16 ms·
Tom Wheeler Resigns from the FCC
- ryandrake 10y agoGot an error when clicking on that link: "Wired.com is not included in your Comcast Internet Basic package. Click here to upgrade to Comcast Internet Extreme for $9.99 more a month, for access to Wired.com and twenty other premium web sites!"
- toodlebunions 10y agoUgh. Let's hope it never gets that bad.
- wmf 10y agoI realize that's satire, but actual net neutrality violations are much cleverer and mostly won't even be visible to users. For example, it's more likely that Wired would (be forced to) pay Comcast a cut of their ad revenue.
- Shendare 10y agoAnd they wouldn't be outright blocked. They'd just be throttled to 128kbps and limited to only one open TCP connection at a time from that customer.
- gravypod 10y agoThink on the bright side of things. Maybe web developers will need to clean up their crap and not pile on 20mb of JS.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- dabockster 10y ago"Nah sir, that's just jitter coming from the cord coming from your XFinity box into your computer. We only support Comcast Certified™ cables such as MONSTER. Our records indicate that your local Best Buy has them on sale for $69.99(1) for a three inch, but we can sell you to them now for 20% off(2) for being such a good customer." 1) Price quoted by support agent may not be the most up to date price for the requested service item. It is often times significantly cheaper than what our data reflects. 2) Discount does not include shipping, processing, transaction, or technical support fees. Our discounted price might also remain significantly more expensive than similar services offered by third parties in your area.
- russdill 10y agoNah, comcast would just inject ads in order to subsidize companies that refuse to "pay their own way"
- voltagex_ 10y agoExcept it's more insidious than that. In Australia, playing Apple Music doesn't count towards your data cap on Telstra Mobile. Hell, even I switched to Apple Music because my home Internet was out for a week and Spotify lost my offline cached tracks (again).
- matheweis 10y agoThat's funny - I completely missed that your message was satire until I saw the child comments. You see, I had just gotten done seeing this message: "Here’s The Thing With Ad Blockers We get it: Ads aren’t what you’re here for. But ads help us keep the lights on. So, add us to your ad blocker’s whitelist or pay $1 per week for an ad-free version of WIRED. Either way, you are supporting our journalism. We’d really appreciate it."
- ronnier 10y agoThis type of thing has been said for years. I placed a long bet with a friend 7 years ago when he said "in 5 years" we'll have what was described above. Hasn't happened. Won't happen.
- JamilD 10y agoThere's a reason it hasn't happened yet; it's not some sort of deterministic process. Many people worked hard to stop it from happening, and a new FCC chairman could change the status quo.
- nitrogen 10y agoAs another example of a self-defeating prophecy, consider Y2K. There was no major disaster because thousands of people worked incredibly hard to make sure there was no disaster. Sometimes working in technology feels like working stage crew -- the audience doesn't give a crap about your existence until you screw up.
- cbdfghh 10y ago>Hasn't happened. Won't happen. I don't know about five years. But in 25 I don't know if you'll be able to differentiate your computer from your (old, dumb) TV, except you'll have fewer rights
- TheCoelacanth 10y agoOnly because they figured out that it's more profitable to charge the other side, and that has happened, for example, Comcast getting Netflix to pay them to not throttle their traffic.
- paulmd 10y agoDespite Netflix's attempt to glom on to the net neutrality movement, peering agreements are something entirely different and are not going away anytime soon. The early Internet functioned on a gentleman's handshake - you send traffic onto my network, I send traffic onto your network, over time the balance will mostly net out. The system operated on the presumption that everyone's traffic increased more or less in parallel over time and so everybody's infrastructure would be upgraded in parallel. The problem is that Netflix now makes up a 37% share of all internet traffic. The traditional way you do that is a CDN, and Netflix used to do that. But in 2012 Netflix decided to save money by shifting away from CDNs into their own datacenters and purchase up all the transit capacity they could. Basically, become their own ISP that took advantage of the gentleman's agreement (because nobody wants to send any significant volume of traffic to Netflix, they have almost no infrastructure costs of their own, so the inherent detente of traffic volume falls apart). http://qz.com/256586/the-inside-story-of-how-netflix-came-to-pay-comcast-for-internet-traffic/ http://qz.com/256586/the-inside-story-of-how-netflix-came-to... The solution for Netflix was always clear, you either pay peering fees, you pay for a CDN who pays peering fees, or you pay to colocate servers with Comcast so there's no peering involved. The problem is that Netflix doesn't want to pay for their infrastructure. The rules on infrastructure costs for residential players are never, never the same as the rules for industrial users. The fact that you paid for a driveway doesn't mean that you will never have to pay a toll, and heavy users will actually have to pay to remediate the damage to local roads/etc caused by their heavy traffic (used in some states/localities where trucks carrying fracking fluid beat up the roads). Analogously - if you make up 1/3 of all internet traffic and are still growing rapidly, you are going to have to expect to pay for some extra infrastructure along the path your data take, even if it's technically outside the boundary of your datacenter. An analogous real-world "gentleman's agreement" is the postal delivery system (actually it's formalized in the Universal Postal Union treaty). When you mail a package to Germany, the German post office gets paid almost nothing, they essentially deliver that package at a loss. And the same applies when a German mails a package to the US. The assumption is that this roughly nets out. Then you get someone like China who comes along and subsidizes postage as an easy way to boost exports and help their economy, and suddenly things no longer net out. The US government, as the "last mile" provider here, eventually had to file a WTO suit to get them to stop dumping. http://www.wsj.com/articles/china-halts-export-subsidy-program-u-s-says-1460643214 http://www.wsj.com/articles/china-halts-export-subsidy-progr... So no, nothing to see here, what Netflix is doing is not part of Net Neutrality, it's a cheap attempt to glom onto the movement to subsidize their infrastructure costs. The same predatory tactics are roundly rebuffed when they're done with other "neutral networks" like the post, and it's been rightly rebuffed with Netflix too. Comcast never shaped any traffic or refused to allow any customers access - they just didn't upgrade their infrastructure to the level Netflix wanted them to until Netflix paid for it, and those links were congested. I hate having to defend Comcast because they are a shit company with shit customer service, but if you are dropping mass volumes of data onto the network to the extent that infrastructure upgrades are necessary (again: 37% of all internet traffic is Netflix) then yeah, you get to pay for them. Otherwise it's just pushing your Netflix bill onto my internet bill.
- EGreg 10y agoDonald Trump effect - before he is even president, the TPP is dropped as well.
- qwertyuiop924 10y agoDammit. We were so close. So close. Hang in there, guys..
- calebm 10y agoI'm assuming you're referring to getting Net Neutrality? If so, I have a similar sentiment.
- tedunangst 10y agoWait, he's the cable industry shill, right? So this is the best news ever?
- b2600 10y agoEverything is relative. He actually wasn't that bad for being an industry shill. The next commissioner will be worse (for consumers).
- uxp 10y ago> The next commissioner will be worse (for consumers). The next commissioner will probably by worse for consumers based on the historical sentiment of previous commissioners, is what you probably meant. While I absolutely agree, we have no idea what the future holds.
- wmf 10y agoThis was poorly reported. Wheeler was a cable industry shill over three decades ago when cable was an innovative underdog being oppressed by the broadcast establishment.
- shmerl 10y agoHe was the opposite in the recent times. Unlike any of his predecessors, he pushed a tremendous amount of consumer friendly policies and curbed monopolistic abuses of incumbents. He failed to repeal anti-competitive local state laws which ban municipal Internet, but he managed to pass Net Neutrality rules. It would be a pity if all that effort will be dismantled by corrupted commissioners backed by monopolists who hate competition and progress.
- radicaldreamer 10y agoAbsolutely, he pushed a lot of things forward, as well as cracking down on obvious things like bandwidth capped accounts advertised as "unlimited" etc.
- tptacek 10y ago
- ComputerGuru 10y agoThis isn't really news, more of a mere formality. The federal government department heads are all expected to resign or be fired when there's a regime shift in the Oval Office (party change).
- turbohedgehog 10y agoIncorrect. FCC commissioners serve a term and Wheeler's term was up June 30, 2018, so this is an early resignation and opens up a spot for Obama or Trump to fill.
- koolba 10y agoObama is not going to be able to fill any spot that requires Senate confirmation.
- turbohedgehog 10y agoI'm not sure it requires confirmation if it's filling a spot with an incomplete term.
- koolba 10y agoIf congress is in session it'd require confirmation. The exception is a recess appointment but that's not going to happen as they're already keeping congress continuously open to block Garland's recess appointment.
- peterkelly 10y ago... and announces return to Outback Australia
- droopybuns 10y agoI have not been impressed with that person. His behavior is demonstrative of fumbling politicians who don't care how technology works, only that people bend to his will. Good riddance.
- eropple 10y agoIf you would, could you explain how Wheeler didn't care how technology works and what of the policies his FCC enacted were around people "bending to his will"? Please provide cites. Thanks in advance!
- droopybuns 10y agohttps://www.c-span.org/video/?414145-1/fcc-robocall-strike-force-meets-discuss-call-blocking-technology&start=96 https://www.c-span.org/video/?414145-1/fcc-robocall-strike-f... Watch starting at the 3 minute mark. He's over the top & kind of babbling. Compared to IRS tax threat scams, the idea the robocalling is the biggest threat is offensive. (IRS Tax threat scams: https://www.irs.gov/uac/newsroom/dont-be-fooled-phone-scams-continue-to-be-serious-threat-nationwide https://www.irs.gov/uac/newsroom/dont-be-fooled-phone-scams-...)
- eropple 10y agoSo I watched the video, and he comes off a little clumsy, but I'm not following the argument you're making. Can you explain to me how that bolsters either that he does not care how technology works or how he's about people "bending to his will"? (I'm not sure that IRS tax threat scams are FCC jurisdiction and not FTC, and the IRS refers to the FTC and not the FCC on that page, but IANAL.)
- droopybuns 10y agoI'd concede I'm grumpy. The broad swaths he strokes about robocalling being a "scourge" feel, to me, like they are indifferent to the virtual miracle of long distance communication on demand. Here's the deal- nobody wants to do the hard parts of secure communications. They want them to work, for free, and be easy. Those goals are not compatible with "secure" and "fraud-free." So I concede, bend to the his will may be provocative- but I don't see an administrator who is being compassionate to the marketplace realities in his behavior.
- quasse 10y agoI was recently at a conference in DC called "Transforming Communities: Broadband Goals for 2017 and Beyond" which was largely focused on public policy related to the lack of real broadband in America. Gigi Sohn, who is the counselor to the chairman of the FCC, spoke. She was very candid about the position of the FCC and the fact that she was finally able to speak her mind because this was going to be one of her last public appearances as a government official. One thing that stuck me was what she said about Tom[1]: "He actually believes that the consumer, the american people, are his clients. He's said that from the first day and he'll say that the day he leaves. Trust me, he doesn't like any of the companies [laughter]". The loss of the current administration of the FCC (including but not limited to Tom) will be a great loss for the American people in my opinion. The conference was interesting and somewhat sad, because it was planned before the election and probably with the assumption that the new administration would not be totally hostile. Instead of the original direction of "here's what we've done and how we plan to carry these goals forward" it ended up being more of a retrospective on progress that had been made at the federal level that was about to be erased. From the people I saw, there did not seem to be anyone there representing the new administration. [1] https://youtu.be/O5drVTSpH5g?list=LLDlLvM2YAVFtSXvebIrlE0A&t=6509 https://youtu.be/O5drVTSpH5g?list=LLDlLvM2YAVFtSXvebIrlE0A&t...
- JustSomeNobody 10y agoThere were a lot of concerns when Mr Wheeler took over and he greatly surprised everyone. Let's be patient and see what happens next.
- chimeracoder 10y ago> There were a lot of concerns when Mr Wheeler took over and he greatly surprised everyone. Let's be patient and see what happens next. When Wheeler was nominated, there were some concerns that he wouldn't even want to live up to the promises that Obama made. That's a very different situation from being worried that the next chairman will live up to the promises that Trump has made.
- 10y ago
- bluetwo 10y agoOne of the problems with Net Neutrality is that techies (us) and the media have both had a hard time explaining it clearly. Meanwhile those opposed have been able to come up with analogies that while false and misleading, are easily understood. What is the best way to explain the concept that can be quickly understood by those that are non-technical?
- gallerdude 10y ago"Imagine if your electricity company could decide that you pay more for some appliances than others."
- kiallmacinnes 10y agoThis actually happens in Ireland for electric "Storage Heaters", which charge up overnight when electricity is cheap and plentiful, but it's not charged at the usual night rate... (This may actually no longer be a thing, storage heaters aren't used all that often anymore..)
- makomk 10y agoAt least in the mainland UK, I think those kind of plans were replaced by Economy 7/10 tariffs that offer the same rate for all off-peak electricity usage regardless of what it's used for a long time ago.
- SomeStupidPoint 10y agoI mean, the real problem is that we have a private utility. I think things like net neutrality can have market solutions if we divorce the last mile operators (to become a utility) from customer ISPs, who merely operate a contract with various backbone networks to connect their clients to servers they want. With last mile paid by taxes, ISPs are only dealing with the cost of backbone transit rates, where there is vibrant competition (and the market seems healthy). This competition to make a good transit deal (to get a cut from clients) is healthy as well, and is how much of the world operates. I think that switching off the US rent-seeking model to something like that would be a long-term solution to issues like net neutrality. Change the incentives to change the behavior. The real explanation is we should use the free market to solve our problems, and government for the portion where a market cant properly operate (ie, the last-mile netwotk).
- schmatz 10y agoI had a chance to meet Tom Wheeler to discuss net neutrality in the summer of 2014. It was coming off of a bad press cycle for him (John Oliver calling him a dingo), so I didn't know what to expect. He was extremely reasonable and very receptive to the needs of the tech community and small businesses. I came away from the meeting pleasantly surprised and have been happy with his actions during his tenure. Sad to see him go.
- shawnfratis2 10y agoWhat I'm curious to know, is how will any of this truly affect users who aren't necessarily streaming/torrenting/big bandwidth users, like those who focus on education, research, computer sciences, among others. Not meaning to sound too vague, but speaking for myself, most of the Internet-related things I depend on don't necessarily involve constant high-bandwidth usage (like online gaming, for example). If the internet gets completely throttled I want to know what I have to look forward to.
- subway 10y agoThrottling is far from the only sort of shenanigans ISPs like to play on their subscribers. A very cynical view might be that any (potentially innovative/interesting) network protocols that aren't easily productized will suffer from deprioritization to the point of becoming unusable. The ISP's response will be that you have no business doing that over a home connection, and that you need to pay 10x for a Business class connection.