6 ms·

Taking comments into account is different than simply having an opt-in vote which translates to who's e-petition can go the most viral (and let's not even get i

Taking comments into account is different than simply having an opt-in vote which translates to who's e-petition can go the most viral (and let's not even get into fraud). And this is very much a good thing. In this case, even if I might agree with having some issue with net neutrality being repealed - I think most people have no clue at all what's going on and are voting based on fear mongering and sensationalism. For instance, what percent of people could explain why Pai thinks repealing net neutrality is a good idea? Most seem to think he's just some Trump appointee selling out the highest bidder. In fact he's been arguing for a path of deregulation for years, even before he was appointed to the FCC by Obama 5 years ago. I tend to debate against the masses on this issue simply because I think we're acting like a mob instead of a rational collective. And even if we may be getting it right on this issue, mob mentality is something that should never be condoned - even if you side with them on an issue.

gbrown 9y ago
> what percent of people could explain why Pai thinks repealing net neutrality is a good idea? Well, he says things like "increasing competition", and talks about "burdensome regulations", but I honestly don't believe he thinks repealing net neutrality will benefit consumers. I don't care who appointed him, to me he's an obvious, lying shill.
- mrgordon 9y ago
  Agreed. See my comment next to yours also. The minority party appoints 2/5 of the FCC so Obama was just appointing Mitch McConnell’s pick (but being Obama he gets all the blame for it!)
mrgordon 9y ago
I agree with gbrown. Pai’s statements are so untruthful and nonsensical that I can’t figure out why he thinks it could help even after reading many comments by him. His most clear argument is that it will somehow increase investments into ISP infrastructure (citing, I think, what happened in Portugal) while he simultaneously says we have no way to know what effects repealing it will have until we try it. Meanwhile a million people have shared the images of the bucketed plans from Portugal charging $9.99 extra for social networking and things like that. The man is totally full of BS. As for your comment that he was an Obama appointee, he was actually selected by Mitch McConnell but I know it’s a common trope to blame everything on Obama. “Though an Obama appointee, Pai does not share Obama’s progressive views and is by no means someone Obama would have chosen to lead the commission. Rather, there’s a tradition of letting the minority party pick two commissioners, since the majority can only legally hold three seats; in nominating Pai — at the recommendation of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, a Republican — Obama was sticking to that tradition.”
- rhino369 9y ago
  All your reasons for impugning his integrity boil down to you disagree with him. That is narrow minded. Pai (and many economists) believe a double sided market could increase potential profits which would incentive investment so ISPs could provide a "fast lane." That isn't "somehow." They thought about and have a reason for believing what they believe. You can disagree but that doesn't make them hitler.
  - mrgordon 9y ago
    There is no fast lane except by creating tons and tons of slow lanes. There are many ways to incentivize even our existing ISPs to invest more but he doesn’t pursue most of those. Meanwhile the actual architects of the Internet point out that he is trying to reclassify a telecommunications service as a data service (despite pretty clear definitions that make it a telecom service) in order to remove most of the FCC’s regulatory powers https://techcrunch.com/2017/11/25/fcc-doubles-down-on-its-dead-wrong-definition-of-how-the-internet-works/ https://techcrunch.com/2017/11/25/fcc-doubles-down-on-its-de... Whether he actually believes less regulation will help the average person or not, he is taking slimy approaches to force his opinion through (over loud complaints from Tim Berners Lee and basically every major internet player that isn’t an ISP)
  - mrgordon 9y ago
    No actually very few of my reasons for pointing out his lack of integrity have to do with simple disagreement on policy. I would try not to label people as narrow minded based on one short comment on the Internet. This community normally does a better job of not immediately devolving into personal attacks especially when you didn’t even ask what my reasons for disliking him are. Read a much more in depth analysis in one of my other comments of his transformation of the FCC into a partisan agency, his attacks on poor people through the Lifeline program, as well as his close ties to Verizon which create a direct conflict of interest: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15781535 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15781535 Not to even mention the post that started this thread about how Pai has accepted over a million fake comments on net neutrality from the telecom/ISP industries’ astroturfer lobbyists while refusing to provide enough information for NY to look into the matter (or investigating themselves) There are people playing devil’s advocate for Pai’s views but how many people actually seem to strongly want these changes? Have you met any who don’t work for Comcast, Verizon, etc.? I honestly have not

gbrown 9y ago

> what percent of people could explain why Pai thinks repealing net neutrality is a good idea? Well, he says things like "increasing competition", and talks about "burdensome regulations", but I honestly don't believe he thinks repealing net neutrality will benefit consumers. I don't care who appointed him, to me he's an obvious, lying shill.

mrgordon 9y ago
Agreed. See my comment next to yours also. The minority party appoints 2/5 of the FCC so Obama was just appointing Mitch McConnell’s pick (but being Obama he gets all the blame for it!)

mrgordon 9y ago

I agree with gbrown. Pai’s statements are so untruthful and nonsensical that I can’t figure out why he thinks it could help even after reading many comments by him. His most clear argument is that it will somehow increase investments into ISP infrastructure (citing, I think, what happened in Portugal) while he simultaneously says we have no way to know what effects repealing it will have until we try it. Meanwhile a million people have shared the images of the bucketed plans from Portugal charging $9.99 extra for social networking and things like that. The man is totally full of BS. As for your comment that he was an Obama appointee, he was actually selected by Mitch McConnell but I know it’s a common trope to blame everything on Obama. “Though an Obama appointee, Pai does not share Obama’s progressive views and is by no means someone Obama would have chosen to lead the commission. Rather, there’s a tradition of letting the minority party pick two commissioners, since the majority can only legally hold three seats; in nominating Pai — at the recommendation of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, a Republican — Obama was sticking to that tradition.”

rhino369 9y ago
All your reasons for impugning his integrity boil down to you disagree with him. That is narrow minded. Pai (and many economists) believe a double sided market could increase potential profits which would incentive investment so ISPs could provide a "fast lane." That isn't "somehow." They thought about and have a reason for believing what they believe. You can disagree but that doesn't make them hitler.
- mrgordon 9y ago
  There is no fast lane except by creating tons and tons of slow lanes. There are many ways to incentivize even our existing ISPs to invest more but he doesn’t pursue most of those. Meanwhile the actual architects of the Internet point out that he is trying to reclassify a telecommunications service as a data service (despite pretty clear definitions that make it a telecom service) in order to remove most of the FCC’s regulatory powers https://techcrunch.com/2017/11/25/fcc-doubles-down-on-its-dead-wrong-definition-of-how-the-internet-works/ https://techcrunch.com/2017/11/25/fcc-doubles-down-on-its-de... Whether he actually believes less regulation will help the average person or not, he is taking slimy approaches to force his opinion through (over loud complaints from Tim Berners Lee and basically every major internet player that isn’t an ISP)
- mrgordon 9y ago
  No actually very few of my reasons for pointing out his lack of integrity have to do with simple disagreement on policy. I would try not to label people as narrow minded based on one short comment on the Internet. This community normally does a better job of not immediately devolving into personal attacks especially when you didn’t even ask what my reasons for disliking him are. Read a much more in depth analysis in one of my other comments of his transformation of the FCC into a partisan agency, his attacks on poor people through the Lifeline program, as well as his close ties to Verizon which create a direct conflict of interest: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15781535 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15781535 Not to even mention the post that started this thread about how Pai has accepted over a million fake comments on net neutrality from the telecom/ISP industries’ astroturfer lobbyists while refusing to provide enough information for NY to look into the matter (or investigating themselves) There are people playing devil’s advocate for Pai’s views but how many people actually seem to strongly want these changes? Have you met any who don’t work for Comcast, Verizon, etc.? I honestly have not