Ajit Pai Is Officially Gone(vice.com)
vice.com
Ajit Pai Is Officially Gone
https://www.vice.com/en/article/bvxpja/gigantic-asshole-ajit-pai-is-officially-gone-good-riddance-time-of-your-life
47 comments
People keep saying killing net neutrality was bad...but has there been actually been anything tangible that came out of killing it?
All of the ISPs merged with media companies, instituted data caps, and then exempted their in house media from the data caps.
So yeah, fairly substantial.
https://www.theverge.com/net-neutrality
So yeah, fairly substantial.
https://www.theverge.com/net-neutrality
> All of the ISPs merged with media companies, instituted data caps, and then exempted their in house media from the data caps.
All of them? From your link, looks like it's ATT who did that.
Cox, my ISP, instituted a data cap before the repeal. Furthermore, data caps have zero to do with net neutrality. Preferential billing and routing based on source or destination is certainly more possible with a data cap but data caps are net neutral by themselves. Data caps are cancer but they aren't going anywhere unless there's competition. Competition may also make net neutrality, as a political issue, obsolete.
Net neutrality seems like a red herring to keep the telecom regulatory capture off the front page.
All of them? From your link, looks like it's ATT who did that.
Cox, my ISP, instituted a data cap before the repeal. Furthermore, data caps have zero to do with net neutrality. Preferential billing and routing based on source or destination is certainly more possible with a data cap but data caps are net neutral by themselves. Data caps are cancer but they aren't going anywhere unless there's competition. Competition may also make net neutrality, as a political issue, obsolete.
Net neutrality seems like a red herring to keep the telecom regulatory capture off the front page.
The data cap isn't the issue. The issue is excluding some services (especially their own). This is basically a monopolization move.
Yep, Comcast instituted a cap in my area. $10/1GB over, if I remember the "agreement I didn't sign" correctly.
Edit to add: I've blown the cap in a 2 week period. It is ridiculous
Edit to add: I've blown the cap in a 2 week period. It is ridiculous
Zero-rating is not against european net neutrality regulations, by the way, but to be fair data caps are (mostly) only a thing for mobile connections here.
Zero rating is against the law in the EU:
https://techcrunch.com/2020/09/15/europes-top-court-says-net...
https://techcrunch.com/2020/09/15/europes-top-court-says-net...
Here in Mexico, the biggest cellular company, Telcel, offers packages with "Unlimited Social Networks". Unlimited, in their language, means Facebook, WhatsApp and Twitter don't count towards your data limit.
This seemed like a good thing, but with the announce of WhatsApp sharing data with Facebook, many people have changed to Telegram or Signal. Some of them will return to WhatsApp because switching actually costs them money.
Like USA, Mexico was unable to stop legislation against net neutrality. The erosion it's just starting.
This seemed like a good thing, but with the announce of WhatsApp sharing data with Facebook, many people have changed to Telegram or Signal. Some of them will return to WhatsApp because switching actually costs them money.
Like USA, Mexico was unable to stop legislation against net neutrality. The erosion it's just starting.
Well Netflix has to have been running at multiples of their regular bandwidth the last year, and at least anecdotally my experience has been flawless, and I haven't read about any widespread issues with Netflix streaming.
It certainly seems the free market was able to deal with it.
One thing I'm really happy with is how the FCC ran the $9.2 billion auction for the RDOF (Rural Digital Opportunity Fund) subsidies. Although I don't have hard numbers, my impression is that the USF (Universal Service Fund) is a typical government boondoggle, and the RDOF auction format was a pretty innovative way to distribute the funds.
For a minute there it looked like they would try to exclude SpaceX from bidding in the high bandwidth / low latency tier, but ultimately they went with taking a chance on their unproven tech and they were able to win $885 million in subsidies.
It certainly seems the free market was able to deal with it.
One thing I'm really happy with is how the FCC ran the $9.2 billion auction for the RDOF (Rural Digital Opportunity Fund) subsidies. Although I don't have hard numbers, my impression is that the USF (Universal Service Fund) is a typical government boondoggle, and the RDOF auction format was a pretty innovative way to distribute the funds.
For a minute there it looked like they would try to exclude SpaceX from bidding in the high bandwidth / low latency tier, but ultimately they went with taking a chance on their unproven tech and they were able to win $885 million in subsidies.
Netflix has a wide distribution infrastructure, both in physical data centers and in cloud providers. Fast.com will usually give you sustained fast speeds even if your overall internet access is spotty. IIRC, some people were able to watch Netflix even when there were global internet outages. Their team is amazing.
Chaos engineering really pays off
[deleted]
There is no free market in communication. "Was able to deal with it" is a curious turn of phrase: Yes, there are still companies. But has Americans' access to communication kept pace with the technology and with the rest of the world? Very, very far from it. Americans, collectively, pay far more, for far fewer bits, than others in the world, particularly once you get just a few miles away from a city center.
It is telling how much higher prices are in places where competition has been curtailed by the FCC's failures, and how much higher even prices where two services operate are, than in other countries. The number of states where towns have been forbidden to operate a municipal network also reveals our poor condition.
America is a third-world country in communication, just as it is in infant mortality. It is not accidental. There are reasons that a cable service is the most hated company in the US, more even than Cargill, Archer Daniels Midland, or Koch Industries, which might deserve it more.
It is telling how much higher prices are in places where competition has been curtailed by the FCC's failures, and how much higher even prices where two services operate are, than in other countries. The number of states where towns have been forbidden to operate a municipal network also reveals our poor condition.
America is a third-world country in communication, just as it is in infant mortality. It is not accidental. There are reasons that a cable service is the most hated company in the US, more even than Cargill, Archer Daniels Midland, or Koch Industries, which might deserve it more.
From your profile it seems like you live in MA right?
https://www.ncsl.org/research/telecommunications-and-informa...
Your state has net neutrality.
https://www.naruc.org/nrri/nrri-activities/net-neutrality-tr...
https://www.ncsl.org/research/telecommunications-and-informa...
Your state has net neutrality.
https://www.naruc.org/nrri/nrri-activities/net-neutrality-tr...
I don’t think any of the Net Neutrality bills in MA ever actually became law.
But with the way the internet actually works, it’s not clear that state-level regulation can be effect in this area, since packets will frequently cross state lines.
But with the way the internet actually works, it’s not clear that state-level regulation can be effect in this area, since packets will frequently cross state lines.
Most of HN wouldn't notice. https://www.naruc.org/nrri/nrri-activities/net-neutrality-tr...
The long term plan is to raise rates on unfettered bandwidth and zero-rate first party streaming. Isn't that already happening in mobile?
In any case, it's not a business plan they can enact tomorrow, they have to build out the services first and they would be wise to boil the frog in order to avoid legislative attention.
In any case, it's not a business plan they can enact tomorrow, they have to build out the services first and they would be wise to boil the frog in order to avoid legislative attention.
IMO major consequences from this repeal has been very slow to roll out due to states threatening to implement their own local NN laws, which would create a really painful, fragmented legal web for companies to have to traverse. Some ISPs are doing some stuff, but nothing too out of control.
I'm 99% certain centurylink is limiting bandwidth to youtube/twitch/netflix/etc in my area.
There are QoS settings for streaming media on your CL provided router. If you changed routers or modified these settings you may be unintentionally de-prioritizing these services.
I've use the centurylink router and my own. No difference. Fiber connection with no wireless.
Often these services are slow even though its the only internet traffic.
Often these services are slow even though its the only internet traffic.
I keep hearing this on HN but how can it be a bad thing to protect net neutrality?
Those who were against killing net neutrality - on the grounds that it would grant corporations the power to censor our online experience - are now in favor of other corporations censoring our online experiences. So, that's a pretty terrible outcome that came from killing it - as bewildering and hard to explain as it may be.
Baselessly asserting technologically literate people and anti-parler people are the same group? That's a bold agendapost.
Net neutrality is fairness. Access isn't fair if it isn't neutral.
Anyone telling you otherwise (Ajit Pai) doesn't care about you.
Anyone telling you otherwise (Ajit Pai) doesn't care about you.
> His official FCC Twitter account, where he antagonized people who criticized him, has been deleted.
Are gov't officials allowed to delete their official use Twitter (and any social media) accounts just like that? I would think posts should be archived or put in read only mode for posterity?
Are gov't officials allowed to delete their official use Twitter (and any social media) accounts just like that? I would think posts should be archived or put in read only mode for posterity?
"Pai killed net". Really?
I think the journalist has some axe to grind.
I think the journalist has some axe to grind.
I learned from Ajit Pai that a public comment period requires identity verification
I'm not the author of the list below, but it's a nice TLDR.
Here is a list of harmful nonsense [1] Pai and his FCC did over the last four years:
- Killed net neutrality
- Approved T-Mobile / Sprint merger
- Repeatedly released reports that claimed U.S. broadband is fine
- Defended murder of net neutrality in court
- Flubbed Puerto Rico hurricane disaster response
- Slow-walked and obstructed investigation into telecom company sale of your location data
- Said FTC would protect net neutrality (it didn’t, and couldn’t)
- Falsely claimed killing net neutrality was good for broadband access (it wasn’t)
- Refused to brief Congress about telecom companies’ sale of their customers’ phone location data
- Helped Comcast and other major telecom companies in their pursuit of monopolistic power
- Oversaw America’s falling rank in an annual “Internet Freedom” index
- Allowed Verizon to throttle California firefighters’ data while they were fighting unprecedented wildfires
- Invented a DDoS attack that shut down the FCC’s net neutrality comment system
- Lied to public about that fake DDoS attack that shut down the agency’s net neutrality comment system
- Lied to Congress about that fake DDoS attack
- Didn’t detect that dead people were leaving comments on net neutrality comment system
- Refused to change the definition of ‘broadband’
- Demanded $200 to release emails about his giant mug
- Allowed scammers to submit fake comments about net neutrality under the names of two sitting senators
- Did that dumbass Harlem Shake thing with a pizzagate conspiracy theorist
- Became a rubber stamp for Sinclair Media and
- Tried to kill a broadband assistance program that subsidized internet connections for the economically unstable and poor
- Got a literal gun from the NRA for his “courage” in killing net neutrality
- Was investigated by his own agency for alleged corruption as he pushed to dismantle media consolidation rules
- Published report claiming broadband market was magically fixed by repealing net neutrality
- Ignored 22 million comments supporting net neutrality
- Tried to reclassify cell phone data service as “broadband internet”
- Allowed phone call rates for incarcerated people to skyrocket
[1]: https://www.vice.com/en/topic/ajit-pai
Here is a list of harmful nonsense [1] Pai and his FCC did over the last four years:
- Killed net neutrality
- Approved T-Mobile / Sprint merger
- Repeatedly released reports that claimed U.S. broadband is fine
- Defended murder of net neutrality in court
- Flubbed Puerto Rico hurricane disaster response
- Slow-walked and obstructed investigation into telecom company sale of your location data
- Said FTC would protect net neutrality (it didn’t, and couldn’t)
- Falsely claimed killing net neutrality was good for broadband access (it wasn’t)
- Refused to brief Congress about telecom companies’ sale of their customers’ phone location data
- Helped Comcast and other major telecom companies in their pursuit of monopolistic power
- Oversaw America’s falling rank in an annual “Internet Freedom” index
- Allowed Verizon to throttle California firefighters’ data while they were fighting unprecedented wildfires
- Invented a DDoS attack that shut down the FCC’s net neutrality comment system
- Lied to public about that fake DDoS attack that shut down the agency’s net neutrality comment system
- Lied to Congress about that fake DDoS attack
- Didn’t detect that dead people were leaving comments on net neutrality comment system
- Refused to change the definition of ‘broadband’
- Demanded $200 to release emails about his giant mug
- Allowed scammers to submit fake comments about net neutrality under the names of two sitting senators
- Did that dumbass Harlem Shake thing with a pizzagate conspiracy theorist
- Became a rubber stamp for Sinclair Media and
- Tried to kill a broadband assistance program that subsidized internet connections for the economically unstable and poor
- Got a literal gun from the NRA for his “courage” in killing net neutrality
- Was investigated by his own agency for alleged corruption as he pushed to dismantle media consolidation rules
- Published report claiming broadband market was magically fixed by repealing net neutrality
- Ignored 22 million comments supporting net neutrality
- Tried to reclassify cell phone data service as “broadband internet”
- Allowed phone call rates for incarcerated people to skyrocket
[1]: https://www.vice.com/en/topic/ajit-pai
> Approved T-Mobile / Sprint merger
That was a good thing. Sprint was toast either way. We were going to go from 4 to 3 major carriers.
The only real question was whether we should have the remains of Sprint be used to strengthen T-Mobile, which was the weakest of the remaining major carriers, or let Verizon and/or AT&T get Sprint's goodies.
That was a good thing. Sprint was toast either way. We were going to go from 4 to 3 major carriers.
The only real question was whether we should have the remains of Sprint be used to strengthen T-Mobile, which was the weakest of the remaining major carriers, or let Verizon and/or AT&T get Sprint's goodies.
I'm interested to see what Dish Network's (I think this is the right company) next move is. They are sitting on a ton of spectrum and now have a legal level to use their competitors' infrastructure to slingshot themselves into being competitive.
If a silver-lining is possbile from all this, way more people know about Net-Neutrality and now think it's important.
I haven't been following the aftermath of the net neutrality decision. Are there any data points that point to the impact of it being worse for most consumers, either in access or cost?
https://www.naruc.org/nrri/nrri-activities/net-neutrality-tr...
Your average HN user is probably from a state that still has NN.
Your average HN user is probably from a state that still has NN.
Net Neutrality never really became status quo. It wasn’t in place for long enough to see any significant challenges. It’s removal was a return to status quo, so there would be nothing to measure.
As a consumer, one thing that’s been visible to me, without Net Neutrality, is connectivity companies (AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, etc) buying media companies (HBO, Hulu, etc) and then implementing bandwidth caps and then zero rating their traffic to get edges over their competitors who don’t control the networks.
There is some history of it, including links to research, on Wikipedia: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality
As a consumer, one thing that’s been visible to me, without Net Neutrality, is connectivity companies (AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, etc) buying media companies (HBO, Hulu, etc) and then implementing bandwidth caps and then zero rating their traffic to get edges over their competitors who don’t control the networks.
There is some history of it, including links to research, on Wikipedia: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality
Do we stand a change to reverse the damages he has inflicted?
There’s a good chance to get decent commissioners approved by a Democratic Senate. They can start a process to make new rules. Federal agencies have a rule making process which requires evidence and findings, especially to change prior rules. Hopefully there will be mounting evidence that many of these changes were harmful.
lorax_108(1)
used my name to kill net neutrality.