

Most recommended from 70 comments

SpectrumDude

join:2002-04-14

Kernersville, NC 34 recommendations SpectrumDude Member A republican said it So it has to be true. They are always looking out for the best interests of the people they serve. Republicans abhor big business and only want to defend our freedoms. Then I woke up. I remembered I was was living in an America where the people foolishly elected a buffoon as president. His highest goal is to get richer and sell our freedoms away to the highest bidder.

NOCMan

MadMacHatter

Premium Member

join:2004-09-30

Colorado Springs, CO 20 recommendations NOCMan Premium Member They always cloak crap like this in words Freedom

Patriotism

Security



Whenever you hear them talking about these things in context of anything they're doing that impacts you, you're getting screwed. AckAck

join:2011-06-02 81.7 124.3

17 recommendations AckAck Member Free for all Pai why don't you just fulfill your dream of reduced regulation, and just disband the FCC. I'm sure that it will foster unfettered competition and innovation in all area of telecommunications. Why just think of all the new jamming tech and more and more powerful RF devices are developed as companies and people compete for the airwaves. It would be truely utopian to see unfettered competition, wouldn't it Ajit?

Harddrive

Proud American and Infidel since 1968.

Premium Member

join:2000-09-20

Mission, TX 15 recommendations Harddrive Premium Member This would help... iwinrar

join:2010-03-18 11 recommendations iwinrar Member Very true Took away our freedom to pay more for less. Damn you Net Neutrality...

rchandra

Stargate Universe fan

Premium Member

join:2000-11-09

14225-2105 ARRIS ONT1000GJ4

EnGenius EAP1250

10 recommendations rchandra Premium Member freedom to gouge If last kilometer access were competitive, I'd agree with Pai. But he seems to have a huge blind spot to the lack of choices in similarly priced Internet access. Satellite and LTE are much more expensive and often technically limited when compared to DOCSIS, DSL, and FTTP. He doesn't seem to be able to see the repeated failures of FCC initiatives whose intent is to help competition, such as UNEs from the 1996 Telecom Act and CableCARD.

trparky

CYA! I'm gone!

Premium Member

join:2000-05-24

Cleveland, OH 9 recommendations trparky Premium Member Corporate vs. Government Censorship The plan is great news for his former boss, Verizon, and a complete and total assault on the free and open Internet for the rest of us. Ajit Pai wants to undo Title II classification of Internet service providers, even though this is the only legal foundation that lets the FCC ban paid “fast lanes”.



Now, the future of the internet is in the air—if ISPs like Comcast and Verizon get their way, they’ll be able to censor and control what we see and do online.



Who's to say that if the government is in charge of the Internet they won't turn around and say "This web site represents a view that's not in line with our current policies and we demand that it be blocked". Or anything else that's not "politically correct" is to be blocked. That's free speech being blocked. That's happening in China and the Middle East; we don't want that kind of control in the hands of the government.



I don't trust the corporations, that's for sure. As for the government, nope. I trust them even less, if that's even possible. Not as long as we have political hacks in charge of the government who've been bought and paid for. Think putting the government in charge of it would be good? Think again. They've been bought and paid for by the very same companies that we're fighting against so in reality it would be like handing the control over to the same entities that we hate.



Now if there was some kind of independent and non-partisan review board consisting of three Democrats, three Republicans, three Independents, and six (or nine) ordinary citizens (as a possible tie-breaker) I would be all for it. But, it must be completely non-partisan, completely independent, and ordinary citizens must have a vote in the process as a sitting member of the group. I received an email from some group that's fighting for Net Neutrality and their wording is this...OK, so who do we have making sure that censorship isn't happening? Under these rules we would have the government making sure of that. My God, that would be like putting a fox in charge of the hen house. I don't trust the government as far as I can throw them.Who's to say that if the government is in charge of the Internet they won't turn around and say "This web site represents a view that's not in line with our current policies and we demand that it be blocked". Or anything else that's not "politically correct" is to be blocked. That's free speech being blocked. That's happening in China and the Middle East; we don't want that kind of control in the hands of the government.I don't trust the corporations, that's for sure. As for the government, nope. I trust them even less, if that's even possible. Not as long as we have political hacks in charge of the government who've been bought and paid for. Think putting the government in charge of it would be good? Think again. They've been bought and paid for by the very same companies that we're fighting against so in reality it would be like handing the control over to the same entities that we hate.Now if there was some kind of independent and non-partisan review board consisting of three Democrats, three Republicans, three Independents, and six (or nine) ordinary citizens (as a possible tie-breaker) I would be all for it. But, it must be completely non-partisan, completely independent, and ordinary citizens must have a vote in the process as a sitting member of the group. DGrossman

join:2017-02-09 5 recommendations DGrossman Member Adding insult to injury... The press release was accompanied by a public notice to the effect of "please don't blow up our electronic comment filing system (again)" followed by instructions on how to file comments, short and long.



Now, it is abundantly clear to FCC staff that there is going to be a great public hue and cry. They're prepared for it. Pai and O'Reilly both have to know it is coming. Yet they're going ahead with this item, regardless.



"Please submit your comments, which we are going to blow off anyway, we've already made up our minds, so f... you". Right. Fine Public Servants they are. This will come up on Appeal. shanghaista

join:2014-08-03

Canton, MA 4 recommendations shanghaista Member How A Bill Becomes Law content.iwastesomuchtime ··· 0634.jpg

Anoncefac

@charter.com 3 recommendations Anoncefac Anon don't stop at net neutrality Won't an a popular opinion here, but I'm actually OK with them stripping regulations *IF* it also means they strip all the regulations that have been installed to create the monopolies and duopoly that have been written into law. I do believe the free market can solve the broadband woes, and I do believe it is overarching regulation that has placed us in this situation. It sure as hell isn't NN though, thats the 'weak' band-aid to deal with their anti-competitive BS.



Strip away ALL regulations, and open the markets up would be better for consumers than NN ever could.



I'm not exactly holding my breath however, this is just a dream. wjf58

join:2011-06-21

Chicago, IL 3 recommendations wjf58 Member Also... Won't someone please think of the children?!?

camper

just visiting this planet

Premium Member

join:2010-03-21

Bethel, CT 2 recommendations camper Premium Member It did take some freedom... The freedom of the ISPs to abuse their market-dominating positions to extract even more money from their customers by stifling competition in the broadband market.