gov. Romney - an eminently qualified, successful leader that was openly mocked for correctly identifying "Russia" as the greatest threat to America in the 2012 debates, only to be proven right after the 2016 election.
Hillary ran a new kind of campaign, and in the end her over-confidence had her making what, in hindsight were some poor choices - she focused on fundraisers and massive vote advantage in the final phase of the election in states like California, while ignoring states that she felt confident she would win, only to learn her massive fundraising and popular vote advantage were meaningless when the Electoral Votes were tallied. She went home to walk in the woods, her opponent moved into 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue with less money raised and fewer votes cast for him - but those fewer votes were all where they needed to be.
Ken
An Anonymous Coward blurted:
I'm proud I voted for Trump. I will vote him again I 2020.
The irony of an AC trumpeting how proud he is of his vote is so thick, rich, and creamy I could cut it with a spoon ...
Check out my novel.
after the "blue wave" takes control of Congress. The weird part is that net neutrality is good for everyone and everyone wants it (except ISPs).
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
Oh, please. Most anti Trump people I know are bear poverty. Most of the ones I know that are pro Trump are all very well off. Myself included.
They are going to freak out when Trump bans bump stocks.
No, they really aren't - most lawful gun owners are interested in convenient, accurate shooting, not "quickly spraying a room full of bullets" - the purpose of the "bump stock" it the latter, not the former.
The "libtards" tend to be upper income
Question, why is it that California, the Mecca of "Libtards" (your term) has the highest concentration of residents living in poverty? One in five California residents lives in poverty, the highest percentage of any of the fifty states even besting states like Mississippi, Louisiana and West Virginia.
Ken
And don't blame the media, or as the old saying goes "don't shoot the messenger".
Thanks to media consolidation in the hands of a few richy-rich mofos who don't give a good goddamn about anything but their pocketbooks, the media is more and more frequently an active part of the problem.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
The weird part is that net neutrality is good for everyone and everyone wants it (except ISPs).
That's true but everyone other than ISPs profits from it indirectly whereas ISPs have a direct incentive to kill net neutrality. Direct incentives almost always seem to win out over indirect ones at least in the short term because those with direct incentives are willing to fight harder for them. Google probably benefits from net neutrality but the benefits are hard to point to on a profit and loss statement so it's harder to get them to fight for it.
...makes the crypt keeper look attractive.
You nailed the #1 most important quality for POTUS - Attractiveness. An ugly president is fine, but an ugly woman president? Unthinkable! I don't even give a rat's ass that our POTUS is obese; it just bugs me that he lied about it.
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
If the Trump admin can rescind the rules this quickly, the next Dem administration can just put them back.
will this change how anyone votes in the mid terms (or in any other election for that matter)? And change doesn't just mean "I'm not voting for so and so" it also means "I'm going to show up at the polls this year".
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
It depends on which voting machine you're hacking into.
Support Right To Repair Legislation.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Thank the Democrat's Super Delegate system which all but forced the "Entitled" candidate to win the primaries, denying the Democrat voters their preferred choice in the 2016 Election, Sen. Bernie Sanders.
Clinton still ended up with more "regular" delegates than Sanders. There's plenty that you can blame the Democratic Party for during the 2016 campaign, but "super delegates" are not the reason that Clinton won the primary.
To emphasize this. Purple or battleground states change over time. Many lessons were learned the last election and a big thing learned was that there are more battleground states than in 2012 or 2008 (PA anyone).
Clinton was the preferred democratic candidate by any measure. If anything, the 2016 election taught us the wisdom of super delegates - they are there as a hedge against some corrupt populist making a lot of promises that can't be kept, and hurling a lot of insults to deflect from his own inadequacies. The Republicans didn't have super delegates, and look what happened.
In principle I agree that the idea of super delegates is contrary to the democratic ideal. In practice, well... here we are.
It's easy to get votes for something when the politician knows there is zero chance that vote is going to actually do anything. Witness the attempts to repeal the ACA. If they actually got across 51 some of those votes would likely evaporate. If the House and presidency flipped some of those votes would certainly disappear.
Wait a minute, weren't you calling Romney "Hitler"? Why yes you were!.
People are in fear of Russians. Absolute nutty paranoia. Let's all get some perspective and tamp down the troll farm panic. It's 90 people with a shaky grasp of English and a rudimentary understanding of U.S. politics shitposting on Facebook. Our reaction to them is all out of proportion to their influence and will harm us more than they ever could. When even the New Yorker is ridiculing the idea that there is some great Russia conspiracy, you know it's all over but the crying.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
Another sad day for democracy, if you can call it that, a political system which is bought and paid for is hardly democratic.
The trend is a bit disturbing and it would be easy to start looking for a plot for world domination akin to a comic book plot. But, there is no need for an evil plot when greed, avarice, and apathy can achieve the same results.
Net neutrality predates Obama by almost a decade. During the aegis of the Obama administration just saw the 2015 tightening of the definition of net neutrality as a result of court actions by AT&T, Comcast, and others to destroy the concept in law. Neutral traffic routing except in case of war was one of the fundamental properties of the network from its first iterations as ARPAnet. Calling net neutrality an Obama Administration thing is a calumny trying to piggy back on the disgust with a destructive administration.
Large corporations now have the control and legal permission to edit all of what you watch and read.
Hmmm, a plot comes to mind. Combination of Skynet and Fahrenheit 451. Population control by hacking and nuking any computer containing unauthorized ideas. Might be too close to reality to sell well.
NRRPT/RCT