Reaction to the AT&T/T-Mobile Mega-Merger of Doom has been, at least among consumers, overwhelmingly negative. Fortunately, those depressed about the news can now cheer themselves up by reading Twitter, which currently features the funniest commentary.

Anil Dash: "On the plus side, it'll be fun to watch the government break up AT&T again in a few years. Keeps re-forming like the T1000 in Terminator 2."

Matt Binder:

"Nothing says 'we love our customers' like airing commercials about how AT&T blows & then selling the company to them. #tmobile"

"Nothing says 'we love our customers' like airing commercials about how AT&T blows & then selling the company to them. #tmobile" Mike Tito: "AT&T acquired T-Mobile? This is a monopoly of [the] dropped call market!! #att #tmobile"

But the scorn isn't confined to the Twitterverse. The LA Times has just warned that "Ma Bell is back. Federal regulators should waste no time in welcoming her home with new rules that address the shortcomings of our failed experiment in deregulation."

Brett Arends, a columnist for MarketWatch, asked readers to write their Congresspeople, the FCC, and the Department of Justice.

"Tell them this takeover must not be allowed," he said. "No, not with conditions. Not with asset disposals. Not with commitments. It must never be allowed. Ever. No way, no how. The absolute bedrock of capitalism is competition. The whole essence of our free market system lies in consumer choice Take away that choice and the consumer is powerless."

Tech journalists have also been eloquent in their opposition. GigaOm called the deal "bad for wireless innovation, which means bad news for consumers." It added: "T-Mobile has been pretty experimental and innovative: It has experimented with newer technologies such as UMA, built its own handsets and has generally been a more consumer-centric company. AT&T, on the other hand, has the innovation of a lead pencil and has the mentality more suited to a monopoly: a position it wants to regain."

Gizmodo also lamented the swallowing of T-Mobile. "They take chances on phones! Remember, they were the first carrier to introduce Android to the masses in the T-Mobile G1. (AT&T was the last). They have cheap plans! Their Fav 5 plan was a huge selling point that spurred other carriers to buck up and offer better deals. Their UMA Wi-Fi calling was awesome. They had really good customer service! No seriously, talking to T-Mobile service reps was not a disgusting experience in humanity like the other big carriers. All that's going to be gone."

As for AT&T's claim that adding T-Mobile cell towers will substantially increase its network coverage, Gizmodo's snark was in full effect: "Which is to say, pinch yourself if you've heard this before, AT&T might really improve their sh--crap service in New York and San Francisco and other areas. That's about the only upside we to see this deal."

The usual DC tech policy groups blasted the buyout, but so did Penn State law and telecoms professor Rob Frieden. "I predict that months from now the FCC will find a way to frame this merger as something really great for consumers," he wrote. "Bogus!"

What says the Ars hivemind—will anyone stand up for the deal, or is it rotten to the core?