Ajit Pai Openly Mocks Net Neutrality Protesters with Dumb New Video

Zarathustra[H] said:
Sadly, while I agree that net neutrality is hugely important, the fact that Netflix works well now is not due to Net Neutrality.

The FCC's Net Neutrality rules under Title II explicitly excluded peering, which is how both Comcast and Verizon throttled Netflix, by intentionally failing to meet demand at their peering sites with Cogent, the network Netflix used for transit.

The reason your Netflix speeds work now is because Netflix caved, and agreed to pay Comcast and Verizon to place their servers inside Comcast's and Verizon's networks.

So, essentially Netflix caved, paid the protection money, and the problem went away.

Net Neutrality WOULD solve a problem like this if it regulated peering traffic as well, but the rules that were in place until today didn't go far enough to solve that.

In other words, the regulations that were in place with Net Neutrality were too light as they were, and now even those too light regulations have been destroyed.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the clarification and insight
 
Well the President officially supports the FCC vote so it is a done deal with Congress in my opinion.

 
otherweeb said:
After stewing on it awhile I realized instead of stating his case and arguing his points intelligently he gave us the 'song and dance' because he thinks the public are idiots.
Click to expand...

Correct, he has never argued or addressed the issues we are concerned about, instead it makes up bullshit nobody is claiming and then shoots it down.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Madoc
like this
ecuador said:
I am starting to think he is retarded. I mean, he can pretty much do whatever he wants, it's not like it is a democracy or anything, so why make these abominable videos???
Click to expand...

Probably something in there about people getting the leadership they deserve. Look! We got a dancing monkey as FCC chairman!
 
cageymaru said:
Well the President officially supports the FCC vote so it is a done deal with Congress in my opinion.

Click to expand...

Well, since the FCC has the power to reverse this yet again, it's Congress' turn at bat. They need to relook Section 5 of the Federal Trade Act, the exemption clause for Common Carriers, and maybe amend that sucker. If they did, then if the FCC again classified the Internet as Title II, the FTC will keep more regulatory power over ISPs that they lost this time around.
 
mavrocket said:
Could [H] make a new news subforum just for Megalith called [H]ardOCP Biased Front Page News?

Gotta admire Pai, he hasn't backed down even with the personal threats to him and his family, and manages to keep his humor intact.
Click to expand...

Maybe that's why Trump likes him.

But for me, I think the guy has balls to stand up to some of the pressure put on him over this. But I still don't like the video. I like my government officials with sticks up their asses and serious about the shit they are doing. Not fucking off running off the rails on Twitter and shit.
 
lcpiper said:
Not everything that the FCC did under the name Net Neutrality was removed today. Some parts of it remain, others the FTC will pick back up and enforce themselves. And some of it, well Companies like T-Mobile can step up and seize opportunity and keep the ship from sinking.
Click to expand...

Sadly the FTC is pretty toothless when it comes to ISP's.

Their attempts at going after anticompetitive behaviors in the industry have been largely unsuccessful as courts have shut them down stating that the ISP's are already elsewhere regulated (by the FCC) so the line Pai has had put there about the FTC taking over regulatory duties has been little more than a sham.

I don't expect the FTC to be able to do shit, unfortunately.

I do agree that the ultimate solution for these problems would be proper competition in the industry, but I wonder how realistic this is. Existing ISP's - even where they don't have state sanctioned monopolies - seem much more interested in not treading on eachothers territories and using and absuing their captive customer base than expanding and competing.

I remember reading a while back that there are laws on the books governing how quickly regulatory agencies can change their positions in order to prevent yo-yo back and forths in regulations between administrations.

I can't remember the details, but I wonder if a suit based on these laws can be applied to Net Neutrality and the internet's Title II classification considering they were so recently implemented...
 
You know... I've never wanted a paid shill to be dead so bad in my life. It's strange how powerfully I hate this person. I'm glad I never have to be face to face with them. I honestly don't know if I could contain myself.
 
This just shows how sad of a situation we are in! The internet is soooooo important in our lives that we call for the death or to beat a person up over it? Holy SHIT PEOPLE go outside, push the keyboard in and go hunt, fish, play sports, hike, get a boat, ride a bike just get outside!! If the internet shut down tomorrow, yes I would be bummed but my life wouldn't end. I didn't have cell phones or internet when I grew up THANK GOD!!


Be part of life instead of just watching it!!!
 
mullet said:
This just shows how sad of a situation we are in! The internet is soooooo important in our lives that we call for the death or to beat a person up over it? Holy SHIT PEOPLE go outside, push the keyboard in and go hunt, fish, play sports, hike, get a boat, ride a bike just get outside!! If the internet shut down tomorrow, yes I would be bummed but my life wouldn't end. I didn't have cell phones or internet when I grew up THANK GOD!!
Be part of life instead of just watching it!!!
Click to expand...

Neither did I, but that access to information and instant communication is it turns out. Very addictive and very nice to have. I'm not angry that the guy sucks as a human being, I'm angry because he is obviously a paid shill for corporate interests. Even I admit its strange how powerfully this person effects me. Maybe it's because he actively celebrates being a waste of human space, and has made millions in doing that? I don't know.. it's a very instinctual kind of hate.
 
Grimlaking said:
You know... I've never wanted a paid shill to be dead so bad in my life. It's strange how powerfully I hate this person. I'm glad I never have to be face to face with them. I honestly don't know if I could contain myself.
Click to expand...

For your own good

In your own best interest

I hope you will curb that shit

Everything you know about this guy, you know because the media showed it to you.

All of it is part of a picture that other people are paid to paint for you.

I want to make something clear to you so that you see things clearly.

Do you know me? Would you call me your friend?

Is there anyone at all on this website, save maybe Kyle, that you would actually call your friend, who isn't someone you personally know?

The same is true for every one of us. I don't know you, I don't call anyone a friend easily I sure as fuck wouldn't call you a friend cause ... I don't know you.

But that don't mean that I want to see something bad happen to you. I don't even wish you a bad day. But what I want don't have nothing to do with it.

Every person who has a Government Security Clearance is being monitored in their online activity, all of them. And there are a lot of them and there are several right here on the [H].

Some you know about, some you don't. All are being watched which means everyone they are talking to are being heard.

None of the people on [H] that have a clearance even need to report this, all are being watched, it just takes one to be looking at this topic and I am pretty sure there is at least one.

I hope you are understanding what I am telling you.
 
Grimlaking said:
Neither did I, but that access to information and instant communication is it turns out. Very addictive and very nice to have. I'm not angry that the guy sucks as a human being, I'm angry because he is obviously a paid shill for corporate interests. Even I admit its strange how powerfully this person effects me. Maybe it's because he actively celebrates being a waste of human space, and has made millions in doing that? I don't know.. it's a very instinctual kind of hate.
Click to expand...


People fucking up their lives over this shit ...... caught up in the moment I guess.

 
Cmdrmonkey said:
It could happen. It's hard to get people really pissed off these days, but this is going to affect things like gaming, porn, watching TV shows and movies. Bread and circuses keeps the masses placated, but this guy wants to take that away. When this kicks in, it could piss people off in a really nasty way. This guy has a death wish.
Click to expand...

Once porn viewing is affected, all hell is going to break loose! :)
 
lcpiper said:
I honestly can't believe you guys are all still thinking this way.

If it goes the way he says it will, and there are more than enough others saying this same thing;

The FCC is voting right now, at this moment, to reclassify the Internet as Title I, and roll back some of the rules, not all of them, for instance they are keeping most of the transparency rules.

Then the 9th Circuit is going to rehear the FTC vs AT&T case and the appeals court is going to reverse the prior court decision because now Section 5 will no longer apply and AT&T will lose Common Carrier protections and all those people that AT&T fucked by throttling their unlimited broadband connections will get some money back. The FTC will get their teeth back.

I swear, you guys know that the media lies to you. You know it, but you still listen to what they try and sell you even when actual events to the contrary suggest that you should take a harder look.

What was it about the courts no longer allowing the FTC to help those people, and the FCC not being able to, and AT&T getting away with just fucking them, that makes you guys think that what the FCC did in the name of NN was turning out to be a good thing?

Pai is in the telecoms pockets but the media isn't? This is what I find amazing.

There, I said it. If it plays out wrong I'll be eating crow later (y)

EDITED: OH, on a side note, I don't think the video was in good taste just like I think the President needs to stay the fuck off Twitter. I'm just old fashioned that way, this bullshit is the wrong vehicle for government officials to use when communicating with the country.
Click to expand...

You're the one believing lies and bullshit. THE FTC HAS NO POWER TO REGULATE THE INTERNET! THEY ARE A TRADE COMMISSION. Regulating how ISPs handle access is the job of the FCC. The internet is a form of COMMUNICATION, that makes it the FCC's duty. Passing the back to the FTC means we're fucked unless congress gets off its ass because the FTC has ZERO power to do anything. Pai IS a shill. He doesn't even bother to hide it. Orange bumblefuck elected him to that spot because he knew Pai was a shill and would repeal anything done under Obama's administration.
 
Derangel said:
You're the one believing lies and bullshit. THE FTC HAS NO POWER TO REGULATE THE INTERNET! THEY ARE A TRADE COMMISSION. Regulating how ISPs handle access is the job of the FCC. The internet is a form of COMMUNICATION, that makes it the FCC's duty. Passing the back to the FTC means we're fucked unless congress gets off its ass because the FTC has ZERO power to do anything. Pai IS a shill. He doesn't even bother to hide it. Orange bumblefuck elected him to that spot because he knew Pai was a shill and would repeal anything done under Obama's administration.
Click to expand...

Well, you think what you think, and I'll think what I think, and pretty soon the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals is going to re-hear the FTC law suite against AT&T where AT&T was throttling customers who had unlimited internet plans and had used more data than AT&T liked.

I'll let the 9th Circuit decide which of us has a better view of the situation.

Your caps-lock key works by the way, I hear you so much better now
 
lcpiper said:
Well, you think what you think, and I'll think what I think, and pretty soon the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals is going to re-hear the FTC law suite against AT&T where AT&T was throttling customers who had unlimited internet plans and had used more data than AT&T liked.

I'll let the 9th Circuit decide which of us has a better view of the situation.
Click to expand...

I would love if the courts decide in favor of the FTC, but we'll see. The 9th court makes some wacky calls sometimes. Regardless of ruling, and especially if it rules in the favor of the FTC, I expect the case to go to the Supreme Court and I wouldn't be surprised if they slap the FTC down.
 
lcpiper said:
Well, you think what you think, and I'll think what I think, and pretty soon the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals is going to re-hear the FTC law suite against AT&T where AT&T was throttling customers who had unlimited internet plans and had used more data than AT&T liked.

I'll let the 9th Circuit decide which of us has a better view of the situation.

Your caps-lock key works by the way, I hear you so much better now
Click to expand...


Great, they will re-hear a case about a company lying about a service it sold..... Tell me again how that is relevant in any way the NN and preventing ISPs filtering/throttling packets? The ISPs are just going to change their Terms/Description of Service to be 'transparent' about doing that and the FTC will not be able to do shit..... Just like how ATT/VZ/Tmobile still sell 'unlimited' plans, they just include that it will be throttled after you use a certain amount of bandwidth. Yup, that transparency requirement sure is going to save us.....
 
Pai is the sort of guy you wouldn't mind seeing someone take a crowbar to his knees and just keep whacking away until the whole mess looks like tomato puree.

Or a bullet to the head to remove that smile, but then it'd be over too quick (for my tastes anyway).
 
Derangel said:
I would love if the courts decide in favor of the FTC, but we'll see. The 9th court makes some wacky calls sometimes. Regardless of ruling, and especially if it rules in the favor of the FTC, I expect the case to go to the Supreme Court and I wouldn't be surprised if they slap the FTC down.
Click to expand...

The initial case hinged on the Common Carrier exclusion clause in Section 5 of the Federal Trade Act, and now that the Internet is no longer Title II, Section 5 isn't part of the issue. The 9th circuit initially refused to rehear the case claiming saying that as long as the FCC was going to vote on changing things up, that there wasn't a point to it. But the other day, the 9th Circuit came back and said that they would rehear it, and en banc, ( a full house, not a 3 judge panel), so at a very minimum, it looks like they intend to give it a hard look however it turns out. But it sure looks like this vote and the classification of Title I vs Title II has a real impact on what the FTC can and can't do in regulating an ISP.

Now I'll drop the other shoe, this case is less about regulating the internet and more about a company who promised a level of service and went back on their promise in an underhanded way. Any ruling in favor of the FTC is not going to mean that ISPs can't throttle service. It's going to mean that they can't promise you something and fuck you over in the manner that AT&T did.
 
Zion Halcyon said:
You guys keep hiding under the bed and saying it's coming.

I am going to continue doing what I do and be aware that nothing has really changed in terms of how the internet was pre 2015 and how it will be going forward.

I never really had an issue with the internet pre 2015 so I think you guys are just a bunch of crazies LOL
Click to expand...

I did. I am on Comcast as they are the only provider and have watched Youtube, Netflix and mostly other streaming services having "buffering" issues. I haven't had those problems since around 2014ish. Most of it was cleared up with a VPN as that hides traffic from the provider before it was a thing. I'm wondering now if my service will slowly erode back to that. Nothing has really stopped them from continually raising the prices every few years as well along with a data cap. I'm assuming the Net Neutrality repeal is just icing on the cake for them not upgrading their network and to throttle traffic they like. It's a shame.

From what I've read and heard most issues were from the 1996 telecom act in which gave them monopoly rights but we've never repealed that. I dunno. I guess we'll find out how this goes in the next few years.
 
mullet said:
This just shows how sad of a situation we are in! The internet is soooooo important in our lives that we call for the death or to beat a person up over it? Holy SHIT PEOPLE go outside, push the keyboard in and go hunt, fish, play sports, hike, get a boat, ride a bike just get outside!! If the internet shut down tomorrow, yes I would be bummed but my life wouldn't end. I didn't have cell phones or internet when I grew up THANK GOD!!

Be part of life instead of just watching it!!!
Click to expand...

You clearly don't know any severely disabled people. To some people, who can do little now but move their eyes in order to control a computer, the internet amounts to what they have left of their entire life. I guarantee you that if they could, they would do what you describe but they can't. But you know, fuck them amiright?
 
LigTasm said:
if we don't like someone we hope they get murdered or kill themselves[H] to be honest.
Click to expand...

There is a difference between not like someone or their opinion and an appointed government official openly mocking the citizens that pay him as he makes changes that will only result in higher internet costs and reduced service.
 
variant said:
He actually did give a detailed statement. It's just very few bothered to read it.

https://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2017/db1128/DOC-347980A1.pdf
Click to expand...

ty, good read. I like this part:

"...Indeed, despite all the talk about the fear that broadband providers could decide what Internet content consumers can see, recent experience shows that so-called edge providers are in fact deciding what content they see. These providers routinely block or discriminate against content they don’t like.

The examples from the past year alone are legion. App stores barring the doors to apps from even cigar aficionados because they are perceived to promote tobacco use. Streaming services restricting videos from the likes of conservative commentator Dennis Prager on subjects he considers “important to understanding American values.” Algorithms that decide what content you see (or don’t), but aren’t disclosed themselves. Online platforms secretly editing certain users’ comments. And of course, American companies caving to repressive foreign governments’ demands to block certain speech—conduct that would be repugnant to free expression if it occurred within our borders."

Someone's breaking the RULZ ! Quick, someone call the FCC chairman.....oh wait....

His thinking sounds a lot like "the US has a murder problem. If we remove all rules about murder, the problem will disappear."
 
image.png
 
Mchart said:
Yup. Exactly.

When I visit every single major news site (Including Fox) and they were wailing about NN ending it really made me think that maybe ending NN is actually the good thing and to look into the issue more.

I'll also point out that the massive amount of social media attention on the issue has me questioning if the attention was from real people or not. I remember a couple weeks back there were tens of thousands of upvotes for hundreds of different pro-NN articles on Reddit. Not for a second do I believe real people upvoted all those articles. It was obvious manipulation either by big-media owned bots and/or Reddit admins itself.
Click to expand...
Youean like how over 1000000 pro repeal.comments at the FCC came from bots
 
Man, I remember a day when politicians and public figure heads for the government held themselves as somewhat "distinguished". Now I wonder why they even wear suits at all, just come to work in a tshirt, jean shorts and flipflops, including when you talk to the press.
 
haste. said:
dailymail. in bold large font. I realize the reasoning behind your stance now.
Click to expand...


What that I copied and pasted the title off the website? what does the font size have to do with a real bomb threat?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top