How does Anandtech feel about the FCC trying to change the rules of the Internet? (Net Neutrality)

Page 13 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,414
8,356
126
fcc can explain that it did the reclassification because it felt it didn't have legal authority to do the classification in the first place (nevermind the DC circuit basically told them to do it), and so the concerns of consumers about the bad things comcast could do to them don't really matter. those aren't legal arguments as to whether the fcc has authority to begin with (which has been pai's public argument, as i understand it).
 
Mar 11, 2004
23,031
5,495
146
As far as I know (sorry for late reply), it's only being reported in certain sub-reddits. I honestly haven't looked into the whole Reddit or Tumblr issue very much since I don't use either of those sites but there have been comments under MSN/Yahoo/CNBC videos removed when asking about the FCC ignoring the New York Attorney General's investigation. It's not unheard of for popular sites to moderate what they want users to see on their page when it comes to user input.

Either way, the 30th senator has signed up for the lawsuit. A senator from Missouri (lost the link and her name escapes me at the moment) just signed on, so now the entire senate will have to vote but the bigger issue will be now with it being in open court, the FCC's lawyers are going to be forced to explain why they ignored the millions of consumer demands to keep Net Neutrality on top of them completely ignoring the AG's investigation on false claims and identity theft. It's going to get a whole lot worse before the outcome is announced and I'm sure what the consumers are left with will be just a shadow of the rules before Ajit Pai got involved.

Hmm, that's iffy. Lots of people on Reddit (and just about every message board) whines about being "censored" and all manner of nonsense. To a certain extent, have you seen Yahoo comments? They make Youtube look like the Enlightenment in comparison.

Claire McCaskill (she's a Democrat).

Good. The problem is they're probably going to be grilled by a bunch of Republicans asking questions that telecoms provide for them ahead of time. So far their answer has been "we're not doing what people claim, in fact we're making things even better, by having the FTC will handle complaints about telecoms!" which is a total farce. An FTC that is in turmoil and Republicans are trying to kill off entirely, and has no expertise on this, and very possibly might not even legally have jurisdiction either (https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy...ll-protect-consumers-after-repeal-fcc-claims/), not to mention the FCC was specifically made for matters like this. I expect all the answers will be about like that though (the FTC will handle it!). Pai is already claiming that he's strengthened consumer protections via that, even though he fucking struck down consumer privacy protections specifically.

We have to keep at it and hold these peoples' feet to the fire. Not just the politicians, but the telecoms, and others (Google, Facebook, etc).
 
Jan 25, 2011
16,586
8,663
146
Kirsten Gillibrand just tweeted that the Senate needs just one vote to reverse the Net Neutrailty decision by the Trump admin.
 

Puffnstuff

Lifer
Mar 9, 2005
16,015
4,785
136
I wrote my elected officials this morning over this issue and asked them to support the house Congressional Review Act which would stop this forever by giving the Congress power to overturn agency rules like this.
 

bshole

Diamond Member
Mar 12, 2013
8,309
1,209
126
From your article...

Broadband providers say they will have difficulty following different state laws related to net neutrality. Various trade groups said they were watching Montana’s action and other state bills and were considering lawsuits.

“Following patchwork of legislation or regulation is costly and makes it even harder to invest in networks,” said Matt Polka, president of the American Cable Association, a lobbying group for small- and midsize broadband providers.

There is a slight chance that this could be pandora's box for the ISPs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Engineer

UNCjigga

Lifer
Dec 12, 2000
24,802
9,005
136
From your article...

There is a slight chance that this could be pandora's box for the ISPs.
I just can't wait for them to go screaming to the Trump Administration, "HELP! States and municipalities are passing their own rules! This is chaos! We can't allow market-driven rules and regulations to be different in every corner of the country! WE NEED STRONGER GOVERNMENT REGULATION!"
 

Homerboy

Lifer
Mar 1, 2000
30,856
4,974
126
I just can't wait for them to go screaming to the Trump Administration, "HELP! States and municipalities are passing their own rules! This is chaos! We can't allow market-driven rules and regulations to be different in every corner of the country! WE NEED STRONGER GOVERNMENT REGULATION!"

You act as if hypocrisy has ever stopped them.
 

Younigue

Diamond Member
Feb 5, 2017
5,888
1,446
106
I still won't eat at Burger King because fast food is gross but I love Burger King for Whopper Neutrality! It's hysterical and informative!
 
Mar 11, 2004
23,031
5,495
146
The GAO is even going to investigate the false identities stuff.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy...ent-fraud-will-be-investigated-by-government/

Although I'm not sure that matters that much since they were going to investigate their claim of DDoS attack. Not sure what happened on that (the GAO straight up said on the comment fraud thing that it'd probably take them 5 months just to get the people with enough expertise in place to start the investigation properly).
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/10/fccs-ddos-claims-will-be-investigated-by-government/
 

Alpha One Seven

Golden Member
Sep 11, 2017
1,098
124
66
https://www.battleforthenet.com/

Call the FCC at 1-888-225-5322 (Option 1, option 4, option 2, option 0. You're entering a complaint on proceeding 17-108. Be polite, be concise, and be firm.). Be prepared to wait (some people claim upwards of two hour wait times). Be polite. But call them. Call your congressmen. Call your senators. Call the people who support net neutrality and tell them they have your support. Call the people who oppose net neutrality and tell them why they should change their minds.
US Capitol Switchboard: 1-202-224-3121
Email and phone number of the FCC's Inspector General Hotline: hotline@fcc.gov 1-212-418-0473


And if you want to e-mail the asshat himself: Ajit.Pai@fcc.gov


Updated information at the bottom of this post about a new bill that could save the internet from ever getting messed with.

IF YOU VALUE YOUR TIME AND FREEDOM ON THE INTERNET, CALL YOUR REPS NOW.


Dating back to the original SOPA, there have been many iterations of this and the popular rumor is that Ajit Pai is going to try to sneak the next vote under everyone's noses the day before Thanksgiving. People are worried with the vote being so close to two major US holidays (Thanksgiving/Black Friday**) that it will fall under everyone's radar and finally pass.

I haven't followed it very much since where I live, our governor/senators are perfectly happy with changing the rules and have made it clear they have no intention of changing their minds. However, I have heard theories from people on both sides of the spectrum to the far extremes and it seems (please correct me if I'm wrong) this is how it could go:

1. The vote passes and ISPs are allowed to throttle speeds to whatever sites they want while completely blocking other sites for their users unless they pay additional fees. It's been speculated that Comcast has their eyes on Youtube and Google while Time Warner is looking at Bing, Yahoo, MSN, and the major sports sites. It's also been said that if one ISP gains control over Youtube, they could easily limit how many videos you're allowed to watch for free (under your current plan) per day and if you want to watch additional videos, you have to pay extra. Essentially if the vote passes, everyone would be at the mercy of their ISP and even startup companies who want to make a new website would have to pay fees just to get Comcast/Time Warner/(popular ISP) to allow their customers access to their site. Oh, and say goodbye to free porn.

2. The vote passes and ISPs work together to create a much faster internet service to everyone worldwide. As it stands (this is the part I hadn't heard before), cable companies aren't able to provide better Internet (ie. fiber optic) because of patents on top of corporate rivalries for more money. If the vote passes, ISPs would no longer need to charge for competitive rates because everything would be open to everyone, so the consumer would get faster speeds for much lower rates. There have also been speculations about opening the internet will effectively squash all illegal activities happening in the dark/deep web because they would no longer be able to hide behind proxies and VPNs.

Now, I understand point #2 doesn't make much sense (at least not to me), but I haven't heard that many arguments for the vote to pass, so the information there is rather limited. I guess it all boils down to whether or not you trust billion dollar corporations to have your best interests at heart and whether or not they will actually try to work together to provide a better internet for the end-users. Personally, I've been using Comcast's Xfinity for about five years now, and while I absolutely love the speeds, I cannot stand trying to contact their customer support. Not only is it almost impossible to understand the vast majority of the people on the other line, it adds a little more salt to the wound that they make them answer with: "Hello, this is Jason Smith..." or "Hello, this is Jennifer Connel..." in the thickest East-Indian accent you've ever heard.

Thoughts?


**I understand Black Friday isn't an actual holiday, but given how many people completely skip Thanksgiving to sit outside Best Buy and Target for 20+ hours just to spend $300 less on a TV is insane.

A new bill has been introduced which will prevent the FCC from ever messing with the rules of the internet (at least until their lawyers find some shitty loophole and they exploit it to turn their millions into billions, but until then...):

H.R.4585 - To prohibit the Federal Communications Commission from relying on the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in the matter of restoring internet freedom to adopt, amend, revoke, or otherwise modify any rule of the Commission.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/4585

ENERGY AND COMMERCE COMMITTEE (if your rep is on the committee, call them immediately)

2125 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515

(202) 225-2927 (main)
(202) 226-4972 (press)

The Democrat E&CC: (same thing as above)

2322A Rayburn House Office Building,
Washington, DC 20515
Main Office: (202) 225-3641
Press Office: (202) 225-5735
I am for anything that promotes companies being forced to offer more bandwidth and higher quality of service to be competitive and let those that want to cut back on service die a slow death as their subscribers leave them.
Net neutrality is a joke. Free enterprise always ends up providing better services and goods than forced socialism does.
 

Alpha One Seven

Golden Member
Sep 11, 2017
1,098
124
66
I disagree with this. The mentality of big business has largely been to make as much money when you can for as long as you can. They will exploit and pillage the very instant the law allows them to do so and will not stop until the very instant in which the law tells them to stop. It is for the same reason the Tobacco industry spread confusion and fought awareness of what their product was doing for as long as possible. Make maximum profit for as long as possible until the gravy train ends. If it ends.

And besides... The party is over the moment Dems retake power? I would not be so certain. While Repubs have been 100% about screwing over the consumer, the Dems have still been fairly 50/50. We made some inroads under Obama for example, but Hillary did not care much for net neutrality. Throw in enough lobbying and I think we have a very plausible case for this being the way it will be for good.
For big tobacco, the gravy train never ended, it just picked up a whole new group of vape users. Tobacco stocks are doing quite well now.
 

ch33zw1z

Lifer
Nov 4, 2004
37,734
18,004
146
I am for anything that promotes companies being forced to offer more bandwidth and higher quality of service to be competitive and let those that want to cut back on service die a slow death as their subscribers leave them.
Net neutrality is a joke. Free enterprise always ends up providing better services and goods than forced socialism does.
Severe misunderstanding of what net neutrality provides, no surprise.
 

jackstar7

Lifer
Jun 26, 2009
11,679
1,944
126
I am for anything that promotes companies being forced to offer more bandwidth and higher quality of service to be competitive and let those that want to cut back on service die a slow death as their subscribers leave them.
Net neutrality is a joke. Free enterprise always ends up providing better services and goods than forced socialism does.
You vote?
 

SMOGZINN

Lifer
Jun 17, 2005
14,202
4,401
136
Net neutrality is a joke. Free enterprise always ends up providing better services and goods than forced socialism does.

No, free enterprise always ends up providing better services and goods for the enterprise not for the people. There is nothing profitable about free speech so it needs to be legislated. Net Neutrality is the equivalent of Free Speech of the Internet.