7 ms·

FCC Chairman Ajit Pai canceled his appearance at CES because of death threats

58 points by moonka 9y ago

f00_ 9y ago
So as far as net neutrality goes: it's very vague, in favor of companies like Netflix that want cheap peering(?) at the expense of ISPs (which are acquiring each other, getting huge similar to before Bell was broken up). It's a corporation vs corporation fight Why aren't ISPs public utilities? These technologies were developed using tax payer money at DARPA, or in government sanctioned monopolies like Bell Labs I would be interested to hear more about the relationship between South Korea's subsidy of internet and the rise of starcraft and the high tech service economy there
1_2__4 9y ago
I have a hard time believing all visible public figures in government don’t get death threats literally every day on average, in just the normal course of doing business, at least electronically. This is a pathetically weak excuse.
MollyR 9y ago
I can't say I like Pai, but I find death threats even worse.
- Afforess 9y ago
  I don't really agree. I'm not one to readily or easily condone violence, but this falls into the grey area, like "punching nazis". If threats of violence are the only tools left to us to protect values, then it is better we use violence, then we lose the values. This sounds really terrible, and not all values are worth violence, but it's probably true - internet freedom is a lot to lose in 2018. The best sort of way to think about this is to imagine Ajit Pai as some sort of Feudal Lord appointed head of the Internet by a King. In this sort of scenario, it would be nearly a no brainer to threaten violence - who the hell cares about some Lord in some distant comfy Castle, protected by an even more distant King? But no - we live in a Democracy! One with an elected President by the popular vote, the will of the people, and ... er...wait... Violence sucks. Death threats are bad. But sometimes the other side is even worse. We need to not cache "violence is bad" and actually stop and think first. I don't actually think Ajit Pai deserves death. But he probably does deserve to feel not-safe. If he is unhappy with that, he can always quit.
  - hux_ 9y ago
    Right. Now how do I send you a death threat?
  - aaron-lebo 9y ago
    You only make him into a victim/martyr and delegitimize your side when you give into stuff like this. You don't like the result of the democratic process, fix it. What happens when the other side decides threatening violence is justified because they can make analogies too and worse they feel under threat? What happens when people who don't have a limit go from threat to action?
    - denkmoon 9y ago
      >What happens when people who don't have a limit go from threat to action? This is already happening, just with greed instead of direct violence. They both have the effect of causing sub-par life quality for the victims.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    - Pica_soO 9y ago
      Wrong, if you dont like the outcome of the democratic process, you buy the system and fix it so it becomes unable to produce outcomes you dont like.
  - geodel 9y ago
    I think the best sort of way to think is that world is interesting place where rules valley geeks like get repealed, politicians they support lose election, and the most violent thing they are able to do is probably demolishing a mission style burrito.
  - jshaqaw 9y ago
    Net neutrality is lovely but if people think this is the biggest problem we have coming out of the Trump administration then they really need to consider their priorities.
- paul7986 9y ago
  Is this Fake news to make those for net neutrality look like looney tunes?
- sandworm101 9y ago
  Such threats have to be taken with a grain of salt. Daniel Tosh famously gets thousands of death threats, all from fans. Anyone who has run a website or had a clip go viral has received such threats. Many a cop or prosecutor has still gone to work after receiving much more personal and specific threats. I interviewed for an internship once where I was asked point blank whether I would be able to work the day after some angry person screamed such a threat at me in court. For a controversial federal official to take pathetic online threats as a real danger, absent any actual evidence, is at best a convenient reason to avoid an appearance. At worst, it's plain cowardice.
  - mrguyorama 9y ago
    While I understand and agree with you, I feel it's important to note that death threats are never okay, even if (and especially if) "everyone gets them"
arduanika 9y ago
also breaking: Internet cancels appearance at FCC hearings because of death threats.
- thisacctforreal 9y ago
  How about threats-of-butt-probes-before-next-flight? I'm pretty sure that one is more likely. (edit: I interpreted "Internet" as in "Internet users", but I now see it was a joke for the Internet itself)
sitkack 9y ago
The 8th thing? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LFhT6H6pRWg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LFhT6H6pRWg I think it is more likely that he didn't want to face criticism. I am going to have to call cite.
- jancsika 9y ago
  From that video: "Recently there's been quite a bit of conversation about my plan to restore internet freedom." Tom Wheeler certainly wasn't a paragon of courage and clarity before he started to feel the pressure to reclassify ISPs under Title II. But before that, I sure don't remember him taking his opponents' own language like "internet freedom" and brazenly applying it to his own position. Did he ever do anything like that? Edit: added apostrophe
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - sitkack 9y ago
    I love how he trivializes and mocks the citizenship's use of the internet as a funhouse of mirrors for blubs.
username223 9y ago
Weak. The person or people issuing death threats are idiots, but my guess is that Pai seized upon a probably-not-credible threat as an excuse to avoid being utterly humiliated in a public forum. Accountability is not his style.
- prepend 9y ago
  It definitely could be. But FCC commissioner doesn’t get a security detail. And if you go to local police they aren’t going to fly people around to protect you, they’ll just tell you to lie low. In his situation, would you risk your life at a big public event?
  - wmf 9y ago
    Maybe he should hire private security and send the bill to Comcast.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
itronitron 9y ago
So with the repeal of net neutrality the FCC can't afford to have Pai video-conference in?
- downrightmike 9y ago
  He could use Cisco's Telepresence with sure mute technology: https://vimeo.com/53993957 https://vimeo.com/53993957
countbackula 9y ago
While I don't doubt the legitimacy of the death threats, I can't help but to think Pai is taking advantage of the situation in order to fashion himself as a martyr figure, especially in the eyes of Trump's hyper-reactive base.
- caminante 9y ago
  You agree that people are trying to kill him, yet by not attending (and not getting killed) he's a "martyr?" Your argument doesn't make sense.
  - FrozenTuna 9y ago
    According to dictionary.com, a martyr doesn't strictly have to die. A martyr "endures great suffering on behalf of any belief, principle, or cause". His argument makes perfect sense and I agree with it.
    - caminante 9y ago
      No. You're "cherry picking." Why did you not quote the entire definition you cited? Here it is. It clearly mentions death as the relative level of suffering. Full definition: >"a person who is put to death or endures great suffering on behalf of any belief, principle, or cause" [0] What you quoted: >"or endures great suffering on behalf of any belief, principle, or cause" [0] http://www.dictionary.com/browse/martyr http://www.dictionary.com/browse/martyr
- moonka 9y ago
  I'm no fan of his, but he has been getting a lot of hate lately. After the signs[1] at his home, I imagine he's a little rattled. [1] http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/fcc-chairman-ajit-pais-family-harassed-over-proposed-net-neutrality-rollback/article/2641854 http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/fcc-chairman-ajit-pais-fam...
  - tw04 9y ago
    When you're a public official who intentionally and gleefully ignores the people you're paid to represent, I guess you shouldn't be surprised when those people get extremely angry with you. You chose to ignore them to enrich yourself at the detriment of an entire nation... And now you want us to feel sorry that someone posted a sign in front of your house? HAH!
dayaz36 9y ago
There was also a bomb threat when voting on net neutrality, but he definitely didn't miss that.
NotSammyHagar 9y ago
Threats to hurt someone are always out of line. Did you read that the recent source of the swatting attack that killed the poor innocent person walking out of his house also is apparently the guy who called in the bomb threat before the vote for network neutrality at the fcc [1]. There are sadly people out there who could hurt any public official. He and everyone should be safe, but I also think he doesn't want to face a very very angry public about his joyous destruction of n.n. [1] https://krebsonsecurity.com/2017/12/kansas-man-killed-in-swatting-attack/ https://krebsonsecurity.com/2017/12/kansas-man-killed-in-swa...
- Zarath 9y ago
  Are they really though? Violence, and the threat of it, is literally what keeps society together at all, and what enforces all of our laws. Kind of sad to read this thread and see everyone sitting on their high horse thinking they are amazing people for being non-violent while this guy gets away with what is probably worse than murder. When did humanity ever reach such a pathetic state where we let people just walk over us like this? You think Reddit posts and Hackernews posts are going to ever change anything? These people are probably just laughing at us twiddling our thumbs pretending to actually do something.
ixacto 9y ago
Death threats are Very convenient for him. Makes him look persecuted while he sells out to comcast. Judging by the number of fake net neutrality comments submitted, I bet my deceased grandfather called in a couple death threats too.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
jwalgenbach 9y ago
Not in favor of death threats, but if you are a public official and you do something so unpopular without a clear moral agenda (such as equal rights in the 60s) that it results in the vast majority of the people you ought to represent being so outraged that some threaten your life, maybe you ought to reexamine your policy choices.
- CodeWriter23 9y ago
  Vast majority of your friends and like-minded people does not imply a “vast majority”. The sad reality is the actual vast majority of people don’t have a clue what Net Neutrality means, or what is implied by its repeal.

58 points by moonka 9y ago

f00_ 9y ago

So as far as net neutrality goes: it's very vague, in favor of companies like Netflix that want cheap peering(?) at the expense of ISPs (which are acquiring each other, getting huge similar to before Bell was broken up). It's a corporation vs corporation fight Why aren't ISPs public utilities? These technologies were developed using tax payer money at DARPA, or in government sanctioned monopolies like Bell Labs I would be interested to hear more about the relationship between South Korea's subsidy of internet and the rise of starcraft and the high tech service economy there

1_2__4 9y ago

I have a hard time believing all visible public figures in government don’t get death threats literally every day on average, in just the normal course of doing business, at least electronically. This is a pathetically weak excuse.

MollyR 9y ago

I can't say I like Pai, but I find death threats even worse.

Afforess 9y ago
I don't really agree. I'm not one to readily or easily condone violence, but this falls into the grey area, like "punching nazis". If threats of violence are the only tools left to us to protect values, then it is better we use violence, then we lose the values. This sounds really terrible, and not all values are worth violence, but it's probably true - internet freedom is a lot to lose in 2018. The best sort of way to think about this is to imagine Ajit Pai as some sort of Feudal Lord appointed head of the Internet by a King. In this sort of scenario, it would be nearly a no brainer to threaten violence - who the hell cares about some Lord in some distant comfy Castle, protected by an even more distant King? But no - we live in a Democracy! One with an elected President by the popular vote, the will of the people, and ... er...wait... Violence sucks. Death threats are bad. But sometimes the other side is even worse. We need to not cache "violence is bad" and actually stop and think first. I don't actually think Ajit Pai deserves death. But he probably does deserve to feel not-safe. If he is unhappy with that, he can always quit.
- hux_ 9y ago
  Right. Now how do I send you a death threat?
- aaron-lebo 9y ago
  You only make him into a victim/martyr and delegitimize your side when you give into stuff like this. You don't like the result of the democratic process, fix it. What happens when the other side decides threatening violence is justified because they can make analogies too and worse they feel under threat? What happens when people who don't have a limit go from threat to action?
  - denkmoon 9y ago
    >What happens when people who don't have a limit go from threat to action? This is already happening, just with greed instead of direct violence. They both have the effect of causing sub-par life quality for the victims.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - Pica_soO 9y ago
    Wrong, if you dont like the outcome of the democratic process, you buy the system and fix it so it becomes unable to produce outcomes you dont like.
- geodel 9y ago
  I think the best sort of way to think is that world is interesting place where rules valley geeks like get repealed, politicians they support lose election, and the most violent thing they are able to do is probably demolishing a mission style burrito.
- jshaqaw 9y ago
  Net neutrality is lovely but if people think this is the biggest problem we have coming out of the Trump administration then they really need to consider their priorities.
paul7986 9y ago
Is this Fake news to make those for net neutrality look like looney tunes?
sandworm101 9y ago
Such threats have to be taken with a grain of salt. Daniel Tosh famously gets thousands of death threats, all from fans. Anyone who has run a website or had a clip go viral has received such threats. Many a cop or prosecutor has still gone to work after receiving much more personal and specific threats. I interviewed for an internship once where I was asked point blank whether I would be able to work the day after some angry person screamed such a threat at me in court. For a controversial federal official to take pathetic online threats as a real danger, absent any actual evidence, is at best a convenient reason to avoid an appearance. At worst, it's plain cowardice.
- mrguyorama 9y ago
  While I understand and agree with you, I feel it's important to note that death threats are never okay, even if (and especially if) "everyone gets them"

arduanika 9y ago

also breaking: Internet cancels appearance at FCC hearings because of death threats.

thisacctforreal 9y ago
How about threats-of-butt-probes-before-next-flight? I'm pretty sure that one is more likely. (edit: I interpreted "Internet" as in "Internet users", but I now see it was a joke for the Internet itself)

sitkack 9y ago

The 8th thing? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LFhT6H6pRWg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LFhT6H6pRWg I think it is more likely that he didn't want to face criticism. I am going to have to call cite.

jancsika 9y ago
From that video: "Recently there's been quite a bit of conversation about my plan to restore internet freedom." Tom Wheeler certainly wasn't a paragon of courage and clarity before he started to feel the pressure to reclassify ISPs under Title II. But before that, I sure don't remember him taking his opponents' own language like "internet freedom" and brazenly applying it to his own position. Did he ever do anything like that? Edit: added apostrophe
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- sitkack 9y ago
  I love how he trivializes and mocks the citizenship's use of the internet as a funhouse of mirrors for blubs.

username223 9y ago

Weak. The person or people issuing death threats are idiots, but my guess is that Pai seized upon a probably-not-credible threat as an excuse to avoid being utterly humiliated in a public forum. Accountability is not his style.

prepend 9y ago
It definitely could be. But FCC commissioner doesn’t get a security detail. And if you go to local police they aren’t going to fly people around to protect you, they’ll just tell you to lie low. In his situation, would you risk your life at a big public event?
- wmf 9y ago
  Maybe he should hire private security and send the bill to Comcast.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

itronitron 9y ago

So with the repeal of net neutrality the FCC can't afford to have Pai video-conference in?

downrightmike 9y ago
He could use Cisco's Telepresence with sure mute technology: https://vimeo.com/53993957 https://vimeo.com/53993957

countbackula 9y ago

While I don't doubt the legitimacy of the death threats, I can't help but to think Pai is taking advantage of the situation in order to fashion himself as a martyr figure, especially in the eyes of Trump's hyper-reactive base.

caminante 9y ago
You agree that people are trying to kill him, yet by not attending (and not getting killed) he's a "martyr?" Your argument doesn't make sense.
- FrozenTuna 9y ago
  According to dictionary.com, a martyr doesn't strictly have to die. A martyr "endures great suffering on behalf of any belief, principle, or cause". His argument makes perfect sense and I agree with it.
  - caminante 9y ago
    No. You're "cherry picking." Why did you not quote the entire definition you cited? Here it is. It clearly mentions death as the relative level of suffering. Full definition: >"a person who is put to death or endures great suffering on behalf of any belief, principle, or cause" [0] What you quoted: >"or endures great suffering on behalf of any belief, principle, or cause" [0] http://www.dictionary.com/browse/martyr http://www.dictionary.com/browse/martyr
moonka 9y ago
I'm no fan of his, but he has been getting a lot of hate lately. After the signs[1] at his home, I imagine he's a little rattled. [1] http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/fcc-chairman-ajit-pais-family-harassed-over-proposed-net-neutrality-rollback/article/2641854 http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/fcc-chairman-ajit-pais-fam...
- tw04 9y ago
  When you're a public official who intentionally and gleefully ignores the people you're paid to represent, I guess you shouldn't be surprised when those people get extremely angry with you. You chose to ignore them to enrich yourself at the detriment of an entire nation... And now you want us to feel sorry that someone posted a sign in front of your house? HAH!

dayaz36 9y ago

There was also a bomb threat when voting on net neutrality, but he definitely didn't miss that.

NotSammyHagar 9y ago

Threats to hurt someone are always out of line. Did you read that the recent source of the swatting attack that killed the poor innocent person walking out of his house also is apparently the guy who called in the bomb threat before the vote for network neutrality at the fcc [1]. There are sadly people out there who could hurt any public official. He and everyone should be safe, but I also think he doesn't want to face a very very angry public about his joyous destruction of n.n. [1] https://krebsonsecurity.com/2017/12/kansas-man-killed-in-swatting-attack/ https://krebsonsecurity.com/2017/12/kansas-man-killed-in-swa...

Zarath 9y ago
Are they really though? Violence, and the threat of it, is literally what keeps society together at all, and what enforces all of our laws. Kind of sad to read this thread and see everyone sitting on their high horse thinking they are amazing people for being non-violent while this guy gets away with what is probably worse than murder. When did humanity ever reach such a pathetic state where we let people just walk over us like this? You think Reddit posts and Hackernews posts are going to ever change anything? These people are probably just laughing at us twiddling our thumbs pretending to actually do something.

ixacto 9y ago

Death threats are Very convenient for him. Makes him look persecuted while he sells out to comcast. Judging by the number of fake net neutrality comments submitted, I bet my deceased grandfather called in a couple death threats too.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

jwalgenbach 9y ago

Not in favor of death threats, but if you are a public official and you do something so unpopular without a clear moral agenda (such as equal rights in the 60s) that it results in the vast majority of the people you ought to represent being so outraged that some threaten your life, maybe you ought to reexamine your policy choices.

CodeWriter23 9y ago
Vast majority of your friends and like-minded people does not imply a “vast majority”. The sad reality is the actual vast majority of people don’t have a clue what Net Neutrality means, or what is implied by its repeal.