Ajit Pai is Officially Out of the FCC (vice.com) 184
Ajit Pai, the man who killed net neutrality, enacted a series of industry-friendly deregulatory moves for big telecom, and drank from a gigantic mug, is no longer around to terrorize the internet. The FCC confirmed to Motherboard that Pai is officially gone: "Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai today concluded his four years as Chairman, eight years as a Commissioner, and twelve years as an employee of the agency," the agency said. His official FCC Twitter account, where he antagonized people who criticized him, has been deleted.
And it's still the first day of president Biden! (Score:5, Insightful)
Keep the good news coming, USA!
Re:And it's still the first day of president Biden (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe stop using the word terrorize when its not appropriate. Ajit Pai is an idjit of the highest order but probably not a terrorist.
Bring back Net Neutrality, I don't care. It didn't destroy the webz, that work is being done daily by big tech.
Re: (Score:2)
It's a colloquialism, moron. The context of its appearance here is in a clearly opinionated summary on a /. article - it's not an address to the United Nations you numskull.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe stop using the word terrorize when its not appropriate.
I'll allow it.
Re:And it's still the first day of president Biden (Score:4, Informative)
Maybe stop using the word terrorize when its not appropriate. Ajit Pai is an idjit of the highest order but probably not a terrorist.
English, do you speak it?
It's perfectly possible to "terrorize" something without being a "terrorist".
https://www.google.com/search?... [google.com]
https://www.google.com/search?... [google.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe stop using the word terrorize when its not appropriate.
Terrorise has a meaning separate from "terrorist". When some kids are "terrorizing the neighbourhood" they're probably not planting bombs.
When your five-year-old is terrorizing the cat, s/he's probably not forcing it to swear allegiance to the dog in front of a flag.
Re: And it's still the first day of president Bide (Score:5, Insightful)
It's hilarious that the left can call some bureaucratic bullshit terrorism, but months of violent riots were peaceful protests.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
The bulk of violent crime in the US is committed by black menb under age 29. Full stop.
The bulk of mass shootings in the US is committed by white men. Full stop. Why doesn't this fact influence police interactions and aid resolution of any problems?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
From 2000 to 2019, there were 672 deaths due to mass shootings. [time.com]
In 2019 alone, over 3,200 people were murdered by African Americans, and over 2,500 of their victims were black. [fbi.gov]
About 13% of the population is responsible for almost 50% of the homicides.
Numbers are fun!
Re: And it's still the first day of president Bid (Score:5, Insightful)
That's the racist way of portraying the numbers. Looked at the correct way, in 2019 99.9988 % of white people didn't kill anyone and 99.9927% of black people didn't kill anyone. If you're a police officer and you're not approaching the citizens of your community with anything less than the respect they highly likely deserve, you do not belong on the force.
Re: (Score:2)
That's the racist way of portraying the numbers. Looked at the correct way, in 2019 99.9988 % of white people didn't kill anyone and 99.9927% of black people didn't kill anyone. If you're a police officer and you're not approaching the citizens of your community with anything less than the respect they highly likely deserve, you do not belong on the force.
Amen
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
That's the racist way of portraying the numbers.
Dude, the number one cause of death for black men under 45 in this country is homicide. [cdc.gov]
You can call those who point out these FACTS "racist" all you want. There's a real fucking problem here, and the cops/racists aren't the cause of it.
Re: (Score:2)
And what is the annual survival rate of black men under 45?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
It's hilarious that you call one poster "the left", or that there were months of "violent riots". Who's calling who names?
Re: And it's still the first day of president Bid (Score:2)
I didn't imply any of that.
Nor am I "the left"! (Or "the right".) I'm a human being, and I'm interested in your wishes just as much, as I practise uncompromizing fairness. But I expect the same from you, if you want to keep existing.
Are you on drugs?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
https://jonathanturley.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/CNN-Headline-Fiery-2.jpg
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
https://jonathanturley.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/CNN-Headline-Fiery-2.jpg
That one is classic. Very stark comparison with how they are covering the Capital story.
That's not "a mostly peaceful protest", it's a full blown insurrection.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
What's hilarious is how you can get so upset over some riots, completely excuse another and then claim the other side is being hypocritical.
Cool story bro except for the part where that never happened.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I think it is appropriate.
Terrorism is when you instill fear and terror, to get your way.
I might have agreed with you as recently as a few months ago but after the actions of the Trump Supporters last week that threshold has been pushed well past Agit Pai's contributions to the Trump Administration.
Trumpettes got mod points again. (Score:2)
Hence (-1, Troll) currently, even though clearly not trolling.
Bit since when do they ever abide by the rules or laws...
Re:And it's still the first day of president Biden (Score:4, Insightful)
Parler's rejection by the app stores and AWS was a TOS citation, they should know better than to run an unregulated messaging service. Now they're on the same ISP as 8Chan...
Re:And it's still the first day of president Biden (Score:5, Informative)
Parler was NOT an unregulated messaging service. They had moderation and plenty of topics you cannot talk about. Most of them were left-wing topics and not because you attract trolls, but because they were banned.
Other topics were more neutral - marijuana was called out as being a topic you could not discuss in any way - regulation, cultivation, usage, etc.
For the vast majority of "Free Speech" sites, they are more "the stuff the alt-right want to talk about" and not "anything goes". Parler could've remained in the app stores just fine, they just didn't want to moderate the "burn the capitol" speech because that was something they encouraged.
Plus, why bother with an app - a web app would work just fine - you have notifications and everything else anyways.
A site that can ban people that talk about a little weed can more than do what everyone asked them too. They intentionally chose not to, and none of the providers acted until there was a provable link between the speech and the action.
I would say the *chans would be free speech sites because anything goes with them.
Re:And it's still the first day of president Biden (Score:4, Informative)
https://www.engadget.com/amazo... [engadget.com]
"Amazon says it spent months warning Parler about violent posts
And Amazon brought the receipts to prove it.
Amazon has officially responded to Parlerâ(TM)s lawsuit against AWS. In court documents filed Tuesday, Amazon says it warned Parler officials about the violent threats on its platform nearly two months before the riot at the US Capitol sparked the appâ(TM)s removal from major app stores and technology platforms.
âoeThis case is not about suppressing speech or stifling viewpoints,â Amazonâ(TM)s lawyers write. âoeIt is not about a conspiracy to restrain trade. Instead, this case is about Parlerâ(TM)s demonstrated unwillingness and inability to remove from the servers of Amazon Web Services content that threatens the public safety, such as by inciting and planning the rape, torture, and assassination of named public officials and private citizens.â
Amazon offers several disturbing examples of the kinds of posts the company says it âoerepeatedlyâ flagged to a top Parler executive. In emails dated in mid-November, AWS representatives asked Parlerâ(TM)s Chief Policy Officer Amy Peikoff for more details on how the app moderates content.
The emails include screenshots of âoepotential hate speech and incitement of violence contentâ that was available on the app at the time. The examples include a post with numerous racial slurs directed at Michelle Obama, as well as two posts that include the phrase âoeKill âem All.â ...
Amazon says that in the seven weeks following that exchange, it âoereported more than 100 additional representative pieces of content advocating violence.â Amazon included more than a dozen examples of the posts it reported, including messages calling for the deaths of numerous tech executives and elected officials and calls for a civil war. Parler users also threatened teachers and members of law enforcement, Amazon says. âoeParler itself has admitted it has a backlog of 26,000 reports of content that violates its (minimal) community standards that it had not yet reviewed,â the company writes.
"
And just as importantly... republicans want these services provided by private businesses and not by the government like it used to be. The 1st amendment doesn't apply to private businesses. If the internet was still a government service, Parler would have some protection. Tho given the record, they would have still been banned (and should have been banned 4-5 weeks earlier). 26,000 backlogged violations means they were not even trying.
Re: (Score:3)
Net Neutrality is not coming back, that would make cancel culture illegal.
You have no idea what you're talking about. Net Neutrality does not remove TOS, so TOS violations can still kick you off.
Net Neutrality requires every user of that ISP to have the same TOS.
Re: (Score:2)
whatabout
whatabout
whatabout
whatabout
Cry some more, maybe that'll help.
Re:And it's still the first day of president Biden (Score:4, Insightful)
Nice in theory. Entirely bullshit in practice
Net Neutrality was removed by Ajit Pai. So all your examples are in a world without Net Neutrality.
Your "Waaah! It's so unfair!!" may actually be enforceable with Net Neutrality. But thanks to your tireless efforts of working against subjects you don't understand, you helped create the environment you now decry.
Re: (Score:2)
... that would make cancel culture illegal.
Heh. "Whatcha in for?" "I burnt my Nikes when a player kneeled during the anthem."
Re: (Score:2)
... that would make cancel culture illegal.
Heh. "Whatcha in for?" "I burnt my Nikes when a player kneeled during the anthem."
Probably shouldn't have done it at the stadium.
Re: (Score:2)
.. that would make cancel culture illegal.
LMAO. Yes the "cancel culture". Murder, rape, extortion, insurrection, all cancelled by the stupid dem socialists..
Re: (Score:3)
Net Neutrality wouldn't have changed AWS' ability to cut them off. Net Neutrality means that an ISP can't throttle or block the bandwidth of a customer, whether that involves slowing down the service of a competitor (such as Netflix or YouTube when many large US ISPs also own media services) or throttling specific traffic (such as Peer-to-peer file sharing protocols). It also says you can't discriminate and make some customers pay more for the same amount of bandwidth than what you charge other customers.
Th
Re: (Score:2)
And here I was thinking Ted Cruise claiming the Paris Accord was about doing what citizens of paris want was the stupidest comment of the day....But wow. You don't even actually know what Net Neutrality is but for some reason decided to mash your fingers on the keyboard and tell us anyway.
What the flying f#!k has "Cancel Culture" got to do with peer pricing and bandwidth allocation between networks and upstream streaming services ?!
Re:And it's still the first day of president Biden (Score:4, Funny)
So... Fahrenheit 2435?
Re: (Score:3)
It does at the ISP level. Different country here, my ISP (Telus) got shit for blocking (for all users) their unions web site, along with 766 others during a strike as it broke net neutrality.
The original idea of net neutrality is that ISP's are just conduits to the internet and can't block sites. Imagine your ISP blocking your political parties web site or even Parlar or whatever it was called, especially, if like me, you have one choice to get on the internet.
Re: (Score:2)
They had 4 years of Trump barkers telling them that "Net Neutrality" was the same as the old TV Neutrality laws that meant you had to give both sides of a political run equal time.
I've spoken to so many of these clowns and after listening to so many of them rant about communism and censoring conservatives and god knows what else, when I ask "Whats that got to do with peering arangements between telecommunication networks and streaming services, most of them just sort of blink confusedly.
I mean "Cancel Cultu
Re: (Score:2)
Now is the part where he actually fixes the underlying problem by allowing the small ISPs to even exist, right?
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't the States that have passed laws stopping small ISP's?
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed! I'm having a deClownGasm today! It's messy, but not orange.
Re: (Score:3)
Indeed- good riddance to bad rubbish.
Now comes the work of unscrewing all the shit he screwed up.
Re:And it's still the first day of president Biden (Score:5, Informative)
But Obama appointed Pai to the FCC board. When you go against Obama, you should revisit your opinion.
People still trot out this bullshit? Obama appointed Pai because he was required by law to appoint a Republican.
I hope there was a foot up his ass... (Score:3)
On the way out the slamming door. Good riddance!
That warrants opening a bottle to celebrate (Score:2)
How does it work? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
From what I've heard, he drank too much Reese's Peanut Butter Cups-flavoured coffee.
Re: (Score:2)
Many government jobs turn over on a day like this... Trump's republicans out, Biden's Democrats in.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The people that serve on the FCC top committee are all political appointees. That said they aren't automatically replaced when the Presidency shifts control. The committee is also made up of picks from the separate parties, the chairman is picked by the President from the committee members. So I'm fairly certain he could have stayed on and gone back to being a regular committee member but he chose to resign instead. He has an ego that paired well with Trump and it isn't surprising that he'd rather resign th
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah but it was only so he could shout "You can't fire me! I QUIT!".
In the USA... (Score:3, Informative)
There are [basically] 3 types of people working in the federal government:
1. A huge number of career employees doing the day-to-day tasks of their agencies (everything from lawyers, to park rangers, and astronauts etc). They are supposed to be hired purely based on government need and employee qualification and they are expected to be non-partisan and faithfully carry out the orders of the President (the person who happens to hold the office, not the individual personality) no matter his/her party. These pe
Net neutrality (Score:3, Interesting)
Now the republicans will be squirming for net neutrality because even their beloved capitalists will deprioritize magaterrorist traffic. Oops. They forgot that could happen. Republicans will soon be the party of government regulation and statist intrusion.
Re: (Score:2)
Now the republicans will be squirming for net neutrality because even their beloved capitalists will deprioritize magaterrorist traffic. Oops. They forgot that could happen. Republicans will soon be the party of government regulation and statist intrusion.
Wouldn't it be great if the legislature would actually pass a law to settle it once and for all?
... and absolutely nothing of value was lost. (Score:2, Insightful)
POS Pai was nothing but a toadie for the communications lobby.
Zero fucks given over his departure.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Not really. They stopped expanding it to new cites because running the fiber backhaul is so expensive, and there's wireless backhaul techs that are very close to being viable.
Their model shifted to running the fiber in a neighborhood, and then connecting that neighborhood to a CO via RF. They need the radio tech to become practical to do that, and it's not quite there yet.
Official govt records? (Score:4, Insightful)
If the twitter account was an 'Official' FCC one can it be legally deleted?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They just have to store the posts in an official archive somewhere.
Re: (Score:3)
Twitter bears no responsibility for preserving anything for anyone unless it is stipulated in a contract with that other party. The government regulations requiring the preservation of government communications and records places the responsibility for keeping those archives with the government itself. This came up with Trump's Twitter account already.
Thank goodness. (Score:2, Funny)
finally (Score:2)
Not going to miss that a$$clown... (Score:2)
Irony. (Score:2)
What great irony to insist on 'neutrality of carriers' to content and yet Not insist on neutrality of server admins ( aka amazon) or even telecommunication companies like facebook! I support net neutrality, no company that I employ should have any business screening INSPECTING or having any knowledge of any of my communications beyond ensuring I am receiving what was paid for. They should completely stay out of the business of telling what I can and can not use the network for or what I say on it. !
In Other News (Score:2)
The Dow Jones has just hit a new absolute peak, overtaking the previous one from when the markets opened last Thursday. I don't think the index had ever ever closed above 30 000 before Biden was declared to have won but it did that then and broke 31 200 a few minutes ago. Those two Senate seats in Georgia also triggered a rally and a new record.
A lot of people are placing a lot of hope in this new administration.
Oh grow up msmash! (Score:2, Insightful)
Ajit Pai, the man who killed net neutrality, enacted a series of industry-friendly deregulatory moves for big telecom, and drank from a gigantic mug, is no longer around to terrorize the internet.
Oddly, despite "killing" Net Neutrality (by rightly saying it belonged under the Federal TRADE Commission, not the Federal COMMUNICATIONS Commission) the Internet has somehow managed to carry on. What was the real impact ending Net Neutrality?
And "terrorize the Internet"? Please define this terrorization? Was there really no better, less inflammatory word to describe Pai's influence on the Internet? When I think of people being "terrorized" I don't picture people fearing data caps or higher internet bills.
P
In with corporate control! (Score:2)
Man if you like corporate control of the internet, it is a fantastic day as Biden personally mans the shovel to dig deeper moats for the large ISPs and cellular carriers to protect themselves against dreaded competition!
Muh Net Neutrality (Score:2)
But you are missing one of Pai's other parting shots. It seems he rejected a petition to let one 5G provider build their network next to (too close to?) GPS frequencies.
https://www.theregister.com/2021/01/20/fcc_ligado_petition/ [theregister.com]
"But we need this to serve IoT devices. And we promise we'll keep a close eye on GPS interference." Yeah, right. Once several million defective IoT equipped cuddly stuffed animals have made it out of China, you are going to have a tough time prying them out of the hands of screami
I noticed zero changes. (Score:2)
Oh yeah? (Score:2)
Re: Taking bets... (Score:3)
Yes
Re: (Score:2)
No bet. It's how the system has worked for as long as I've been alive.
Re: (Score:2)
Pretty sure the safest bet is Verizon, but I wouldn't rule out a private bidding war landing him in another telecom. Lord knows he won't just disappear with his current graft money.
Re: (Score:2)
Somewhere on K Street, so he can fleece them all.
Re: (Score:2)
Lobbyist for all telecoms, with a handsome fee.
Re:Net Neutrality is unconstitutional (Score:5, Informative)
So, your saying if you build a tollway, such as we do have, to transport vehicles on, and people pay for that through their tolls. That in fact you should receive a portion of the value they carry?
I think that's what your saying...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
full on socialist
Full on mob. Sure, you paid your taxes to maintain our road. But we'd like a cut of the profit you are making. It would be a real shame if something happened to your trucking business.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Net Neutrality is unconstitutional (Score:5, Insightful)
*Every* ISP spends money on laying fiber. Comcast already got their fair share of the profits from their subscriber fees from their customers. What those customers choose to do with the bandwidth once it's sold is none of their damn business. If Comcast wants money directly from YouTube, they should put in a competitive bid to be YouTube's ISP.
Everything about getting rid of net neutrality is problematic. Breaking the standard internet peering system out of short-term greed and a desire to double-dip has bigger implications than a longer buffering time on YouTube and Netflix. You may not like them.
Re: (Score:2)
How is net neutrality "forcing Comcast to give this to Youtube for free"? "Preferential routing" is another name for "taking" from those who don't pay for preference without compensation. Youtube has already paid for it's access, Comcast demanding payment from those who are not their customer in exchange for not damaging the payloads they've paid to provide is extortion. You seem to have the "taking" backwards.
"Comcast has spent the money on laying out the fiber. "
And they can seek compensation from THEI
Re: (Score:2)
Forcing Comcast to give this to Youtube for free is a "taking" and hence nconstitutional
That isn't Net Neutrality. "Free" is not part of Net Neutrality.
Net Neutrality requires the ISPs to treat every packet on their networks the same. They can charge the source of those packets if they like. They just have to use the same rate structure for every source.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe Comcast should be charged for every connection that YouTube makes to a Comcast client. Since Comcast is taking up YouTube's valuable network AND server bandwidth they owe money to YouTube... directly. In fact, one could say that, since the traffic is being pulled from Comcast's clients, that Comcast should directly pay for that (server/network) bandwidth. YouTube isn't streaming out these videos unless someone on Comcast's
Re: (Score:2)
it is clearly proven that there is an economic benefit to internet providers if they can charge fees from media streaming firms in return for giving them preferential routing.
Citation very much needed.
Forcing Comcast to give this to Youtube for free is a "taking" and hence nconstitutional.
What exactly would Comcast be forced to give to YouTube for free? YouTube (or Google, or Alphabet, or whoever signs the checks) is paying for their Internet connection, and YouTube's users are paying for their Internet connections. Preventing Comcast from double-charging is not taking anything.
Re: (Score:2)
By that logic, shouldn't government have to compensate business for the costs of pollution mitigation and any loss of efficiency that results from it?
Do you have any idea how much energy companies spend on limiting emissions simply because we like clean air? But I've been hearing that government regulation kills business for longer than I've been old enough to vote.
And I don't have any idea what it costs either but I'm sure it's a lot - of course there are economic benefits to not having toxic air, water a
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yep... T-Mobile may have bought Sprint, but Sprint's bandwidth is being cleared out for a new player from Dish. That new player should be the first network to start with 5G on day one, and little interference from other users on slower protocols.
Re:Industry-friendly is consumer-friendly (Score:5, Insightful)
Industry-friendly is consumer-friendly
I've got two shitty options for my ISP that unofficially collude on pricing, and the incumbents successfully block the rollouts of competitors.
How, exactly, is that consumer-friendly?
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like me except a few weeks ago I saw a work crew laying fiber less than a mile from my house. Our city's broadband is getting closer. I'm trying not to get overly excited. It will still probably be months, but there is literally just the last mile left for it to get to me.
Re: (Score:3)
Except when the incumbents lobby the state to override the local government [vice.com]
Re: (Score:2)
The emphasized part is highly illegal — you don't need FCC to police that.
It's illegal for the companies to meet and decide on pricing.
It is not illegal for one company to look at the publicly-available pricing of their competitors, and just happen to increase their prices to match.
No, your local government does that
My local government requires pulling a permit, and that's it. Same as adding any other utility. They've got a vested interest in enforcing some degree safety standards and compliance with building codes.
That particular author is bitching about a very cheap part of the process, and utterly missing the
Re:And you wonder why half the country (Score:4, Insightful)
Oh please spare us the false victimhood. Many of us are completely sick of public officials who are brought in to basically destroy the agencies that they are supposed to run. They act in bad faith and in obviously corrupt ways, and then you're shocked, shocked I tell you at the level of hatred and scorn that they earn. It seems from my perspective, that you're just being disingenuous. I have this worrying thought though, that you're actually serious. That you really do not understand why we hate these people and that you believe that serious ethical breaches are just a difference of political opinion.
Re: (Score:3)
Where is the evidence of this ethical breach.
Off the top of my head, there's the way tried to pretend that the fraudulent public comments supporting the repeal of Net Neutrality were real. That, by itself was enough for most of us. Accepting that gun he was gifted by the NRA as an award was also clearly illegal.
As for the word hate, it means to severely dislike. Saying that I severely dislike him does not somehow cause anything to actually happen to him by voodoo magic. It just expresses my feelings. I think he's a scumbag, therefore I dislike him. I
Re: (Score:2)
As I replied to the other current reply to my post, off the top of my head, there's the way tried to pretend that the fraudulent public comments supporting the repeal of Net Neutrality were real. That, by itself was enough for most of us. Accepting that gun he was gifted by the NRA as an award was also clearly illegal.
There's no difficult policy choice involved in pretending to have public support because of a flood of fake comments. That's just fraud.
Re: (Score:2)
Have you been to a skating rink? Ever notice how everyone skates in the same direction (normally counterclockwise)? Have you ever seen them put up cones over different sections? Hear anyone over the PA system tell everyone to clear the ice? Prevent people from speed skating or designate certain areas/times for it? Your example of a skating at a rink as an unregulated activity is laughable.
Re: (Score:2)
Everybody here who predicted disaster when Net Neutrality was blocked needs to own up to just how very wrong you were.
I think we all know that is never going to happen. This whole episode will just get swept into the dustbin of history never to be spoken of again. Just like all of the other ridiculous predictions and failed policies we've seen from these people. Even if the issue comes up again we'll just go right back to theories and "what ifs" instead of actually looking at the record.
Re: 2021 will be the year of disappointment (Score:2)
He will try his 'best' though.
As will you, clearly.
The cops will get you, make no mistake.