Slashdot Mirror
The New York Times Sues FCC For Net Neutrality Records (bna.com)
The New York Times Company on Thursday filed a lawsuit against the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) concerning records the newspaper alleges may shed light on possible Russian participation in a public comment period before the commission rolled back Obama-era net neutrality rules. Bloomberg reports: The plaintiffs, including Times reporter Nicholas Confessore and investigations editor Gabriel Dance, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York Sept. 20 under the Freedom of Information Act, seeking to compel the commission to hand over data. "The request at issue in this litigation involves records that will shed light on the extent to which Russian nationals and agents of the Russian government have interfered with the agency notice-and-comment process about a topic of extensive public interest: the government's decision to abandon 'net neutrality,'" the plaintiffs alleged.
What is the connection between Russians and network neutrality? I get that there were fake comments, but I thought they were forged by telecom companies or organizations that were fooled by telecom companies. Is the Russian angle just to get them release the records?
They are suing to release the information. Why don't you want the information to be seen? Your post has NOTHING to do with the article. Just another bullshit troll. It's getting old real fast.
https://www.recode.net/2017/8/30/16223210/net-neutrality-fcc-21-million-record-comments-duplicates-suspicious-data
https://www.vox.com/technology/2017/12/1/16715274/fcc-net-neutrality-spambots-comments-pew
"Yet more than 90 percent of the record-breaking 21 million comments received by the Federal Communications Commission — from both sides of the debate — are essentially pre-written form letters"
it would only be considering “unique” comments that “introduced new facts into the record or made serious legal arguments,”
I'm starting to think Trump Derangement Syndrome has hit the media harder than we thought. I can't come up with any reason to suspect Russian involvement in this other than the generic anti-Trump "it's the Russians!" rhetoric we've been hearing since he won the election.
I've got no reason why the New York Times thinks Russia is involved in this. It makes no sense. There's at least a kernel of truth to the whole "Russia Facebook" thing (there's some evidence that Russian-backed groups posted meme images, that's the extent of it) but Russians involved in flooding the FCC with comments? Literally the first I've heard of it.
Because libs have lost their fucking minds.
I bet if Russia nuked us they would be smiling as they died. "I was right!" they happily cried, as the blast melted their faces off.
If you care about this stuff, why don't you just leave?
Please explain ---
One way to gain economic dominance is to convince the other side to blunder into an economically harmful decision.
They don't. They just want to start shit and disrupt civil society, and posting fake shit online is cheap and easy to do.
It's like asking why the Anonymous Coward does what he does on Slashdot. There is no why. It's just vandalism for the information age. Terrorism for those too cowardly to actually risk anything.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Please try to understand the purpose of an investigation. It is supposed to ascertain the reasons behind, or factors that brought about something. .... thats why they are INVESTIGATING.
AFTER the investigation we decide whats the happened. You seem to think the point is to prove a given theory. We don't know what the Russian agle to this would be. We clearly don;'t know if there is one.
Maybe it is the Chewbacca offense ....
Is russian collusion in the room with you now?
The NYT is attacking and undermining the will of people who elected this goverment and are acting in a treasonous manner towards all of us. Shame on them. Down with biased liberal media.
> They are suing to release the information. Why don't you want the information to be seen?
The information is meaningless because I understand how the public comment process works and the vast majority of commenters appear not to, having actually taken the time to participate in some before. Yes, that does mean I'm a US citizen. There's no voting going on here. It doesn't matter how many people show their support for any particular idea. It's a place to bring up new ideas, so we should be glad if we can get the benefits of diversity from hearing other perspectives we might not consider. They have always ignored the spam comments the same way everyone who gets spam does. So the only BS here is people trying to "prove" something that simply cannot be proven from the data you seek.
In short, it honestly doesn't matter to anyone but a few bigots as to who commented, only the ideas that were presented therein. You can have the info as far as I'm concerned, I really don't give a crap. It's just that it makes no possible difference who wrote them. Even if I assume it was Putin himself, or whatever nationality triggers your bigotry the most, it could not possibly make one iota of difference. For those familiar with legal terms, I'd say that you have failed to allege a claim upon which relief may be granted. In other words, the very premise of your argument, even if I assume it's 100% factually true or would be proven true by this data, is so wrong as to comical.
> I've got no reason why the New York Times thinks Russia is involved in this. It makes no sense.
Actually it makes perfect sense if someone used some Russian proxies/VPNs/etc. to comment with in order to later "uncover" the fact that Russian's commented on an open web form that invited public comment for the purpose of giving them ideas and feedback about how to proceed. Remember: this freak out was going on while comments were still open, as well.
It's about like people talking about "identity theft" on the same comment boxes, as though there weren't thousands of John Smiths and whatnot, each of which were entitled to their own opinions. My own name has a surprising number of duplicates.
Ajit Pai was determined to roll back net neutrality regardless of any outside influence (including comments from actual citizens). It was a done deal once he got appointed FCC commission chair.
I think it's just to create chaos.
I mean, if there's anything at all to the "Russians did it" in so many fields their main motivation seems to be create conflicts, not create any specific advantage.
It does seem like the one side effect of the social internet is that you can create real conflict very easily.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/2/20/17031772/mueller-indictments-grand-jury
I love it when tinydicked nazi faggots slobber over themselves pretending to be tough faggots on the internet, slashdot especially lol. You fucking retards couldn't beat up Putin's cock with your mouth if it took you 2 years, blow harder faggot.
I agree that the ideas are more important that who presented them,
but another part of this is the large number of public comments is important information in itself.
If these were fake, that is useful to know.
If these were not fake, but the FCC said they were as justification for the NN decision, that is important as well.
Lol Trump is going to hang from his retarded traitor neck. Michael Cohen has done multiple interviews with Mueller team - https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/20/politics/michael-cohen-robert-mueller/index.html
And there's nothing you greasy inbred republican traitor faggot deplorables can do about it, except keep whining for me bitch, I love that.
If I had to guess....
I would say because the free flow of information across the internet allows the general public to better educate themselves and learn information which makes it harder for Americans to mindlessly be led unlike the ones who get their information exclusively through Television (Which is owned from 1 of 5 companies which are able to control the flow of that information).
Also that Net Neutrality is actually a free market protection that allows more businesses to thrive than otherwise would and that by attacking it they are hurting US citizens ability to inform themselves and hopefully turning more of them into the brainless fox news viewing audience who are more willing to sell out themselves and their children based on policy ideas that don't reflect reality, while at the same time hurting us economically to help a few monopolies with vested interests in helping funnel money and power to the top and trying to control it all, all while also helping to cause civil unrest in the US in the process.
It would be nothing but pure win for Russia in their goals on every front and they already have a lot of moneyed interests here pushing for that same thing which makes it that much easier for them to push. For the moneyed interests, it is selling out this nation and its people for personal money and power, for Russia, it is helping those moneyed people to hurt the nation.
Think of it this way, just about everyone nominated to every position are people who wanted to weaken or destroy the sector they were put in charge of and effectively hurt and dismantle the nation allowing the rich to raid it and leave us as a bankrupt husk too weak and handcuffed to fight back, attacking Net Neutrality is just another prong in that attack.
I'm starting to think you Ajit Peeed your pants.
You have some strange fantasies.
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
It's like asking why the Anonymous Coward does what he does on Slashdot.
Go ahead and ask...
You may not like what you hear.
The Russians don't necessarily care about net neutrality, but they do appear to be actively stirring wasps nest to cause discontent and conflict among the US population. The more unrest within the US internally, the less Americans worry about what Russia is doing on the other side of the world.
You forget that the Russian troll mission is merely to create discord in open societies like America. They do not care what the topic is so long as they can stimulate you to hate other Americans. Looks like they did a great job on you. Personally I am looking forward to watching the civil war on T.V. it should be entertaining.
Facts are history now plebs have politics for religion on social media.
What? Russian, again? Come on, I checked the date, and today is not April 1st.
Me? Well, I'm learning the Canadian national anthem. I just hope they'll allow someone from a shit hole country like the USA to emigrate there.
Be sure you are learning the new words (they were just changes so if you look up an old reference you will be learning the wrong lyrics).
Yeah, everybody knows the Repubs are supposed to be the ones spouting about Russians. Strange times.
Okay fellow Anonymous Cowards, let me ask you a hypothetical question.
If unimpeachable evidence was brought to light showing that the Russians did interfere with the FCC's Net Neutrality commenting process, what would your reaction be?
This thought process is not about politics. What it is concerned with is how people on all sides of this question would suggest we, as a nation, move forward if it were proven that a sworn enemy of this nation was interfering in our business with the intent to do us harm.
Well Anonymous Cowards, how should we react?
What matters is that under Ijit Pia, the FCC ignored the fact that if the obviously fake comments would have been ignored, the vast majority of the legitimate comments favored keeping the Obama era net neutrality ruled in place! The FCC is supposed to serve the public interest, not corporate interests!!
The real issue is Trump and the Russians.
Remember, Trump has not divested himself of his businesses, something Presidents do to avoid conflict of interest situations where they may do legislation that benefits them directly. Every time Trump goes to Mar-A-Largo, the Secret Service has to spend money there, which has direct benefits to the President.
Also remember, that in general, Trump's business hasn't been doingn too well. Some make profits, but that's about it. Except in one place - Russia. Trump gets a lot of money from his Russian interests, hence the natural "friendliness" towards them.
Combined with direct benefits from business, there's a lot of interest in anywhere Trump feels particularly friendly towards.
It's like ZTE, which Trump vowed to kill until China invested half a billion dollars in a Trump hotel and give Ivanka a super hard to get trademark.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... How To Wear Saree Blouse Draping Properly !!.properly saree draping video learn how to wear indian designer saree blouse.saree ke fall sa. saree photoshoot. saree wearing, sareeo. saree palace. saree dress.wear my hat mac miller. wear my ring bart crow band. weather radar.saree ke fall sa. saree photoshoot. saree wearing. saree palace. saree dress.#banglatechaaak .
> It's like asking why the Anonymous Coward does what he does on Slashdot.
I take (some) offense in that :-)
There are some among us who just don't care to feed cookies to The Big Cookie Monster[1], but who are, in general, pretty nice fellas.
[1] Yes, I know there are other ways of tracking. But I like to make some statement by surfing, by default, with no cookies and a Javascript-castrated (no NoScript: just deep about:config messing) browser. Kinda like showing my naked ass. Don't ask.
Russia? Again? Seriously?
Are you seriously this blindingly gullible that you still believe that 'Russian collusion' is actually a thing?
My God.. the infantile unthinking acceptance is... literally astounding.
How can you all be so stupid?
Still pretends they're not shitbags.