Jump to content


 


Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.


Click here to Register a free account now! or read our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Photo

Don't Be Neutral or Passive On Net Neutrality


  • Please log in to reply
15 replies to this topic

#1 buddy215

buddy215

  • Moderator
  • 13,501 posts
  • ONLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:West Tennessee
  • Local time:04:37 PM

Posted 10 July 2017 - 01:27 PM

_96801516_139c7158-4d4f-42f4-9a14-504d0f

 

The coming battle over 'net neutrality' - BBC News

This week some of the internet's most popular websites will look quite different, as they participate in a day of action on Wednesday 12 July to oppose changes to US rules which govern net neutrality.

Sites such as Netflix and Amazon are joining with civil liberty groups in a co-ordinated protest, and activists are already sharing viral content on Twitter, Reddit and Facebook in preparation. So why all the outcry - and who's behind the social media campaign?

What is Net Neutrality?

Net neutrality is the principle that an internet service provider (ISP) should give consumers equal access to all legal content regardless of its source.................

 

..............The US Federal Communications Commission (FCC), with the support of the Obama administration introduced new net neutrality regulations in 2015, after an extensive campaign by activist groups and tech companies. Those rules put ISPs in the same category as other telecommunication companies.

But President Trump is a vocal critic of the measures, and he appointed a net neutrality opponent, former commissioner Ajit Pai, to chair the FCC at the beginning of this year.

 

Yep, the huge ISPs have BOUGHT the Retaliban pols....including the president. The consumer be damned.

 

 

On 12 July, huge tech companies such as Amazon will join more than 170 organisations which will "slow down" their services to protest the proposed change. The protest is an attempt to simulate what could potentially happen to popular websites if net neutrality rules are scrapped.

The companies will show advertisements and pop ups which encourage users to comment on a dedicated campaign website.

 

_96828876_f42b3887-fc5a-4746-9674-5621f9


“Every atom in your body came from a star that exploded and the atoms in your left hand probably came from a different star than your right hand. It really is the most poetic thing I know about physics...you are all stardust.”Lawrence M. Krauss
A 1792 U.S. penny, designed in part by Thomas Jefferson and George Washington, reads “Liberty Parent of Science & Industry.”

BC AdBot (Login to Remove)

 


#2 Chris Cosgrove

Chris Cosgrove

  • Moderator
  • 7,207 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scotland
  • Local time:10:37 PM

Posted 10 July 2017 - 06:50 PM

Am I right in thinking that this is an entirely internal USA problem, or not ?

 

And as for cable, the nearest cable to my house is five miles in one direction and eight in another.

 

Chris Cosgrove



#3 buddy215

buddy215
  • Topic Starter

  • Moderator
  • 13,501 posts
  • ONLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:West Tennessee
  • Local time:04:37 PM

Posted 10 July 2017 - 07:23 PM

Yep...you're right...it's not Scotland's or Mississippi's problem..just USA's problem. I think I'm right in thinking the public hearings/ input 

are a mere formality and the fix is already in. The huge ISPs have paid millions in bribes and are demanding to get their way.


“Every atom in your body came from a star that exploded and the atoms in your left hand probably came from a different star than your right hand. It really is the most poetic thing I know about physics...you are all stardust.”Lawrence M. Krauss
A 1792 U.S. penny, designed in part by Thomas Jefferson and George Washington, reads “Liberty Parent of Science & Industry.”

#4 Just_One_Question

Just_One_Question

  • Members
  • 1,400 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bulgaria
  • Local time:01:37 AM

Posted 14 July 2017 - 07:12 PM

Yeah, that's what I don't understand about such protests. Hasn't Congress already made up their mind? Do they even look at those petitions? What's the point of them, besides throwing a mass-sized tantrum? Or is there a mechanism in place if a given number of signatures is achieved?:)



#5 SuperSapien64

SuperSapien64

  • Members
  • 1,042 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:04:37 PM

Posted 13 December 2017 - 06:38 PM

The Net Neutrality Lie: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nqJDW_s93rc

If your in the US call your congressman and tell them to support Net Neutrality.



#6 MadmanRB

MadmanRB

    Spoon!!!!


  • Members
  • 3,340 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:No time for that when there is evil afoot!
  • Local time:05:37 PM

Posted 14 December 2017 - 12:47 PM

Spoiler alert: it gets repealled

 

Its okay i am going to become a pirate and hacker here soon, the rules are bullcrap anyhow.

Ethics mean nothing under a corrupt system that favors big business over its citizens.

Democracy is dead and our voices mean nothing.

 

Anarchy baby!


Edited by MadmanRB, 14 December 2017 - 12:48 PM.

You know you want me baby!

Proud Linux user and dual booter.

Proud Vivaldi user.

8spxh0-6.png


#7 buddy215

buddy215
  • Topic Starter

  • Moderator
  • 13,501 posts
  • ONLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:West Tennessee
  • Local time:04:37 PM

Posted 14 December 2017 - 01:38 PM

Net neutrality rules weakened by US regulator - BBC News

Restrictions on US broadband providers' ability to prioritise one service's data over another are to be reduced after a vote by a regulator.

The Federal Communications Commission split three to two in favour of changing the way "net neutrality" is governed.

Internet service providers (ISPs) will now be allowed to speed up or slow down different companies' data, and charge consumers according to the services they access.

But they must disclose such practices.

Proceedings in Washington were halted for about 15 minutes after a security alert forced an evacuation of the FCC's chamber.

Campaigners claim the reversal of rules introduced under President Barack Obama will make the internet less open and accessible.

But the FCC's chairman Ajit Pai has suggested the move will foster innovation and encourage ISPs to invest in faster connections for people living in rural areas.

He refers to the change as "restoring internet freedom".

Technically, the vote was to reclassify broadband internet as an information service rather than telecommunications.

 

The consequence of this is that the FCC will no longer directly regulate ISPs.

 

Instead jurisdiction will pass to another regulator, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). Its key responsibility will be to check that the companies disclose if they block data, throttle it or offer to prioritise traffic, rather than stopping such behaviour.

One criticism of this is that consumers often have few if any ISPs to choose between. Moreover, opponents of the change claim it could take years to address any misbehaviour.

"I dissent to this legally-lightweight, consumer-harming, corporate-enabling, destroying-internet freedom order," said Democrat commissioner Mignon Clyburn ahead of the vote.

 

NO ONE IS SURPRISED BY THIS. TRUMP IS ALL ABOUT INCREASING HIS, BILLIONAIRES and HUGE CORPORATIONS PROFITS AND WEALTH. SHAME ON ALL THAT
HELPED ELECT THIS ANTI-CONSUMER AND LIAR IN CHIEF.


“Every atom in your body came from a star that exploded and the atoms in your left hand probably came from a different star than your right hand. It really is the most poetic thing I know about physics...you are all stardust.”Lawrence M. Krauss
A 1792 U.S. penny, designed in part by Thomas Jefferson and George Washington, reads “Liberty Parent of Science & Industry.”

#8 MadmanRB

MadmanRB

    Spoon!!!!


  • Members
  • 3,340 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:No time for that when there is evil afoot!
  • Local time:05:37 PM

Posted 14 December 2017 - 01:51 PM

It is a bad situation.

 

I wonder if its too late to go to Canada?


You know you want me baby!

Proud Linux user and dual booter.

Proud Vivaldi user.

8spxh0-6.png


#9 mjd420nova

mjd420nova

  • Members
  • 1,914 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:02:37 PM

Posted 14 December 2017 - 03:47 PM

The repeal will just be the beginning of the end for the internet.  If the phone companies tried this, we'd all be back to tin cans and string.   Imagine that Verizon wouldn't let you call a T-Mobile  phone because it's not in their best interest.  The corporations rule the government and can buy the rulings the way they want them.  If one provider blocks or throttles another streaming service because they offer their own, that's smacks of censorship.



#10 buddy215

buddy215
  • Topic Starter

  • Moderator
  • 13,501 posts
  • ONLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:West Tennessee
  • Local time:04:37 PM

Posted 14 December 2017 - 03:49 PM

New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, a leading voice in the fight against the FCC's net neutrality rules repeal, has stepped forward with one of the first legal challenges to the commission’s controversial vote.

Citing his investigation into the FCC's public comments process preceding the vote, Schneiderman declared his office's intention to sue to "stop the FCC’s illegal rollback of net neutrality" — a forthcoming legal challenge that's sure to be in good company. In response to questions from TechCrunch, Schneiderman's office noted that he will spearhead a multi-state lawsuit and that we can expect it "in the coming days."

"We will be filing a claim to preserve protections for New Yorkers and all Americans. And we'll be working aggressively to stop the FCC's leadership from doing any further damage to the internet and to our economy," Schneiderman said in a press release.

"Today’s new rule would enable ISPs to charge consumers more to access sites like Facebook and Twitter and give them the leverage to degrade high quality of video streaming until and unless somebody pays them more money. Even worse, today’s vote would enable ISPs to favor certain viewpoints over others."


“Every atom in your body came from a star that exploded and the atoms in your left hand probably came from a different star than your right hand. It really is the most poetic thing I know about physics...you are all stardust.”Lawrence M. Krauss
A 1792 U.S. penny, designed in part by Thomas Jefferson and George Washington, reads “Liberty Parent of Science & Industry.”

#11 rp88

rp88

  • Members
  • 3,082 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Local time:10:37 PM

Posted 14 December 2017 - 06:11 PM

There is a small ray of hope with the following development:

DNS over HTTPS

Though at a guess it doesn't quite seem enough if a nasty ISP trying to slow and filter traffic chooses to work by IP addresses of sites rather than by their readable URLs. But the idea of a protocol designed to make filtering and slowing more difficult is a step in a good direction, a technical solution able to make slowing and filtering IMPOSSIBLE would be the best solution and far more effective and wide reaching than a legislative solution could ever be.

This is an American problem NOW, but a lot of sites are US hosted so slowing of them could propagate to users anywhere in the world, and the old saying "when America sneezes the rest of the world catches a cold", what happens there can spread and affect the rest of us (I'm in the UK) too. Both the EU and India have stood up to defend net neutrality in their respective countries, I'm not sure if any other countries or multi-country collaborations have done the right thing.

Edited by rp88, 14 December 2017 - 06:11 PM.

Back on this site, for a while anyway, been so busy the last year.

My systems:2 laptops, intel i3 processors, windows 8.1 installed on the hard-drive and linux mint 17.3 MATE installed to USB

#12 SuperSapien64

SuperSapien64

  • Members
  • 1,042 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:04:37 PM

Posted 14 December 2017 - 06:18 PM

Well I did my part today I called my local representative and told them to support Net Neutrality.



#13 buddy215

buddy215
  • Topic Starter

  • Moderator
  • 13,501 posts
  • ONLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:West Tennessee
  • Local time:04:37 PM

Posted 14 December 2017 - 07:13 PM

DISSENTING STATEMENT OF
COMMISSIONER MIGNON CLYBURN
Re:
Destroying Internet Freedom
, WC Docket No. 17-108
I dissent. I dissent from this fiercely-spun, legally-lightweight, consumer-harming, corporate-
enabling
Destroying Internet Freedom Order
.
I dissent, because I am among the millions who are outraged. Outraged, because the FCC pulls its
own teeth, abdicating responsibility to protect the nation’s broadband consumers. Why are we witnessing
such an unprecedented groundswell of public support, for keeping the 2015 net neutrality protections in
place? Because the public can plainly see, that a soon-to-be-toothless FCC, is handing the keys to the
Internet – the Internet, one of the most remarkable, empowering, enabling inventions of our lifetime – over
to a handful of multi-billion dollar corporations. And if past is prologue, those very same broadband
internet service providers, that the majority says you should trust to do right by you, will put profits and
shareholder returns above, what is best for you.
Each of us raised our right hands when we were sworn in as FCC Commissioners, took an oath
and promised to uphold our duties and responsibilities ‘to make available, so far as possible, to all the
people of the United States, without discrimination... a rapid, efficient, Nation-wide, and world-wide wire
and radio communication service with adequate facilities at reasonable charges.’ Today the FCC majority
officially abandons that pledge and millions have taken note.
I do not believe that there are any FCC or Congressional offices immune to the deluge of
consumer outcry. We are even hearing about state and local offices fielding calls and what is always
newsworthy is that at last count, five Republican Members of Congress went on the record in calling for a
halt of today’s vote. Why such a bipartisan outcry? Because the large majority of Americans are in favor
of keeping strong net neutrality rules in place. The sad thing about this commentary, it pains me to say, is
what I can only describe as the new norm at the FCC: A majority that is ignoring the will of the people. A
majority that will stand idly by while the people they serve lose.
We have heard story after story of what net neutrality means to consumers and small businesses
from places as diverse as Los Angeles’ Skid Row and Marietta, Ohio. I hold in my hand letters that plead
with the FCC to keep our net neutrality rules in place but what is striking and in keeping with the new
norm, despite the millions of comments, letters, and calls received, this Order cites,
not even one
. That
speaks volumes about the direction the FCC is heading. That speaks volumes about just who is being
heard.
Sole proprietors, whose entire business model, depends on an open internet, are worried that the
absence of clear and enforceable net neutrality protections will result in higher costs and fewer benefits
because you see: they are not able to pay tolls for premium access. Even large online businesses have
weighed in, expressing concern about being subject to added charges as they simply try to reach their
own customers. Engineers have submitted comments including many of the internet’s pioneers, sharing
with the FCC majority, the fundamentals of how the internet works because from where they sit, there is
no way that an item like this would ever see the light of day, if the majority understood the platform some
of them helped to create.
I have heard from innovators, worried that we are standing up a mother-may-I regime, where the
broadband provider becomes arbiter of acceptable online business models. And yes, I have heard from
consumers, who are worried given that their broadband provider has already shown that they will charge
inscrutable below-the-line fees, raise prices unexpectedly, and put consumers on hold for hours at a time.
Who will have their best interests at heart in a world without clear and enforceable rules overseen by an
agency with clear enforcement authority? A toothless FCC?
There has been a darker side to all of this over the past few weeks. Threats and intimidation.
Personal attacks. Nazis cheering. Russian influence. Fake comments. Those are unacceptable. Some
are illegal. They all are to be rejected. But what is also not acceptable, is the FCC’s refusal to cooperate
with state attorney general investigations, or allow evidence in the record that would undercut a
preordained outcome.
Many have asked, what happens next? How will all of this – Net Neutrality, my internet
experience, look after today? My answer is simple. When the current protections are abandoned, and the
rules that have been officially in place since 2015 are repealed, we will have a Cheshire cat version of net
neutrality. We will be in a world where regulatory substance fades to black, and all that is left is a
broadband provider’s toothy grin and those oh so comforting words: we have every incentive to do the
right thing. What they will soon have, is every incentive to do their own thing.
Now the results of throwing out your Net Neutrality protections, may not be felt right away. Most
of us will get up tomorrow morning and over the next week, wade through hundreds of headlines, turn
away from those endless prognosticators, and submerge ourselves in a sea of holiday bliss. But what we
have wrought will one day be apparent and by then, when you really see what has changed, I fear, it may
not only be too late to do anything about it, because there will be no agency empowered to address your
concerns. This item insidiously ensures the FCC will never be able to fully grasp the harm it may have
unleashed on the internet ecosystem. And that inability might lead decisionmakers to conclude, that the
next internet startup that failed to flourish and attempted to seek relief, simply had a bad business plan,
when in fact what was missing was a level playing field online.
Particularly damning is what today’s repeal will mean for marginalized groups, like communities of
color, that rely on platforms like the internet to communicate, because traditional outlets do not consider
their issues or concerns, worthy of any coverage. It was through social media that the world first heard
about Ferguson, Missouri, because legacy news outlets did not consider it important until the hashtag
started trending. It has been through online video services, that targeted entertainment has thrived, where
stories are finally being told because those same programming were repeatedly rejected by mainstream
distribution and media outlets. And it has been through secure messaging platforms, where activists have
communicated and organized for justice without gatekeepers with differing opinions blocking them.
Where will the next significant attack on internet freedom come from? Maybe from a broadband
provider allowing its network to congest, making a high-traffic video provider ask what more can it pay to
make the pain stop. That will never happen you say? Well it already has. The difference now, is the open
question of what is stopping them? The difference after today’s vote, is that no one will be able to stop
them.
Maybe several providers will quietly roll out paid prioritization packages that enable deep-
pocketed players to cut the queue. Maybe a vertically-integrated broadband provider decides that it will
favor its own apps and services. Or some high-value internet-of-things traffic will be subject to an
additional fee. Maybe some of these actions will be cloaked under nondisclosure agreements and
wrapped up in mandatory arbitration clauses so that it will be a breach of contract to disclose these
publicly or take the provider to court over any wrongdoing. Some may say ‘Of Course this will never
happen?” After today’s vote, what will be in place to stop them?
What we do know, is that broadband providers did not even wait for the ink to dry on this Order
before making their moves. One broadband provider, who had in the past promised to not engage in paid
prioritization, has now quietly dropped that promise from its list of commitments on its website. What’s
next? Blocking or throttling? That will never happen? After today’s vote, exactly who is the cop of the
beat that can or will stop them?
And just who will be impacted the most? Consumers and small businesses, that’s who. The
internet continues to evolve and has become ever more critical for every participant in our 21
st
century
ecosystem: government services have migrated online, as have educational opportunities and job notices
and applications, but at the same time, broadband providers have continued to consolidate, becoming
bigger. They own their own content, they own media companies, and they own or have an interest in
other types of services.
Why are millions so alarmed? Because they understand the risks this all poses and even those
who may not know what Title II authority is, know that they will be at risk without it.
I have been asking myself repeatedly, why the majority is so singularly-focused on overturning
these wildly-popular rules? Is it simply because they felt that the 2015 Net Neutrality order, which threw
out over 700 rules and dispensed with more than 25 provisions, was too heavy-handed? Is this a ploy to
create a “need” for legislation where there was none before? Or is it to establish uncertainty where little
previously existed?
Is it a tactic to undermine the net neutrality protections adopted in 2015 that are currently parked
at the Supreme Court? You know, the same rules that were resoundingly upheld by the D.C. Circuit last
year? No doubt, we will see a rush to the courthouse, asking the Supreme Court to vacate and remand
the substantive rules we fought so hard for over the past few years, because today, the FCC uses legally-
suspect means to clear the decks of substantive protections for consumers and competition.
It is abundantly clear why we see so much bad process with this item: because the fix was
already in. There is no real mention of the thousands of net neutrality complaints filed by consumers.
Why? The majority has refused to put them in the record while maintaining the rhetoric that there have
been no real violations. Record evidence of the massive incentives and abilities of broadband providers to
act in anti-competitive ways are missing from the docket? Why? Because they have refused to use the
data and knowledge the agency does have, and has relied upon in the past to inform our merger reviews.
As the majority has shown again and again, the views of individuals do not matter, including the views of
those who care deeply about the substance, but are not Washington insiders.
There is a basic fallacy underlying the majority’s actions and rhetoric today: the assumption of
what is best for broadband providers, is best for America. Breathless claims about unshackling
broadband services from unnecessary regulation, are only about ensuring that broadband providers, have
the keys to the internet. Assertions that this is merely a return to some imaginary status quo ante, cannot
hide the fact, that this is the very first time, that the FCC, has disavowed substantive protections for
consumers online.
And when the current, 2015 Net Neutrality rules are laid to waste, we may be left with no single
authority with the power to protect consumers. Now this Order loudly crows about handing over authority
of broadband to the FTC, but what is absent from the Order and glossed over in that haphazardly issued
afterthought of a Memorandum of Understanding or MOU, is that the FTC is an agency, with no technical
expertise in telecommunications; the FTC is an agency that may not even have authority over broadband
providers in the first instance; the FTC is an agency that if you can even reach that high bar of proving
unfair or deceptive practices and that there is substantial consumer injury, it will take years upon years to
remedy. But don’t just take my word for it: even one of the FTC’s own Commissioners has articulated
these very concerns. And if you’re wondering why the FCC is preempting state consumer protection laws
in this item without notice, let me help you with a simple jingle that you can easily commit to memory: If it
benefits industry, preemption is good; if it benefits consumers, preemption is bad.
Reclassification of broadband will do more than wreak havoc on net neutrality. It will also
undermine our universal service construct for years to come, something which the Order implicitly
acknowledges. It will undermine the Lifeline program. It will weaken our ability to support robust
broadband infrastructure deployment. And what we will soon find out, is what a broadband market
unencumbered by robust consumer protections will look like. I suspect the result will not be pretty.
I know there are many questions on the mind of Americans right now, including what the repeal of
net neutrality will mean for them. To help answer outstanding questions I will host a town hall through
Twitter next Tuesday at 2pm EST. What saddens me is that the agency that is supposed to protect you is
 

Edited by buddy215, 14 December 2017 - 07:27 PM.

“Every atom in your body came from a star that exploded and the atoms in your left hand probably came from a different star than your right hand. It really is the most poetic thing I know about physics...you are all stardust.”Lawrence M. Krauss
A 1792 U.S. penny, designed in part by Thomas Jefferson and George Washington, reads “Liberty Parent of Science & Industry.”

#14 buddy215

buddy215
  • Topic Starter

  • Moderator
  • 13,501 posts
  • ONLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:West Tennessee
  • Local time:04:37 PM

Posted 14 December 2017 - 07:30 PM

STATEMENT OF
COMMISSIONER JESSICA ROSENWORCEL,
DISSENTING
Re:
Restoring Internet Freedom
, WC Docket No. 17-108, Declaratory Ruling, Report and
Order, and Order (December 14, 2017)
Net neutrality is internet freedom. I support that freedom. I dissent from this rash
decision to roll back net neutrality rules. I dissent from the corrupt process that has brought us to
this point. And I dissent from the contempt this agency has shown our citizens in pursuing this
path today. This decision puts the Federal Communications Commission on the wrong side of
history, the wrong side of the law, and the wrong side of the American public.
The future of the internet is the future of everything. That is because there is nothing in
our commercial, social, and civic lives that has been untouched by its influence or unmoved by
its power. And here in the United States our internet economy is the envy of the world. This is
because it rests on a foundation of openness.
That openness is revolutionary. It means you can go where you want and do what you
want online without your broadband provider getting in the way or making choices for you. It
means every one of us can create without permission, build community beyond geography,
organize without physical constraints, consume content we want when and where we want it, and
share ideas not just around the corner but across the globe. I believe it is essential that we sustain
this foundation of openness—and that is why I support net neutrality.
Net neutrality has deep origins in communications law and history. In the era when
communications meant telephony, every call went through, and your phone company could not
cut off your call or edit the content of your conversations. This guiding principle of
nondiscrimination meant you were in control of the connections you made.
This principle continued as time advanced, technology changed, and Internet access
became the dial tone of the digital age. So it was twelve years ago—when President George W.
Bush was in the White House—that this agency put its first net neutrality policies on paper. In
the decade that followed, the FCC revamped and revised its net neutrality rules, seeking to keep
them current and find them a stable home in the law. In its 2015 order the FCC succeeded—
because in the following year, in a 184-page opinion the agency’s net neutrality rules were fully
and completely upheld.
So our existing net neutrality policies have passed court muster. They are wildly popular.
But today we wipe away this work, destroy this progress, and burn down time-tested values that
have made our Internet economy the envy of the world.
As a result of today’s misguided action, our broadband providers will get extraordinary
new power from this agency. They will have the power to block websites, throttle services, and
censor online content. They will have the right to discriminate and favor the internet traffic of
2
those companies with whom they have pay-for-play arrangements and the right to consign all
others to a slow and bumpy road.
Now our broadband providers will tell you they will never do these things. They say just
trust us. But know this: they have the technical ability and business incentive to discriminate and
manipulate your internet traffic. And now this agency gives them the legal green light to go
ahead and do so.
This is not good. Not good for consumers. Not good for businesses. Not good for
anyone who connects and creates online. Not good for the democratizing force that depends on
openness to thrive. Moreover, it is not good for American leadership on the global stage of our
new and complex digital world.
I’m not alone with these concerns. Everyone from the creator of the world wide web to
religious leaders to governors and mayors of big cities and small towns to musicians to actors
and actresses to entrepreneurs and academics and activists has registered their upset and anger.
They are reeling at how this agency could make this kind of mistake. They are wondering how it
could be so tone deaf. And they are justifiably concerned that just a few unelected officials
could make such vast and far-reaching decisions about the future of the internet.
So after erasing our net neutrality rules what is left? What recourse do consumers have?
We’re told don’t worry, competition will save us. But the FCC’s own data show that our
broadband markets are not competitive. Half of the households in this country have no choice of
broadband provider. So if your broadband provider is blocking websites, you have no recourse.
You have nowhere to go.
We’re told don’t worry, the Federal Trade Commission will save us. But the FTC is not
the expert agency for communications. It has authority over unfair and deceptive practices. But
to evade FTC review, all any broadband provider will need to do is add new provisions to the
fine print in its terms of service. In addition, it is both costly and impractical to report difficulties
to the FTC. By the time the FTC gets around to addressing them in court proceedings or
enforcement actions, it’s fair to assume that the start-ups and small entities wrestling with
discriminatory treatment could be long gone. Moreover, what little authority the FTC has is now
under question in the courts.
We’re told don’t worry, the state authorities will save us. But at the same time, the FCC
all but clears the field with sweeping preemption of anything that resembles state or local
consumer protection.
If the substance that got us to this point is bad, the process is even worse.
Let’s talk about the public record.
The public has been making noise, speaking up, and raising a ruckus. We see it in the
protests across the country and outside here today. We see it in how they lit up our phone lines,
3
clogged our e-mail in-boxes, and jammed our online comment system. It might be messy, but
whatever our disagreements are on this dais I hope we can agree this is democracy in action—
and something we can all support.
To date, nearly 24 million comments have been filed in this proceeding. There is no
record in the history of this agency that has attracted so many filings. But there’s something foul
in this record:
Two million comments feature stolen identities.
Half a million comments are from Russian addresses.
Fifty thousand consumer complaints are inexplicably missing from the record.
I think that’s a problem. I think our record has been corrupted and our process for public
participation lacks integrity. Nineteen state attorneys general agree. They have written us
demanding we halt our vote until we investigate and get to the bottom of this mess. Identity theft
is a crime under state and federal law—and while it is taking place this agency has turned a blind
eye to its victims and callously told our fellow law enforcement officials it will not help.
This is not acceptable. It is a stain on the FCC and this proceeding. This issue is not
going away. It needs to be addressed.
Finally, I worry that this decision and the process that brought us to this point is ugly.
It’s ugly in the cavalier disregard this agency has demonstrated to the public, the contempt it has
shown for citizens who speak up, and the disdain it has for popular opinion. Unlike its
predecessors this FCC has not held a single public hearing on net neutrality. There is no
shortage of people who believe Washington is not listening to their concerns, their fears, and
their desires. Add this agency to the list.
I, too, am frustrated. But here’s a twist: I hear you. I listen to what callers are saying. I
read the countless, individually written e-mails in my in-box, the posts online, and the very short
and sometimes very long letters. And I’m not going to give up—and neither should you. If the
arc of history is long, we are going to bend this toward a more just outcome. In the courts. In
Congress. Wherever we need to go to ensure that net neutrality stays the law of the land.
Because if you are conservative or progressive, you benefit from internet openness. If you come
from a small town or big city, you benefit from internet openness. If you are a company or non-
profit, you benefit from internet openness. If you are a start-up or an established business, you
benefit from internet openness. If you are a consumer or a creator, you benefit from internet
openness. If you believe in democracy, you benefit from internet openness.
So let’s persist. Let’s fight. Let’s not stop here or now. It’s too important. The future
depends on it.
 

Edited by buddy215, 15 December 2017 - 09:21 AM.

“Every atom in your body came from a star that exploded and the atoms in your left hand probably came from a different star than your right hand. It really is the most poetic thing I know about physics...you are all stardust.”Lawrence M. Krauss
A 1792 U.S. penny, designed in part by Thomas Jefferson and George Washington, reads “Liberty Parent of Science & Industry.”

#15 SuperSapien64

SuperSapien64

  • Members
  • 1,042 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:04:37 PM

Posted 15 December 2017 - 08:48 PM

I just thought of another victim of repealing Net Neutrality, and that would be scientific research thats internet based like NASA. I forgot what it's called but it uses a small portion of your computers processing power to help NASA with research.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users