SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
US Officially Repeals Net Neutrality Rules
The net neutrality rules said companies had to treat all data equally.
Enacted in 2015, the rules sought to stop providers giving preferential treatment to sites and services that paid them to accelerate their data.
And critics fear repealing them may see consumers charged extra for anything more than the most basic service.
Public protests greeted the Federal Communications Commission's plan to end use of the rules, with many saying it could have an impact on free speech.
But, in December, the FCC voted to repeal the rules. And the regulations expired on Monday.
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-44438812
Oddly The Trump FCC Doesn't Much Want To Talk About Why It Made Up A DDOS Attack
Last week, e-mails obtained via FOIA request revealed that yes, FCC staffers routinely misled journalists in order to prop up this flimsy narrative, apparently in the belief they could conflate consumer outrage with criminal activity. The motive? It was likely for the same reason the FCC refused to do anything about the identity theft and bogus comments we witnessed during the repeal's open comment period: they wanted to try and downplay the massive, bipartisan public opposition to what the lion's share of Americans thought was an idiotic, corruption-fueled repeal of popular consumer protections.
[...] One of the FCC staffers accused of making false statements about the DDOS attack was recently departed FCC IT chief David Bray. Original reports stated that Bray and other staffers had been feeding this flimsy DDOS narrative to gullible reporters for years, then pointing to these inaccurate stories as "proof" the nonexistent attack occurred. Under fire in the wake of last week's report, Bray first doubled down on his claims, adding that the 2014 "attack" hadn't been publicized because former FCC boss Tom Wheeler covered it up. But Wheeler himself subsequently stated in a report late last week that this was unequivocally false:
"When I was in the greenroom waiting to come in here, I got an email from David Bray, who said 'I never said that you told us not to talk about this and to cover up,' which was the term that got used. Which of course is logical, because as the Gizmodo article that you referenced pointed out, A) FCC officials who were there at the time said it didn't happen, [and] B) the independent IT contractors that were hired said it didn't happen. So if it didn't happen it's hard to have a cover up for something that didn't happen."
(Score: 5, Interesting) by DeathMonkey on Wednesday June 13 2018, @11:19PM (11 children)
Did that never make it through the House or something?
Paul Ryan and the House Republicans are refusing to even hold a vote on it. [thehill.com]
Vote Dem in the midterms if you want your net neutrality back.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by bob_super on Wednesday June 13 2018, @11:36PM (6 children)
I'm for a constitutional amendment requiring one chamber to take a vote on any text passed by the other chamber within two weeks if they don't present their own project, or a month if they do.
Either chamber should have to vote on any text backed by at least a quarter of its members under the same deadlines (maybe limit that "backing" to once a day per member).
Similarly, the Senate should have to vote on any nominee for any position in less than a month.
They can vote no a lot, but they have to vote.
Even if that helps scumbags pass stuff I never want to see, it's better than the current stalling game that distorts democracy.
Other amendment: unrelated riders should render a bill void in its entirety.
I'm pretty sure we could get those two easily approved by The People, if only that mattered.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 13 2018, @11:45PM (2 children)
Add a clause that anyone that doesn't vote also doesn't get a paycheck.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by bob_super on Thursday June 14 2018, @12:00AM
Yes, but most are too rich to really care about the paycheck. Add: their staff doesn't get paid.
I'd go for "miss 25% of the votes, you become ineligible forever" (requires a safety against the Speaker setting up 700 votes on your day off).
(Score: 2) by nobu_the_bard on Thursday June 14 2018, @12:54PM
In my state they'd agree to this, then also pass a bill that whenever they do get a paycheck, they deserve backpay covering all missed paychecks with a bonus for good behavior, so they'd only need to have their act together a few times a year.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 13 2018, @11:53PM (2 children)
You can even run it as russian roulette. But for every day past some relatively short cutoff date, the two majority parties in Congress will have one member from each side executed for each day they are unable to decide on a bill, budget, or other legislative action. Do this a few times and you will see Congress hopping to in a hurry, because they only thing they like more than cash and collusion is their lives, and having a legally mandated way to threaten that will see a lot more of them hopping to.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Thursday June 14 2018, @06:57PM (1 child)
Just make sure that there are no exceptions whatsoever. The Speaker doesn't get out of it just because he's the head honcho.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Thursday June 14 2018, @07:00PM
Er, and it's a randomly-selected member. We didn't actually say that? It's random.
1/500 (or whatever) chance gets interesting when the stakes are that high
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 1, Redundant) by Gaaark on Thursday June 14 2018, @01:09AM (3 children)
"Vote Dem in the midterms if you want your net neutrality back."
and hope they don't bobble Hillary back out again.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 14 2018, @01:36AM (2 children)
They won't do that for the midterms. If they decide to screw the pooch by introducing her again, it will be in 2020.
But I desperately, foolishly hope the party learns from the mistakes of the past few decades. "We're marginally less corrupt than the Republicans" just doesn't mobilize the base the way the Democrat establishment expected.
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Thursday June 14 2018, @02:31AM
Last I saw (not an American), Bernie seemed to be going strong!
He's known, he's popular: bring HIM out.
If I'd been American and given the choice of Bernie Vs Trump I'd have gone Bernie.
Hill Vs Trump, with no other option, I would have voted trump (no other option, mind you)
Yeah, people seem to be cluing in to the whole corruption and 'we want better' idea. Bout time.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday June 14 2018, @04:15AM
They're gonna do it in 2020. The Democrats aren't as corrupt in absolute terms as the Republicans, but the Clinton machine was instrumental in shifting the Overton Window right beyond the wildest dreams of, say, Nixon (who threatened to do the same thing when he was elected). Unless something fundamental changes about the way the Dems work, they are the new Republicans (whereas the GOP are now basically the Taliban, but too fat and weak to grow facial hair).
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...