The FCC just announced its plan to slash net neutrality rules, allowing ISPs like Verizon to block apps, slow websites, and charge fees to control what you see & do online. They vote December 14th.
Internet Defenders Urge Mass Revolt to Fight FCC’s “Scorched-Earth” Attack on Net Neutrality: “FCC Pai is handing over the internet to a few humongous gatekeepers who see the rest of us as products to be delivered to advertisers, not as citizens needing communications that serve democracy’s needs.’
Net neutrality supporters plan nationwide protests on December 7
One site has enabled 180,000 calls to Congress in a single day.
The Obama administration’s network neutrality rules are in danger, and the activists who helped get those regulations enacted aren’t giving up without a fight. They’re planning a series of protests nationwide to pressure the Federal Communications Commission to reject Chairman Ajit Pai’s plan to roll back network neutrality protections.
The protests will be held outside Verizon stores on December 7, a week before an expected December 14 vote on Pai’s proposal. They chose Verizon because Verizon has been a leading opponent of the net neutrality rules and because Pai worked as Verizon’s associate general counsel from 2001 to 2003.
“The company has been spending millions on lobbying and lawsuits to kill net neutrality so they can gouge us all for more money,” the protest organizers write. “We’re calling on our lawmakers to do their job overseeing the FCC and speak out against Ajit Pai’s plan to gut Title II net neutrality protections.”
And yes, Ajit Pai is now the most hated man in the Interenet.
Ajit Varadaraj Pai is an American attorney who serves as the Chairman of the United States Federal Communications Commission. He is the first Indian American to hold the office and his Wikipedia profile has been altered as such …
Man people love to edit Wikipedia pages
What’s the issue, really?
Explain why net neutrality is important like I’m a bookworm.
“So, remember that time you were like “f**k yeah, im going to the library!” and we all got in the car and we got there.
The librarian was super helpful in helping you navigate the Dewey decimal system, but when you went to check out some books, she started charging you more for certain books. Like, for no reason other than because she wanted to.
You were like “woah dude, this is a library, these books shouldn’t be priced differently based on their content!” to which she said “Tough. Nothing stopping me. You can read these books that align with my ideological and political leanings for $5, or you can read this book that I authored for free. But these books that I don’t want you reading? $20.”
Sadly, your broke ass didn’t have $20 so you didn’t get the books you wanted and you took the books you were offered for free. The entire drive home, you were mad that you had to pay more for access to something that you didnt have to before. You then said “why dont we just go to that other library across town” to which i had to remind you “dude, we only have ONE library that services our area. There is another library, sure. And that library may even have a better selection. But the problem is that you dont live in the right area so that librarian wont even let you check out books. And even then there is no guarantee that she wont charge you whatever she wants as well.
Then you pouted for a bit.”
Dystopian internet without net neutrality described,
“I use the analogy of “the wild west” when trying to help others “get” what is at stake. We will lose a vast frontier. Not just communication freedom, but worldwide we lose an actual frontier. Remember when we already all thought the internet was cool and then it got even more fun? Someone comes along and invents Facebook or Reddit or YouTube or Wikipedia or Bitcoin or MMORPGs or started [insert thing] that constantly makes it even cooler? We do not even KNOW what cool internet things will come along and give it a try in the future. But without Net Neutrality, we will cut off that freedom for our future. It doesn’t matter if you came out west for gold or for religious reasons or just because it sounded awesome if you get selectively prohibited from your intended exploration.”
American answer a non-american why Net Neutrality keeps being an issue that needs to be defended in the US
Why does the issue about needing to defend Net Neutrality resurface over and over again in the US, and could something ever put a stop to that? I am not American, but I have seen your struggle of needing to defend Net Neutrality for years.
Response:
“America is an oligarchy. Our representatives are appointed through massive political machinery (i.e. media, funding), and the oligarchs want what they paid for. They will demand it until they get it.
The oligarchs are the politicians keys to power — a politician in either party only need a little over half of the people in a single party to agree with them (at least, more than they agree with their competition). Once elected, they then align with their corporate backers (their keys to power) and structure voting districts to make it harder for people who might disagree with them to vote.
This is simply the way the game of power is played. If we want to change things, we must become the keys to power.”
There’s nothing hypothetical about what ISPs will do when net neutrality is eliminated. Here is a list of all the times IPSs have illegally broken Net Neutrality laws: –
- 2005 – Madison River Communications was blocking VOIP services. The FCC put a stop to it.
- 2005 – Comcast was denying access to p2p services without notifying customers.
- 2007-2009 – AT&T was having Skype and other VOIPs blocked because they didn’t like there was competition for their cellphones. 2011 – MetroPCS tried to block all streaming except youtube. (edit: they actually sued the FCC over this)
- 2011-2013, AT&T, Sprint, and Verizon were blocking access to Google Wallet because it competed with their bullshit. edit: this one happened literally months after the trio were busted collaborating with Google to block apps from the android marketplace
- 2012, Verizon was demanding google block tethering apps on android because it let owners avoid their $20 tethering fee. This was despite guaranteeing they wouldn’t do that as part of a winning bid on an airwaves auction. (edit: they were fined $1.25million over this)
- 2012, AT&T – tried to block access to FaceTime unless customers paid more money.
- 2013, Verizon literally stated that the only thing stopping them from favoring some content providers over other providers were the net neutrality rules in place.
The foundation of Reason’s argument is that Net Neutrality is unnecessary because we’ve never had issues without it. But this timeline shows just how crucial it really is to a free and open internet.
Links for everything listed above: –
- Madison River Communications: https://www.cnet.com/news/telco-agrees-to-stop-blocking-voip-calls/
- Comcast hates pirates: https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=a679f360-9890-4129-9d7e-53a598c3ac10 (article from ’08)
- AT&T VOIP hostage: https://www.wired.com/2009/10/iphone-att-skype/
- Google wallet hostage: http://money.cnn.com/2011/12/06/technology/verizon_blocks_google_wallet/index.htm
- Verizon hates tethering apps: https://www.wired.com/2011/06/verizon-tethering-fcc/
- AT&T claimed blocking facetime wasn’t a net neutrality issue: http://money.cnn.com/2012/08/23/technology/att-facetime/index.html
- “Verizon lawyer Helgi Walker made the company’s intentions all too clear, saying the company wants to prioritize those websites and services that are willing to shell out for better access.”: https://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/2013/09/18/verizons-plan-break-internet
And more,
- 2005, AT&T suggested giving preferential treatment to some web giants in exchange for money, starting the whole thing.
- 2014, Verizon and Comcast throttled Netflix data and held those customers hostage to a huge bribe from Netflix.
This is what ISPs will do after net neutrality is destroyed
This is Portugal and it’s real.
Why Voting Democrat would have protected and expanded Network Neutrality
So voting could’ve prevented tweeting, but millions of Americans didn’t vote and millions chose to be on the R side of the below issues:
| For | Against | |
|---|---|---|
| Republicans | 2 | 234 |
| Democrats | 177 | 6 |
Senate Vote for Net Neutrality
| For | Against | |
|---|---|---|
| Republicans | 0 | 46 |
| Democrats | 52 | 0 |
Money in Elections and Voting
Campaign Finance Disclosure Requirements
| For | Against | |
|---|---|---|
| Republicans | 0 | 39 |
| Democrats | 59 | 0 |
| For | Against | |
|---|---|---|
| Rep | 0 | 45 |
| Dem | 53 | 0 |
Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act
| For | Against | |
|---|---|---|
| Rep | 8 | 38 |
| Dem | 51 | 3 |
| For | Against | |
|---|---|---|
| Rep | 0 | 42 |
| Dem | 54 | 0 |
The Economy/Jobs
Limits Interest Rates for Certain Federal Student Loans
| For | Against | |
|---|---|---|
| Rep | 0 | 46 |
| Dem | 46 | 6 |
Student Loan Affordability Act
| For | Against | |
|---|---|---|
| Rep | 0 | 51 |
| Dem | 45 | 1 |
Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Funding Amendment
| For | Against | |
|---|---|---|
| Rep | 1 | 41 |
| Dem | 54 | 0 |
Reduces Funding for Food Stamps
| For | Against | |
|---|---|---|
| Rep | 33 | 13 |
| Dem | 0 | 52 |
Revokes tax credits for businesses that move jobs overseas
| For | Against | |
|---|---|---|
| Rep | 10 | 32 |
| Dem | 53 | 1 |
End the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection
| For | Against | |
|---|---|---|
| Rep | 39 | 1 |
| Dem | 1 | 54 |
Kill Credit Default Swap Regulations
| For | Against | |
|---|---|---|
| Rep | 38 | 2 |
| Dem | 18 | 36 |
Dodd Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Bureau Act
| For | Against | |
|---|---|---|
| Rep | 4 | 39 |
| Dem | 55 | 2 |
American Jobs Act of 2011 – $50 billion for infrastructure projects
| For | Against | |
|---|---|---|
| Rep | 0 | 48 |
| Dem | 50 | 2 |
Emergency Unemployment Compensation Extension
| For | Against | |
|---|---|---|
| Rep | 1 | 44 |
| Dem | 54 | 1 |
| For | Against | |
|---|---|---|
| Rep | 1 | 41 |
| Dem | 53 | 1 |
Civil Rights
Same Sex Marriage Resolution 2006
| For | Against | |
|---|---|---|
| Rep | 6 | 47 |
| Dem | 42 | 2 |
Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2013
| For | Against | |
|---|---|---|
| Rep | 1 | 41 |
| Dem | 54 | 0 |
| For | Against | |
|---|---|---|
| Rep | 41 | 3 |
| Dem | 2 | 52 |
Family Planning
Teen Pregnancy Education Amendment
| For | Against | |
|---|---|---|
| Rep | 4 | 50 |
| Dem | 44 | 1 |
Family Planning and Teen Pregnancy Prevention
| For | Against | |
|---|---|---|
| Rep | 3 | 51 |
| Dem | 44 | 1 |
Protect Women’s Health From Corporate Interference Act The ‘anti-Hobby Lobby’ bill.
| For | Against | |
|---|---|---|
| Rep | 3 | 42 |
| Dem | 53 | 1 |
Environment
Stop “the War on Coal” Act of 2012
| For | Against | |
|---|---|---|
| Rep | 214 | 13 |
| Dem | 19 | 162 |
EPA Science Advisory Board Reform Act of 2013
| For | Against | |
|---|---|---|
| Rep | 225 | 1 |
| Dem | 4 | 190 |
Prohibit the Social Cost of Carbon in Agency Determinations
| For | Against | |
|---|---|---|
| Rep | 218 | 2 |
| Dem | 4 | 186 |
“War on Terror”
Time Between Troop Deployments
| For | Against | |
|---|---|---|
| Rep | 6 | 43 |
| Dem | 50 | 1 |
Prohibits Detention of U.S. Citizens Without Trial
| For | Against | |
|---|---|---|
| Rep | 5 | 42 |
| Dem | 39 | 12 |
Habeas Corpus for Detainees of the United States
| For | Against | |
|---|---|---|
| Rep | 5 | 42 |
| Dem | 50 | 0 |
Repeal Indefinite Military Detention
| For | Against | |
|---|---|---|
| Rep | 15 | 214 |
| Dem | 176 | 16 |
| For | Against | |
|---|---|---|
| Rep | 196 | 31 |
| Dem | 54 | 122 |
Oversight of CIA Interrogation and Detention
| For | Against | |
|---|---|---|
| Rep | 1 | 52 |
| Dem | 45 | 1 |
Misc
Prohibit the Use of Funds to Carry Out the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
| For | Against | |
|---|---|---|
| Rep | 45 | 0 |
| Dem | 0 | 52 |
| For | Against | |
|---|---|---|
| Rep | 22 | 0 |
| Dem | 0 | 17 |
“Here’s the vote for Hurricane Sandy aid. 179 of the 180 no votes were Republicans.
I count at least 20 Texas Republicans.”
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2013/roll023.xml, https://twitter.com/MEPFuller/status/901871687532208128
“The Party of Principles:
Exhibit 1: https://i.imgur.com/lTAU8LM.jpg
Opinion of Syrian airstrikes under Obama vs. Trump.”
Democrats:
37% support Trump’s Syria strikes
38% supported Obama doing it
Republicans:
86% supported Trump doing it
22% supported Obama doing
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/04/gop-voters-love-same-attack-on-syria-they-hated-under-obama.html, https://twitter.com/kfile/status/851794827419275264
“Exhibit 4: https://i.imgur.com/OBrVUnd.png Opinion of Vladimir Putin after Trump began praising Russia during the election. https://today.yougov.com/news/2016/12/14/americans-and-trump-part-ways-over-russia/
Exhibit 5: Opinion of “Obamacare” vs. “Kynect” (Kentucky’s implementation of Obamacare). Kentuckians feel differently about the policy depending on the name. https://www.vox.com/2014/5/12/5709866/kentuckians-only-hate-obamacare-if-you-call-it-obamacare
Exhibit 6: Christians (particularly evangelicals) became monumentally more tolerant of private immoral conduct among politicians once Trump became the GOP nominee. https://www.prri.org/research/prri-brookings-oct-19-poll-politics-election-clinton-double-digit-lead-trump/
Exhibit 7: White Evangelicals cared less about how religious a candidate was once Trump became the GOP nominee. https://www.prri.org/research/prri-brookings-oct-19-poll-politics-election-clinton-double-digit-lead-trump/
Exhibit 10: Republicans started to think college education is a bad thing once Trump entered the primary. Democrats remain consistent. http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/07/20/republicans-skeptical-of-colleges-impact-on-u-s-but-most-see-benefits-for-workforce-preparation/
Exhibit 11: https://i.imgur.com/B2yx5TB.png”
Economicanxiety
“Wisconsin Republicans felt the economy improve by 85 approval points the day Trump was sworn in. Graph also shows some Democratic bias, but not nearly as bad. http://www.jsonline.com/story/news/blogs/wisconsin-voter/2017/04/15/donald-trumps-election-flips-both-parties-views-economy/100502848/”
https://np.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/787fdh/after_gold_star_widow_breaks_silence_trump/dornc4n/
Steve Bannon on getting “rootless white males” “radicalized”:
“the power of what he called “rootless white males” who spend all their time online.
And five years later when Bannon wound up at Breitbart, he resolved to try and attract those people over to Breitbart because he thought they could be radicalized in a kind of populist, nationalist way. And the way that Bannon did that, the bridge between the angry abusive gamers and Breitbart and Pepe was Milo Yiannopoulous, who Bannon discovered and hired to be Breitbart’s tech editor”
“I realized Milo could connect with these kids right away,” Bannon told Green. “You can activate that army. They come in through Gamergate or whatever and then get turned onto politics and Trump.””
More quotes from right-wing media bragging about their tactics:
https://np.reddit.com/r/news/comments/7ej943/fcc_announces_plan_to_repeal_net_neutrality/dq5lpvw/
The most effective thing you can do for net neutrality and almost every other issue you care about is politics and being political
Activist identifies a potential weak link on the 5-member FCC Committee that will decide on Net Neutrality, and offers messaging suggestions as follows: –
O’Rielly is the weak link. Carr served as Pai’s lawyer (in some official capacity) before being nominated.
It is important to understand that O’Rielly is a mechanistic Republican. Any attempt to change his mind needs to be couched in the language of Republican ideals. It is unclear as to whether or not he actually understands the issues, despite serving as commissioner for an extended period of time. The key difficulties to convincing him, based on his previous statements, are:
- He willfully ignores evidence or effects of monopoly on a free market.
- He appears to believe things which are provably false, including that regulations have slowed investment and that a lack of NN is “light touch” regulation which will allow “innovation” (a word I am almost certain he does not understand) to flourish.
He worked for the Republican Whip’s office under John Cornyn.
His alma mater is the University of Rochester.
Anyone that knows any elected official that he’s ever worked with should contact them and ask them to talk to him on your/constituent’s behalf.
He probably lives in the DC/Maryland area, though I don’t have an address and would discourage anyone from actually attempting to dox him, as I believe it would be anti-productive.
Edit: changed “actually intelligent to “understands the issues…etc”, since something that can be construed strictly as an insult isn’t helpful.
How to directly contact the FCC leadership to directly demand net neutrality. Perhaps one of us can change a key vote
The FCC just announced its plan to slash net neutrality rules, allowing ISPs like Verizon to block apps, slow websites, and charge fees to control what you see & do online. They vote December 14th.
FYI – Congress and the Senate have nothing to do with this. Only five people at the FCC get to vote.
Here they are. The three men plan to vote to repeal net neutrality. The two women plan to vote to keep net neutrality.
Their individual contact information can be found under “Bio”.
To defeat the net neutrality repeal, one of those three men has to change their vote.
Whaddaya Say?