In it, Pai clearly says why he opposed the plan to regulate the Internet under title II of the telecommunications.
Quoting:
"But if this
Order
manages to survive judicial review, these will be the consequences: higher
broadband prices, slower speeds, less broadband deployment, less innovation, and fewer options for
American consumers. To paraphrase Ronald Reagan, President Obama’s plan to regulate
the Internet
isn’t the solution to a problem. His plan is the problem.
In short, because this Order
imposes intrusive government regulations that won’t work to solve a
problem that doesn’t exist using legal authority the FCC doesn’t have, I dissent."
The cheerleaders of "net neutrality" have become the cheerleaders of regulation of the Internet-- the most incredible invention and display of the power of free-market capitalism. I say this from someone who started at 300baud modems and now have 50Mbps. Compare that to the "speed and efficiency" of the post office, or the DMV, which is managed by the idiots in Washington.
Your FUD stinks worse than my FUD. I agree with most of the sentiments proposed by net neutrality. Its the details that were inserted at the request of who knows who that worry me. And yeah, I don't want to see the internet run like the post office, the DMV, the VA, and social security.
Your real story is false. The FCC has the discretion to release the 8 pages or the 332 pages. It didn't, which begs the question: Why so secret? Why release a rosy 5 page summary when (against all logic and plausibility) the rules are supposed to be only 8 pages long?
By definition, the FCC has only released simple propaganda.
Is it the camel's nose going under the tent? What are the loopholes, tax footholds, fines, and new restrictions that we have yet to examine? NO ONE HERE KNOWS. I simply wish someone in government had the courage to post it online.
You can read the official explanation for the very real gag order that prevents the 323 page document from being released.
While there is a historical tradition for secrecy, it is not mandatory, and requests to make the preliminary draft public was denied by FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler and explained here. This is a case where we need wikileaks.
Here is proof the regulations are indeed 332 pages. This photographic proof comes from one of the 5 FCC commissioners who wants to make it public. Crunchy-- what better proof do you want? Where is your proof that its 320 pages of "comments"?
mine bill has gone down too. (I used to pay $425/mo for fractional T1.). Yes, I wish there were fiber options in my area...but all things being equal, cable is the best thing to happen to internet prices.
If there is no gag order, how do you explain the fact that the draft hasn't been released? They only have printed copies and the convert to PDF function isn't working?
Why do you defend secrecy? If these tiny 8 pages will truly make the Internet a bed of roses, why not link to them? My guess is that it will regulate the interent. Impose restrictions on free speech and add taxes. That's what governments do.. they impose taxes, add laws, make loopholes, and generally make things worse. (I can cite the post office, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Social Security... all government run programs that are near bankrupt.)
Democrats: Trust us
No thank you. I'd like to trust and verify.
Link to the regs, let the public comment, then vote based on the merits.
If it were the other way around, where the republicans were voting on a secret plan to control the internet, I'm pretty sure you'd be on the other side. What's good for the goose...
How can you claim there is no gag rule, when any google search will reveal there is one...And you shamelessly blame Pai, the Republican. Ajit Pai has been trying to raise the alarm, even though he is prevented from releasing the details because of Wheeler’s gag order, saying that he wishes the public could “see what’s inside”. Pai said, “President Obama’s plan marks a monumental shift toward government control of the Internet. It gives the FCC the power to micromanage virtually every aspect of how the Internet works. The plan explicitly opens the door to billions of dollars in new taxes on broadband These new taxes will mean higher prices for consumers and more hidden fees that they have to pay.”
Ok, post a link to the "8 pages". You can't, because the Obama appointed lackey imposed a gag rule making it illegal to post the content of these benign eight pages and 330 pages of "boilerplate."
Blame the republicans.. Well done. Of course, you're wrong. The gag order was imposed by the chair of the FCC, Tom Wheeler, appointed by Barack Obama. If a member who has access to the regulations were to make it public, they'd be committing a felony.
How can everyone argue about all this when the FCC has imposed a gag order that prevents the public from seeing the regulations?
The gag order and secrecy surrounding the regulation of the internet is the only concern I have at this point.
That isn't why the regulations were not released. A specific gag order was implemented that prevented anyone outside of a select group from viewing the proposed rules until after they were voted on. It wasn't because no one filed a FOIA request or the FCC just forgot to post a PDF. It would have been a violation of law to release the documents. The camel's nose is inside the tent. What could possibly go wrong.
I may very well love this new set of regulations. But will this set of regulations include, or make it easier to imposes taxes, expand wiretapping, or outlaw certain types of IP traffic, or criminalize crypto-currencies, etc. ?
The FACT this set of regulation was secret and the public blocked from seeing it until (presumably) after it is passed is an obvious sign that something in the regulations stinks. Maybe its all roses... Guess we'll find out when they let the little people see what's in it.
I'm not worried about rules that everyone will like. Its the power grabs, limits to freedom, or "unintended consequences" that may or may not be in the regulations. We all love the Internet... we should all care very deeply with what our "leaders" attempt to do regulate it in secret.
Yeah, I meant "Rule". That said, it would be nice if the "most transparent administration ever" would have released the contents of the rules so they could be judged on the facts, rather than the concepts. The whole, you have to pass it before you can see whats in it is something everyone should oppose. I am suspect when the government comes in and says they're here for my benefit.
Slashdot Mirror
In it, Pai clearly says why he opposed the plan to regulate the Internet under title II of the telecommunications. Quoting:
"But if this Order manages to survive judicial review, these will be the consequences: higher broadband prices, slower speeds, less broadband deployment, less innovation, and fewer options for American consumers. To paraphrase Ronald Reagan, President Obama’s plan to regulate the Internet isn’t the solution to a problem. His plan is the problem.
In short, because this Order imposes intrusive government regulations that won’t work to solve a problem that doesn’t exist using legal authority the FCC doesn’t have, I dissent."
The cheerleaders of "net neutrality" have become the cheerleaders of regulation of the Internet-- the most incredible invention and display of the power of free-market capitalism. I say this from someone who started at 300baud modems and now have 50Mbps. Compare that to the "speed and efficiency" of the post office, or the DMV, which is managed by the idiots in Washington.
Its discretionary. It could and should have been made public. Even wikileaks would have been preferable to secrecy.
Your FUD stinks worse than my FUD. I agree with most of the sentiments proposed by net neutrality. Its the details that were inserted at the request of who knows who that worry me. And yeah, I don't want to see the internet run like the post office, the DMV, the VA, and social security.
By definition, the FCC has only released simple propaganda.
Is it the camel's nose going under the tent? What are the loopholes, tax footholds, fines, and new restrictions that we have yet to examine? NO ONE HERE KNOWS. I simply wish someone in government had the courage to post it online.
A 5 page summary is not what was voted on. What was voted on was a draft 332 page set of regulations. But nice try.
You can read the official explanation for the very real gag order that prevents the 323 page document from being released. While there is a historical tradition for secrecy, it is not mandatory, and requests to make the preliminary draft public was denied by FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler and explained here. This is a case where we need wikileaks.
Here is proof the regulations are indeed 332 pages. This photographic proof comes from one of the 5 FCC commissioners who wants to make it public. Crunchy-- what better proof do you want? Where is your proof that its 320 pages of "comments"?
Here is a picture of Ajit Pai holding up the paperwork... Made secret by Tom Wheeler.
mine bill has gone down too. (I used to pay $425/mo for fractional T1.). Yes, I wish there were fiber options in my area...but all things being equal, cable is the best thing to happen to internet prices.
If there is no gag order, how do you explain the fact that the draft hasn't been released? They only have printed copies and the convert to PDF function isn't working?
Why do you defend secrecy? If these tiny 8 pages will truly make the Internet a bed of roses, why not link to them? My guess is that it will regulate the interent. Impose restrictions on free speech and add taxes. That's what governments do.. they impose taxes, add laws, make loopholes, and generally make things worse. (I can cite the post office, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Social Security... all government run programs that are near bankrupt.)
Democrats: Trust us
No thank you. I'd like to trust and verify.
Link to the regs, let the public comment, then vote based on the merits.
If it were the other way around, where the republicans were voting on a secret plan to control the internet, I'm pretty sure you'd be on the other side. What's good for the goose...
How can you claim there is no gag rule, when any google search will reveal there is one...And you shamelessly blame Pai, the Republican. Ajit Pai has been trying to raise the alarm, even though he is prevented from releasing the details because of Wheeler’s gag order, saying that he wishes the public could “see what’s inside”. Pai said, “President Obama’s plan marks a monumental shift toward government control of the Internet. It gives the FCC the power to micromanage virtually every aspect of how the Internet works. The plan explicitly opens the door to billions of dollars in new taxes on broadband These new taxes will mean higher prices for consumers and more hidden fees that they have to pay.”
Ok, post a link to the "8 pages". You can't, because the Obama appointed lackey imposed a gag rule making it illegal to post the content of these benign eight pages and 330 pages of "boilerplate."
Blame the republicans.. Well done. Of course, you're wrong. The gag order was imposed by the chair of the FCC, Tom Wheeler, appointed by Barack Obama. If a member who has access to the regulations were to make it public, they'd be committing a felony.
Here, let me google that for you.
The extensions are good.. the open source is really nice... their problem may be their revenue model.
How can everyone argue about all this when the FCC has imposed a gag order that prevents the public from seeing the regulations? The gag order and secrecy surrounding the regulation of the internet is the only concern I have at this point.
That isn't why the regulations were not released. A specific gag order was implemented that prevented anyone outside of a select group from viewing the proposed rules until after they were voted on. It wasn't because no one filed a FOIA request or the FCC just forgot to post a PDF. It would have been a violation of law to release the documents. The camel's nose is inside the tent. What could possibly go wrong.
Right, the gag order imposed on the 300 pages of regulations was for our own good. Thank you, government.
I may very well love this new set of regulations. But will this set of regulations include, or make it easier to imposes taxes, expand wiretapping, or outlaw certain types of IP traffic, or criminalize crypto-currencies, etc. ?
The FACT this set of regulation was secret and the public blocked from seeing it until (presumably) after it is passed is an obvious sign that something in the regulations stinks. Maybe its all roses... Guess we'll find out when they let the little people see what's in it.
I'm not worried about rules that everyone will like. Its the power grabs, limits to freedom, or "unintended consequences" that may or may not be in the regulations. We all love the Internet... we should all care very deeply with what our "leaders" attempt to do regulate it in secret.
Yeah, I meant "Rule". That said, it would be nice if the "most transparent administration ever" would have released the contents of the rules so they could be judged on the facts, rather than the concepts. The whole, you have to pass it before you can see whats in it is something everyone should oppose. I am suspect when the government comes in and says they're here for my benefit.
More people have read that press release than have read the full text of the bill. Feel free to link to the entire bill if you think I'm wrong.