back to article FCC forced by court to ask the public (again) if they think tearing up net neutrality was a really good idea or not

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is asking the American public to tell it if its decision in 2017 to scrap net neutrality regulations was dumb or not. In a striking piece of irony – and one that the FCC is distinctly unhappy about – the watchdog is legally obliged to seek public comment on three issues: how its …

  1. ADJB

    Plain English

    Looks like the FCC press office has employed Sir Humphrey.

    1. BebopWeBop Silver badge

      Re: Plain English

      I suspect that whoever got the sign up "beware of the leopard" on the door of the room housing the report got there first!

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I nominate that woman for President.

    Maybe if we elect a woman proven to have a good head on her shoulders, ethics & morals compass' not skewed completely out of alignment, & so obviously disgusted with the shite the others of the bureau have gotten up to, perhaps this nation (dare I hope the world?) may get returned to some semblence of sanity, diplomacy, & decency?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: I nominate that woman for President.

      Power corrupts

      Absolute power corrupts absolutely

      Emulate San Marino, 2 "captains" serving a 6 month term and several days after they leave office for the public to file complaints to the authorities about their conduct (and possible criminal charges)

  3. Gene Cash Silver badge

    Contempt of court?

    I'd think such a poor execution of the court's instructions and such a blatantly willful disregard of their intent would be considered contempt of court.

    Does the court not have the balls to police the enforcement of its wishes?

    1. steviebuk Silver badge

      Re: Contempt of court?

      Firing Pai is what is desperately needed. But that won't happen on Trump's watch. As, and I could be wrong, I get the impression when I look at him, that he is one of those Apprentice candidates who'll do anything to kiss Trumps arse so to make a buck. Wouldn't surprise me if he's doing stuff at the FCC that, indirectly, benefits Trumps businesses that he refused to give up when becoming President.

      1. Michael Wojcik Silver badge

        Re: Contempt of court?

        Trump's businesses have phone lines. There's no need for "indirectly"; the telcos are in a position to write sweetheart contracts that directly affect those businesses' costs.

        But there doesn't have to be any present quid pro quo. I doubt Trump himself devotes any of his (meager) intellectual resources to Pai or the FCC. They haven't aroused his ire, or that of anyone who has his ear. That's really all that matters.

  4. TheSmokingArgus

    Net Neutrality is to Free Open Internet as PATRIOT Act is to Patriotism

    Net Neutrality is to Free Open Internet as PATRIOT Act is to Patriotism.

    All the sky is falling boo hoo and support of former Obama-Donor-Super-Bundler and thus appointed former FCC Commissar Tom Wheeler's lies all for naught. None of the bed-wetting came true.

    In 2013 100Mbps synchronous account + 5 static IP block = $178 +taxes

    In 2020 500Mbps synchronous account + 5 static IP block = $124 + taxes.

    Just another excuse for a government created oligopoly to hand attempt to regulate the internet and put the toothpaste back in the tube.

    1. james_smith

      Re: Net Neutrality is to Free Open Internet as PATRIOT Act is to Patriotism

      "Quick! Bring the net and a straitjacket, they've let one of the crazies out".

      1. CrazyOldCatMan Silver badge

        Re: Net Neutrality is to Free Open Internet as PATRIOT Act is to Patriotism

        they've let one of the crazies out"

        Do they do frog pills in dart form?

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Net Neutrality is to Free Open Internet as PATRIOT Act is to Patriotism

          "Do they do frog pills in dart form?"

          Yes ...... just freeze the Frog(or Frog Pills) in Liquid Nitrogen and then sharpen the end !!!!

          :)

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Net Neutrality is to Free Open Internet as PATRIOT Act is to Patriotism

      Okay, so your high-end internet connection got slightly cheaper, but what does that have to do with the issues in question:

      * public safety,

      * low income Americans, and

      * broadband infrastructure?

      1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

        Re: Net Neutrality is to Free Open Internet as PATRIOT Act is to Patriotism

        * public safety,

        * low income Americans, and

        * broadband infrastructure?

        Public safety is potentially the easiest one. So can be linked to E911 regulations. Allow (or better, require) ISPs to prioritise 128kbps on all broadband connections using ToS 3&7. Forbid non-public safety apps from using those markings. That would require some definition of public safety, so E911 and the ability to make emergency calls is one, but also should support alarm/alert services and devices like medic alert buttons that can call for help.

        Require congestion monitoring at the interconnect level (ie peering/transit) for those services and regulate connection costs between connection provider and PSAP. This would effectively extend (or enforce) some provisions in the "New and Emerging Technologies 911 Improvement Act".

        Low income and broadband infrastructure are more political than technical, ie how and who to charge for USO-type obligations, which could then go into the slush fund for supporting/subsidising those connections. That's been floated in various countries as a 'broadband tax', which would be regressive if applied to consumer charges, but could be extended to traffic generators.. So charge content providers as well as ISPs. But ideally there would also be an overhaul wrt how USO funds are managed and disbursed.

    3. Bronek Kozicki
      Paris Hilton

      Re: Net Neutrality is to Free Open Internet as PATRIOT Act is to Patriotism

      @TheSmokingArgus , so what is it that you are smoking?

    4. tin 2

      Re: Net Neutrality is to Free Open Internet as PATRIOT Act is to Patriotism

      Try to make a possibly valid point but fill it full of hyperbole so that it looks like you're a nutter, why dontcha?

    5. Jimmy2Cows Silver badge
      Facepalm

      Re: Net Neutrality is to Free Open Internet as PATRIOT Act is to Patriotism

      Hard to know where to start counting the ways your rant completely misses the point.

    6. MrDamage

      Re: Net Neutrality is to Free Open Internet as PATRIOT Act is to Patriotism

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKjxFJfcrcA

    7. TheSmokingArgus

      Re: Net Neutrality is to Free Open Internet as PATRIOT Act is to Patriotism

      OK Boomers

      Always surprising unto those who lick the boots of STATE.

      The same federal plantation that drops depleted uranium all over the world for nearly two decades.

      Provides liability limits to companies putting tax payers on the hook for disasters like Deepwater Horizon.

      Whose FCC encouraged the consolidation of old media into 5 companies.

      Lies its people into fake wars over Yellow Cake uranium.

      As they say, you can lead a Tax Cow to water, but you can't make them think.

      1. Intractable Potsherd Silver badge

        Re: Net Neutrality is to Free Open Internet as PATRIOT Act is to Patriotism

        @TheSmokingArse: if there was the slightest reliable evidence of anything you cite, I'd have some sympathy. As it is, you do come across as a less than reliable source of opinion.

      2. Someone Else Silver badge
        Pint

        Re: Net Neutrality is to Free Open Internet as PATRIOT Act is to Patriotism

        OK Skeeter.

        How about next time you at least feign an attempt to rant tangentially on topic?

        Beer, because you're soaking in it...

    8. bombastic bob Silver badge
      Meh

      Re: Net Neutrality is to Free Open Internet as PATRIOT Act is to Patriotism

      not a bad analogy. More like "Net Neutrality is to Free/Open Internet as CO2 is to global warming" - where people all SAY that 'Net Neutrality' is something that it really is NOT [it's just another gummint takeover of a generally UNregulated thing, in the name of 'freedom' or 'fairness' or some OTHER such *LIE*] in the same way that people *FEEL* (not think) that CO2 (produced by humans) is causing global climate "whatever". (if you want proof view my posting history, no need to create a distraction thread branch here, but from MY perspective, it's a really good point to make).

      And, the point is that 'net neutrality' *SOUNDS* like something we would want, i.e. no favoritism, everybody equal, etc., but isn't. In actual practice, it means that UNPROFITABILITY for the fringe cases would COST EVERYONE ELSE A WHOLE LOT MORE (in the name of 'fairness' and 'neutrality')!!! And that's just the beginning of it.

      Personally I'd *love* to have a fast-lane that you could pay for. It'd be like 1st class seating on an airline, buying a "fast pass" for commuter lanes and toll roads, and having everything delivered to your house. You pay more to get BETTER SERVICE. The fruits of that extra revenue end up lowering other costs, or improving overall service, because that's how businesses operate. [if you don't *FEEL* [not think, *FEEL*] that I'm right about this, I suggest you need a clue-bat attitude adjustment].

      And this straw-man "poor person" who can't get high speed internet because of NO NET NEUTRALITY has been driving a LOT of "arguments" though. But I see it this way: WHY must *I* only be able to afford LOUSY INTERNET so that the TAXES from that will "help" some "straw man poor person" [not ME] "afford" high speed [faster than what I have I bet] intarwebs *AT* *MY* *EXPENSE* ???

      This is a case of GUMMINT PICKING WINNERS AND LOSERS, and *ULTIMATELY* it's what the so-called "Net Neutrality" *REALITY* ends up being - MORE! GUMMINT! TAKEOVER! AND! POLITICAL! PAYOFFS! TO! PROTECTED! AND! FAVORED! CLASSES!!! [people who vote for *them* in other words]

      Besides, the FCC really shouldn't be regulating things "that way". Such regulations need to be passed by CON-GRAB (aia 'congress') except they're too busy WITCH HUNTING to bother with it...

  5. Baldrickk

    more than ignorance

    FCC commissioners who pushed through a pre-decided outcome and actively ignored public opposition to their plans

    They actively polluted the previous survey/poll with huge numbers of fake entries from people who had never gone near it, and indeed, those who were deceased at the time!

    That's not ignorance - that's something that someone at the very least should have lost their jobs over.

    1. Charles 9 Silver badge

      Re: more than ignorance

      Unless the ones involved are the ones WITH the power to hire and fire, which is what we're seeing here. The only people with any real power to force the issue LIKE what they're seeing.

      1. JohnFen

        Re: more than ignorance

        Which is why they should be brought up on something like criminal fraud charges.

        1. Charles 9 Silver badge

          Re: more than ignorance

          Can't. As high-level government agents, they'll likely invoke Sovereign Immunity and find a judge corrupt enough to make it stick (worse, federal judges are confirmed positions; they can only be removed through the impeachment process).

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: more than ignorance

          Which is why they should be brought up on something like criminal fraud charges.

          Nine more months, baby.

          But if Trump is somehow reelected then we are well and truly fucked.

          1. bombastic bob Silver badge
            Trollface

            Re: more than ignorance

            But if Trump is somehow NOT reelected then we are well and truly fucked.

            fixed it for ya. you're welcome!

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: more than ignorance

              fixed it for ya. you're welcome!

              Fixed it how? I don't need any help from Nazis. Go take a long walk off a short pier.

            2. Intractable Potsherd Silver badge

              Re: more than ignorance

              Upvoted, Bob, because you are correct. However, the AC you replied to is correct, too. Until the ludicrous partisan politics of the USA is sorted out, it doesn't matter who is president - you are all fucked. Work towards building bridges between the two sides, and you might be on the way to where you want to be.

              1. Someone Else Silver badge

                Re: more than ignorance

                That you, Joe?

              2. Charles 9 Silver badge

                Re: more than ignorance

                And if neither side is interested in anything of the sort, because this is what they want and they honestly feel the other side is The Enemy and subhuman?

                1. Intractable Potsherd Silver badge

                  Re: more than ignorance

                  Then the only answer we know of is war - is that what you are advocating?

                  1. Charles 9 Silver badge

                    Re: more than ignorance

                    If the only answer you know is war, then the most likely prospect you propose is an escalation to World War III. Is the inevitability of this what YOU are advocating?

              3. This post has been deleted by its author

    2. Someone Else Silver badge

      Re: more than ignorance

      That's not ignorance - that's something that someone at the very least should have lost their jobs over they learned from the folks in St. Petersburg.

      There. FTFY. (Although you were not wrong in your initial posting.)

  6. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

    "It is a virtual certainty that net neutrality advocates will gleefully take the opportunity to rail against the FCC"

    On past form they'll be crowded out by an overwhelming messages of support from the FCC. Suspiciously overwhelming.

    1. Charles 9 Silver badge

      Not if the show of derision is itself overwhelming, meaning the show of support would have to be overwhelming on top of overwhelming, to the point of looking blatantly ridiculous and perhaps potential fodder for a House investifation.

  7. JohnFen

    Naturally

    The FCC's behavior here is entirely expected. It's just the FCC engaging in the Trump administration tradition of considering the citizenry to be nothing more than an annoying impediment to the goal of further cementing a corporatocracy in the US.

  8. HildyJ Silver badge
    Alert

    Does anyone expect the FCC to pay attention?

    While it's nice that people (real people) are being allowed to vent, the reality, given the current FCC, is that they will ignore these comments just as they always ignore comments that don't support their predetermined political agenda.

  9. This post has been deleted by its author

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021