Technology technology

GOP Busted Using Cable Lobbyist Net Neutrality Talking Points: email from GOP leadership... included a "toolkit" (pdf) of misleading or outright false talking points that, among other things, attempted to portray net neutrality as "anti-consumer."

GOP Busted Using Cable Lobbyist Net Neutrality Talking Points: email from GOP leadership... included a "toolkit" (pdf) of misleading or outright false talking points that, among other things, attempted to portray net neutrality as "anti-consumer."
GOP Busted Using Cable Lobbyist Net Neutrality Talking Points: email from GOP leadership... inclu...

Holy shit, this PDF is disgusting.

Myth: Internet providers oppose open internet regulation. Fact: All major internet providers strongly support a free and open internet – the idea that no one should block, throttle or unreasonably discriminate against internet content in any way.

Right, they just want to "reasonably discriminate". But of course, it's only that darn Title II that's literally the only thing stopping them.

Myth: “Title II” utility regulation is the only way to keep the internet open and free. Fact: “Congress on its own could take away the gaps in the FCC[‘s] authority” and pass a simple law that keeps the internet free and open without the destructive baggage of utility regulation,

Yeah, because Title II has some seriously huge baggage! I mean, it's the one thing the court said without, the FCC would hold no authority to enforce the Open Internet Order. Stupid classification actually letting orders get enforced!

The FCC and FTC also have their own authority to enact or enforce open internet protections without utility

Wait -- Didn't we just see that without title II, the FCC doesn't have that authority? I mean, I know 2014 was a long time ago, but surely the FCC must remember that giant blow that caused them to take action.

Myth: Only internet providers oppose utility regulation. Fact: This is false.

Well, you've got me on that one. I've met a whole slew of people who think any government oversight is bad, consequences be damned. Let's go ahead and get rid of those pesky bank regulations too, because 2008 was such a fun time for the economy.

Myth: Open internet legislation is uncertain to pass. Fact: There is no reason that legislation should not pass Congress. The open internet has broad, bipartisan support – only utility regulation is controversial. Congress has clear constitutional authority to permanently protect the open internet

Oh, okay. So until someone figures out how to pass a country wide speed limit for the roads, we'll just take down all the speed limit signs, because don't worry, they'll get around to fixing it.

Myth: Utility regulation protects consumers from monopoly internet providers. Fact: Between wired, wireless, and satellite service, consumers have more options for internet service than ever. In 2015, 95% of consumers had three or more choices for service at 13-20 Mbps and even even under the critics’ most skewed definition counting only wired service exceeding 25 Mbps as “internet” nearly 40% of consumers have two or more choices of provider.

I don't even understand the argument they're trying to make here, because I'm pretty sure they made my point for me. Literally more than half of the consumers in the country has one (or fewer...) choices for broadband internet. Yes, we do make the choice to cut it off at 25Mbps, because that's literally your fucking definition. But hey, senators think we don't need that much bandwidth anyways. Anyways, this argument is a moot point anyways: we can all switch to 13Mbps dsl as an alternative to the other single option or maybe 2 that we can pick? Is that really supposed to be the kind of competition that is going to help consumers? No, no it's not. It's still pretty damn close to an effective natural monopoly. You know how we treat other natural monopolies like water, electricity? We treat them like a fucking utility. Why? Because (and to quote wikipedia:) "Natural monopolies were discussed as a potential source of market failure by John Stuart Mill, who advocated government regulation to make them serve the public good."

But hey, maybe we don't need the internet to serve the public good. It's not like it's become a pillar of fucking commerce or anything.

Jesus Christ. I'm three fucking pages into this document and I'm completely disgusted that some human being put this all together.

The direction of the leadership in this country makes me fucking embarrassed.

They're not even trying to hide it anymore. This is such horseshit

I know for a fact my GOP rep has copied and pasted talking points. Especially that bullshit one about the FCC "putting their thumb on the scale" against ISPs.

Saying satellite and mobile internet competes with wired boradband is like saying Power Wheels competes with Ford.

FCC revised net neutrality rules reveal cable company control of process

FCC revised net neutrality rules reveal cable company control of process
FCC revised net neutrality rules reveal cable company control of process

Regulatory capture at it's worst. Especially the utter disregard for the overwhelmingly pro-NN comments, "this isn't a talent show vote" no, it's supposed to be a democracy you shitbags!

Ajit Pai can choke on his own dick. What a piece of shit.

The company that has done more to undermine net neutrality rules than any other – Verizon – gets a veritable wishlist of changes made to a document that was already highly favorable to it.

It is likely mere coincidence that FCC chair Ajit Pai was once Verizon's associate general counsel.

How hopeless it feels to be a young adult these days.

what else did anyone expect. go read the 1996 telecommunications act, its so bad it'll make you cry while you laugh.

2.6 million comments in, the FCC has changed almost nothing about its net neutrality proposal

2.6 million comments in, the FCC has changed almost nothing about its net neutrality proposal

It's like they dont care. It's blatant ignorance of the voice of millions, and I hope they can change their mind.

the voice of millions

Counts for nothing when ISPs are throwing cash around

Pai is a jackass and a blatent corporate shill, but any FCC chair appointed by Trump would be doing the same thing.

Edit: I do not want the NN rules rolled back, but it looks like the ISPs $$ has paved the way. If they are, Pai's will be in the hotseat to show his claims are true and the rules were holding ISPs back from increasing and improving service. My guess is it will be the same old shitty service because they have no competition, they will still outsource jobs to India and lay off staff. The money they make off fewer regulations will go right to exec compensation and future lobbying efforts.

Consider the following.

We got to Title II and our current stance on Net Neutrality because the American people demanded it in 2016.

The ONLY reason, to go back on that today is because the new Administration cares little to nothing for what the American people want.

So why would they give 2 shits about 2.6 million comments from the people that they are actively showing direct disregard for?

If they gave a shit about what the American people thought they would stay the course not spit in our face.

They didn't forget. They are intentionally disregarding the will of the people for personal gain.

Advertisement

The FCC's case against net neutrality rests on deliberate misunderstanding of how the Internet works

The FCC's case against net neutrality rests on deliberate misunderstanding of how the Internet works

Hey, I'm the author of this article. Got any problems or suggestions, hit my inbox!

edit: gold! thanks for reading and gilding!

Man, appreciate what you're doing here. The FCC is so full of crap, it's coming out of their ears. In case you haven't seen it recently, someone posted the actual FCC stance on Net Neutrality from the FCC website the other day. Worth a look over, if you haven't already.

EDIT: Guys, this was the FCC's position in the LAST administration, the people who instituted Net Neutrality in the first place in response to ISP's doing exactly what the rules are against. This is still on the FCC's page. But the current Administration is trying to confuse the issue and claim Net Neutrality is something completely different.

I feel that 'deliberate misunderstanding' doesn't convey the reality which I would describe as 'maliciously misleading'

Ajit Pai. Ajit Pai is full of crap.

I will never forget how Tom Wheeler completely subverted our understandably bleak expectations and actually started listening to the public and working to establish internet as a Title II utility. It reminds me that government agencies can still be used to help the common American. The problem remains, though; when will they start helping us again?

'You Can't Make This Up': Comcast Threatens Legal Action Against Net Neutrality Proponents: If FCC chairman Ajit Pai's plan "is enacted, there would be nothing preventing Comcast from simply blocking sites like Comcastroturf.com that are critical of their corporate policies"

'You Can't Make This Up': Comcast Threatens Legal Action Against Net Neutrality Proponents: If FCC chairman Ajit Pai's plan "is enacted, there would be nothing preventing Comcast from simply blocking sites like Comcastroturf.com that are critical of their corporate policies"
'You Can't Make This Up': Comcast Threatens Legal Action Against Net Neutrality Proponents: If FC...

Nope nothing suspicious here.

We just don't want anyone checking on our claims. What? You want to verify? We'll see you in court!!

Comcast

They want a fight. They want to win a legal judgement. AFAIK. Just having comcast in a domain name is not trademark infringement, particularly for satire/political speech, which this clearly is.

Www.slutsofinstagram.com was sent a cease and desist. They didn't realize he was just swedish(?) cartoonist making a comic about a creature named Slutsof in the land of Stagram. They withdrew the claim.

"But telecoms haven't ever tried to silence dissenting opinions in the past"

-Chairman Pai

Comcast is trying to censor our pro-net neutrality website that calls for an investigation into fake FCC comments potentially funded by the cable lobby

Comcast is trying to censor our pro-net neutrality website that calls for an investigation into fake FCC comments potentially funded by the cable lobby

Fight for the Future has received a cease and desist order from Comcast’s lawyers, claiming that Comcastroturf.com - a pro-net neutrality site encouraging Internet users to investigate an astroturfing campaign possibly funded by the cable lobby - violates Comcast’s "valuable intellectual property." The letter threatens legal action if the domain is not transferred to Comcast’s control.

The notice is ironic, in that it’s a perfect example of why we need Title II based net neutrality protections that ban ISPs from blocking or throttling content.

If the FCC’s current proposal is enacted, there would be nothing preventing Comcast from simply censoring this site -- or other sites critical of their corporate policies -- without even bothering with lawyers.

The legal notice can be viewed here. It claims that Comcastroturf.com violates the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act and infringes on Comcast’s trademarks. Of course, these claims are legally baseless, since the site is clearly a form of First Amendment protected political speech and makes no attempt to impersonate Comcast. (See the case "Bosley Medical Institute vs. Kremer" which held that a site critical of a company’s practices could not be considered trademark infringement, or the case Taubman vs. Webfeats, which decided that *sucks.com domain names—in this case taubmansucks.com—were free speech)

Comcastroturf.com criticizes the cable lobby and encourages Internet users to search the Federal Communication Commission (FCC)’s docket to check if a fake comment was submitted using their name and address to attack Title II based net neutrality protections. It has been widely reported that more than 450,000 of these comments have been submitted to the FCC -- and as a result of the site at Comcastroturf.com, Fight for the Future has heard from dozens of people who say that anti-net neutrality comments were submitted using their personal information without their permission. We have connected individuals with Attorneys Generals and have called for the FCC act immediately to investigate this potential fraud.

Companies like Comcast have a long history of funding shady astroturfing operations like the one we are trying to expose with Comcastroturf.com, and also a long history of engaging in censorship. This is exactly why we need net neutrality rules, and why we can’t trust companies like Comcast to just "behave" when they have abused their power time and time again.

Fight for the Future has no intention of taking down Comcastroturf.com, and we would be happy to discuss the matter with Comcast in court.

we need to spread this news all over the net. Never had comcast myself thank god, but i hear the most complains in comcast.

EDIT: wow, thank you for gold whoever sent it, the OP is the one most deserving from bringing this to our attention. Just wanted to make sure we spread this everywhere. Everyone needs to understand what this MEANS as internet users.

Yes, the only thing worse than their service is the fact that they spend part of our cable bill lobbying against our Internet freedom.

EDIT: People can DO something about it. Submit a comment to the FCC to prevent more Comcast abuse here.

Cool, I hope the court finds in your favor.

I don't think comcastroturf is "confusingly similar" to comcast.

Also hope that this new fight is an aid rather than a hindrance to your efforts to raise awareness of net neutrality and Chairman Pai's threat to eliminate it.

Note too... and this is important.

They are not just lobbying in Washington. They lobby more at the local level... your City Council, your Mayor... the people you might see at the movie theater or the diner.... they're all being both 'bought' and also misguided/mis-educated by trolls from Comcast.

They buy them fancy dinners and host parties, take them on trips to the islands, so on and so forth. Comcast actively teaches our government the wrong things about Net Neutrality, the internet in general and just how things work. These folks are lawyers and politicians. They can't so much as even configure their own printer, much less get a grip on overall idea of how the internet works. These are the people that still think 4Chan is a hacker, and don't even get me started on what they think a hacker is.

Want to see the evidence? The gross evidence? Look up your State's "Ethics" website and look for the donations list. It's usually obfuscated and made somewhat difficult to find, but every state has one. It'll make you sick when you see that ALL of your congressmen, all of the senators, everyone in office period has taken a giant wad of cash from Comcast, AT&T, Verizon, etc...

Senators ask FCC why reporter was “manhandled” after net neutrality vote

Senators ask FCC why reporter was “manhandled” after net neutrality vote
This is why

We should also know what the question he was trying to ask was and what the FCC's answer is to that question.

I'd bet it was something to do with them voting against the will of the vast majority of the public comments.

Wow this is the first I'm hearing of this. That's pretty fucked up.

Ancestry.com takes DNA ownership rights from customers and their relatives

Ancestry.com takes DNA ownership rights from customers and their relatives

My ex got gifted one of these services, and she refused to use it out of fear "they would put my DNA in a database and it would be used against me or my kids one day, like the discrimination in GATTACA."

Looks like she was right.

Lets be real though, by the time it gets to that point the government would just be collecting samples from every birth and/or hospitals would probably be selling them

To those who haven't seen it yet I suggest watching Gattaca, it is becoming more and more reality every day.

https://youtu.be/GRZoV8abnNk

The key point here that is missing is how Ancestry's DNA ethnicity test is basically a lie. The science behind it is dubious at best, and is based on some extremely irrational assumptions, such as how the populations tested for their DNA are assumed to have lived in that area for 600 years. Anyone with a knowledge of history knows that this is not sensible.

There is no way to give you a percentage figure of how much ethnicity you have versus another. It simply does not work that way, all you can detect are the presence of genetic markers. So all the people who are redecorating their houses after learning they have surprising ancestry...they are deluded due to the fact that they have been blatantly lied to.

Do not trust DNA ethnicity testing.

Edit: added "ethnicity" in the first sentence.

Edit 2: An example of Ancestry's advertisement, clearly pushing percentages and in a sick way rewriting this man's concept of his own heritage with bad science.

FCC says it was hit by a DDoS attack, but refuses to show any evidence

FCC says it was hit by a DDoS attack, but refuses to show any evidence
FCC says it was hit by a DDoS attack, but refuses to show any evidence

"Our Interweb email comment text server was haxored by a DDoS attack in triplicated l33t IM protocols from a terrorist Mini USB Dongle programmed via CueCat PS/2 data MiniDisc on a stolen BlackBerry provided by Lithuanian XboX controller counterfeiters to North Korean WoW gold farmers, therefore fuck your rights"

Claiming to be hacked is this century's "the dog ate my homework".

Did anyone see Comcast's video "defending" net neutrality this morning on Facebook? They're trying to position themselves as a defender of our rights, and how evil Title II was, stating that they have been behind net neutrality from the start. And I quote...

Our position is the best way to ensure #netneutrality is in Congressional action. And while that process happens, we'll continue to give our customers the protections they expect. Nothing less. Read more: http://comca.st/2p5waxL

EVERY. SINGLE. COMMENT on the page is telling Comcast they're full of shit in glorious fashion.

Step 1. Take a shower.

Step 2. Rethink your thought.

Step 3. Post to /sub/showerthoughts

Step 4. ???

Step 5. Profit.

Canadians 'reluctant' to accept new police powers, prefer privacy online, government find

Canadians 'reluctant' to accept new police powers, prefer privacy online, government find
Canadians 'reluctant' to accept new police powers, prefer privacy online, government find

Did anyone do this survey? This was the one that was a total joke right? That was blatantly written in the least unbiased way possible to favor comments AGAINST privacy and for increased police powers?

If it's the survey I took, the results are pretty impressive, given that the questions were like "Do you think police should have the power to stop digital rapists and child molestors? Yes or no" and crap like that. They did their absolute best to cheat the survey and still lost.

I think that's the one. I wrote a scathing letter to my MP about it and asked her to speak against it. That survey was truly a piece of manipulative crap and it made my stomach turn to just read it.

The run down to privacy online is: Encrypt everything.

PGP (for email), and possibly online backups.

Use communication tools that are encrypted (ex. Signal)

When you need to verify that an item is received confidentially, do so in person.

Stop posting your life online.

Put the phone down, or shut it off. It's ok if people can't contact you for a few hours here and there when you need to go deal with personal stuff, or are out with friends.

Privacy is about choice. And in a world that attacks your privacy, passively arguing about it will do nothing. You must take action and take actions that sends a message to those watching, and that message should clearly state "I take my privacy seriously, and wish my privacy protected".

If all you do is talk but fail to walk that path, the message heard is "I don't really care that much, so whatever" and this, is what people fail to understand.

Additionally, you must educate the people around you. Everyone has something to hide - everyone. It may simply be confidential passwords, or it might be your private fetishes for whatever - I dunno what wierd people are into (rule 34 of the internet would imply anything and everything is fair game).

And you never know where you will end up being the focus of the public eye - it's better to be safe then sorry later.

Cool transcript

Try one of these subthreads