Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 12th Jul 2017 13:37 UTC
Internet & Networking

FCC chairman Ajit Pai is fond of saying that "the internet was not broken in 2015" when he argues for repeal of our nation's net neutrality rules. This is particularly funny to me, because in 2014 I literally wrote an article called "The internet is fucked".

Why was it fucked? Because the free and open internet was in danger of becoming tightly controlled by giant telecom corporations that were already doing things like blocking apps and services from phones and excusing their own services from data caps. Because the lack of competition in the internet access market let these companies act like predatory monopolies. And because our government lacked the will or clarity to just say what everyone already knows: internet access is a utility.

Most of these things are still true, even after the Obama-era FCC under Chairman Tom Wheeler reclassified internet access as a Title II telecommunications service and imposed strict net neutrality rules on wired and wireless internet providers. And most of these things will get even worse when Pai pushes through his plan to rescind Title II and those rules, despite widespread public outcry.

Hey look, another case of corporations actively working to undermine society by bribing politicians with huge amounts of money that individuals would never (or only rarely) have access to. As long as politicians' power is derived not from the people, but from money, shit like this will continue to happen. Trying to stop Pai's obviously horrible and destructive anti-consumer plans is a noble goal, but these plans are only a symptom, not a cause. We're playing whack-a-mole, while they are playing Jenga.

These corporate criminals and their political lapdogs will keep throwing money at the wall until it breaks - and they have more money than we have bricks and mortar.

Permalink for comment 646662
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Comment by kurkosdr
by bryanv on Wed 12th Jul 2017 20:50 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by kurkosdr"
Member since:

I don't vote because I'm an anarchist, and because they never offer any choice that I'd ever vote for anyhow.

Then the proper thing to do, is to cast an empty ballot.
SHOW UP. Abstaining on a vote actually is _counted_. They see those numbers. Represent your refusal to vote for shitty options by showing up, and refusing to vote for shitty options.

Not showing up is interpreted completely differently than showing up and refusing to pick a bad option.

You have been deceived into thinking that 'not voting' is somehow sticking it to the parties. No, sir.. They _count_ on people like you not showing up.

If it got to the point where voters who abstain were > the margin of victory, you would start to see a different type of candidate next cycle.

Reply Parent Score: 5