So... what did the fake comments say? I'm suspicious that in his open letter he never addresses the content of the fake comments.
An Open Letter to the FCC
201–210 of 222 posts
Re: An Open Letter to the FCC
#202Earlier quoted context omitted.
I remember hearing that the no-lobbying executive order was loopholed pretty badly. Does it actually apply here?
Depends how cynical you are. He could technically lobby 'other parts' of the government according to this article but it does not specify, only reiterates you can't lobby your former agency for 5 years. Serving 5 years in a government position when you could be an exec at a Telecom company is a gigantic opportunity cost so the point here is that he's not getting paid off, unless fraudulently, which can't be completel…
Would the FTC count as "other parts of the government"?
I seem to recall one of the arguments of Pai is that the FCC shouldn't be responsible for regulation of the internet, it should fall under the FTC.
So as head of the FCC he can effectively strip it of all power, the governance shifting to the FTC. Once his commission is up he takes a job at Verizon/At&T/etc, lobbying the FTC.
Or, as burkaman noted, they will just issue a waiver.
Re: An Open Letter to the FCC
#203I'm one of the people who has had part of their identity used to submit false comments. Found out when a journalist emailed me asking me to do a survey and some additional comments months ago. I proceeded to sign up for an API key[1] to confirm what was being claimed and turns out, it was true. The API is a bit limited, but I was also able to do searches using the falsely submitted comment to find others like it as w…
>What is a citizen to do when they try to do everything in their power and play by the rules - vote, submit comments, call representatives, contact press for help, and repeat - results in nothing? you already know the answer, you are just afraid to say it. stop playing by the rules. arm yourself and your allies. then send a clear signal that there will be blood if your political demands are not met. >I'm not even sur…
I, for one, am glad to live in a world where people don't start shedding blood over internet regulations.
Re: An Open Letter to the FCC
#204Earlier quoted context omitted.
> FCC Chairman Ajit Pai is a former Verizon lawyer He worked in their legal department for 2-3 years 15 years ago. All of his other time has been spent has a public servant. People need to stop bringing this up, because it only muddies the actual policy debate.
This shouldn't be downvoted. We don't need to make up things about people to attack terrible policy and unethical behavior.
People downvote things that disagree with their biases. I thought Hacker News was better than this though.
Re: An Open Letter to the FCC
#205Earlier quoted context omitted.
The corruption of the judicial branch is more obvious to its victims than it is to the average citizen, but it does quite a bit more direct harm than Congress does. For example, the courts that fund their municipalities on the backs of the poor, all the shady arrangements with the incarceration industry, the seemingly deliberate destruction of families and children perpetrated by the divorce courts, the horrific exce…
Pretty sure the most of what you're talking about is the executive branch. They're in charge of enforcing the rules - e.g. deciding who to prosecute for drug crimes and which prisons to put them in to serve their term. Likewise, the executive branch is the one that decides to go after offenders based on profitability over public good (although you could also lay that on the legislative branch for allowing the executi…
Nothing I mentioned happens without the eager cooperation of judges and other officers of the court. The ongoing disaster of the divorce or "family" courts has nothing at all to do with the executive. Anyway we weren't comparing the judicial with the executive but rather with the legislative.
Re: An Open Letter to the FCC
#206Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a completely different topic altogether, though. Even if there were 100 ISPs, Net Neutrality would still be an issue. When there was plenty of competition among long distance phone carriers (back when people needed to worry about that kind of thing), there still was "phone neutrality", meaning that no phone operator could slow down or otherwise interfere with your call based on who you were calling, what provi…
It's not the exact same thing. Phone calls are predominantly direct, 1:1 exchanges (in some cases you may have a conference call with a few other parties on the line). No single party could be responsible for a huge majority of the load on a phone network without seeing proportional billing; that is, if you wanted to have 300 simultaneous calls from your office, you had to pay for 300 open phone lines. Since the inte…
Usage-based billing, per second or per month, does not break net-neutrality.
And as sjolsen pointed out, the consumer is the one who will end up paying the tab, either to the ISP directly, or indirectly via an increase in streaming subscription costs.
Re: An Open Letter to the FCC
#207Earlier quoted context omitted.
You’re talking about metered or tiered pricing, which is already allowed and has nothing to do with net neutrality. Net neutrality means ISPs can’t favor some traffic over other traffic.
Not with wifi. Fios offers different speeds but it does not charge by consumption.
That is also allowed by current law, and also has nothing to do with net neutrality.
Re: An Open Letter to the FCC
#208Are there any legitimate arguments for anti-net neutrality proponents? Or is it just more "republicans prefer less regulations"?
http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r25390782-From-a-WISP
Really just google WISP and Netflix or YouTube.
Re: An Open Letter to the FCC
#209Seems like america is going to loose its freedom until next president ALREADY LOST - to pick a internet plan of their choice which is affordable and reliable to them. ALREADY LOST - to have privacy. LOOSING - what people will watch in their internet, so basically you will be target fed specific info and some info you will never come across leading to people will be kept in dark like the sugar news forever. if we were…
I don't think it matters much who occupies the oval office. I fear the U.S. is in a systematic regression due to deeper economic issues that so far are being totally unaddressed and unidentified in public. I hope other nations can begin exerting pressure on this country so that we are forced to begin considering substantial reforms (apparently a long-lived fiscal crisis isn't enough); otherwise these issues may worse…
"I don't think it matters much who occupies the oval office."
That sort of ignores the fact that Trump is undoing work done under the Obama administration. Clearly it matters who is in office.
Re: An Open Letter to the FCC
#210To play devil’s advocate, are we really ready for Internet to be regulated like a public utility? Like water, we will need to pay more the more we consume. You and I can pay but what about poor people? Will this discourage Internet usage?
Remember though, multiple regulations make pay-for-use work. For instance, due to rules on product package labels, you can figure out the power consumption of one product and compare that to other products (should be easier to do and more important to consumers but I digress).
I would love to reach the point where I can take these bloated, horrible web sites and make them have to publicly embarrass themselves by publishing their relative Internet consumption.