FCC to repeal Net Neutrality Bill

[Ifreann]

They are. Executing the law in a manner that upsets you isn't the same as not executing the law at all.

No. They are not executing the law. They are doing the opposite.

Exactly what law do you believe the FCC is failing to execute?

[Vassenor]

They are. Executing the law in a manner that upsets you isn't the same as not executing the law at all.

No. They are not executing the law. They are doing the opposite.

In what way?

[Soldati Senza Confini]

The 1990s internet was just the way it was because we didn't have powerful computers.

You cannot sit here and tell me seriously that you think a shitty Pentium 333MHz can do the same things on a network than a Core i7, can you?

And that's before you even start on the actual networking tech.

I could write an entire book on this honestly from what I've heard and the woes people had to deal with back in the day

Just the mention of a networking hub and 10/100mbps ports on them tho *cringes*

[The Flutterlands]

No. They are not executing the law. They are doing the opposite.

Exactly what law do you believe the FCC is failing to execute?

By ultimately saying there should be no laws regulating ISPs and thus leaving us at the mercy of their relentless greed and monetization of the internet EA style...

[Telconi]

Exactly what law do you believe the FCC is failing to execute?

By ultimately saying there should be no laws regulating ISPs and thus leaving us at the mercy of their relentless greed and monetization of the internet EA style...

And I'm sure you can cite the law that says that shouldn't happen right?

[Soldati Senza Confini]

They are. Executing the law in a manner that upsets you isn't the same as not executing the law at all.

No. They are not executing the law. They are doing the opposite.

There is no law relevant to the net neutrality issue.

The whole net neutrality thing was simply an FCC administrative decision that could have been, and has been, easily reversed.

This was nothing more than the FCC saying "well, now the internet is no longer under Title II", which I have my reservations and I really think an update to the Telecom Act of 1996 would be a better idea.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Exactly what law do you believe the FCC is failing to execute?

By ultimately saying there should be no laws regulating ISPs and thus leaving us at the mercy of their relentless greed and monetization of the internet EA style...

That's not what they did.

[The Flutterlands]

No. They are not executing the law. They are doing the opposite.

There is no law relevant to the net neutrality issue.

The whole net neutrality thing was simply an FCC administrative decision that could have been, and has been, easily reversed.

This was nothing more than the FCC saying "well, now the internet is under Title II", which I have my reservations and I really think an update to the Telecom Act of 1996 would be a better idea.

Doesn't matter. Oh and what gives the FCC the authority to prempt states anyway? They cant say they lack the authority to regulate ISPs while in the same breath claiming that they have the authority to prevent states from regulating ISPs! That is a legal paradox, right?

[Soldati Senza Confini]

There is no law relevant to the net neutrality issue.

The whole net neutrality thing was simply an FCC administrative decision that could have been, and has been, easily reversed.

This was nothing more than the FCC saying "well, now the internet is under Title II", which I have my reservations and I really think an update to the Telecom Act of 1996 would be a better idea.

Doesn't matter. Oh and what gives the FCC the authority to prempt states anyway? They cant say they lack the authority to regulate ISPs while in the same breath claiming that they have the authority to prevent states from regulating ISPs! That is a legal paradox, right?

The FCC is a federal agency, they can preempt the states from doing stuff in so far as it falls within the agency's purview. Federal trumps State.

They didn't say they lack the authority to regulate ISPs, what Pai said was that the switch to Title II was overly broad (which is kinda true, you do need a balanced law that won't end up becoming a tool to bludgeon each side depending on the political whim of the FCC and the current administration in power if you want long-term stability in net neutrality).

[The Flutterlands]

Doesn't matter. Oh and what gives the FCC the authority to prempt states anyway? They cant say they lack the authority to regulate ISPs while in the same breath claiming that they have the authority to prevent states from regulating ISPs! That is a legal paradox, right?

The FCC is a federal agency, they can preempt the states from doing stuff in so far as it falls within the agency's purview. Federal trumps State.

They didn't say they lack the authority to regulate ISPs, what Pai said was that the switch to Title II was overly broad (which is kinda true, you do need a balanced law that won't end up becoming a tool to bludgeon each side depending on the political whim of the FCC and the current administration in power if you want long-term stability in net neutrality).

Ajit Pai called Net Neutrality federal overreach. He claims that the FCC shouldn't regulate while at the same time saying states can't regulate. He is basically saying that ISPs, just five big companies in the whole country, should not be regulated at all. That fucker thinks that ISPs should do what they want, when they want at the expense of over 300 million people. He is a corporate shill and the worse of Trump's appointees.

[Telconi]

The FCC is a federal agency, they can preempt the states from doing stuff in so far as it falls within the agency's purview. Federal trumps State.

They didn't say they lack the authority to regulate ISPs, what Pai said was that the switch to Title II was overly broad (which is kinda true, you do need a balanced law that won't end up becoming a tool to bludgeon each side depending on the political whim of the FCC and the current administration in power if you want long-term stability in net neutrality).

Ajit Pai called Net Neutrality federal overreach. He claims that the FCC shouldn't regulate while at the same time saying states can't regulate. He is basically saying that ISPs, just five big companies in the whole country, should not be regulated at all. That fucker thinks that ISPs should do what they want, when they want at the expense of over 300 million people. He is a corporate shill and the worse of Trump's appointees.

The two concepts aren't contradictions.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Ajit Pai called Net Neutrality federal overreach. He claims that the FCC shouldn't regulate while at the same time saying states can't regulate. He is basically saying that ISPs, just five big companies in the whole country, should not be regulated at all. That fucker thinks that ISPs should do what they want, when they want at the expense of over 300 million people. He is a corporate shill and the worse of Trump's appointees.

That makes Ajit Pai an idiot, considering he's running a fucking federal agency, if he said it.

I can agree with you that Pai is a piece of shit, that doesn't mean there weren't issues with the implementation by Wheeler of Net Neutrality, namely that it was a vague administrative decision with no long-term value and a lot of issues. Which is why I am more in support of pushing things to congress and have them draft either a net neutrality bill or an update of the Telecom Act (which is needed anyways).

[The Flutterlands]

Ajit Pai called Net Neutrality federal overreach. He claims that the FCC shouldn't regulate while at the same time saying states can't regulate. He is basically saying that ISPs, just five big companies in the whole country, should not be regulated at all. That fucker thinks that ISPs should do what they want, when they want at the expense of over 300 million people. He is a corporate shill and the worse of Trump's appointees.

The two concepts aren't contradictions.

Saying I can't regulate and you can't regulate ether are legal contradictions

[Telconi]

The two concepts aren't contradictions.

Saying I can't regulate and you can't regulate ether are legal contradictions

I cannot fly. You also cannot fly. Look at the cool lack of contradictions here.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

The two concepts aren't contradictions.

Saying I can't regulate and you can't regulate ether are legal contradictions

It really isn't a contradiction tho.

It's a shitty decision, depending on which side you fall on the debate, but it's not contradictory.

[The Flutterlands]

Saying I can't regulate and you can't regulate ether are legal contradictions

I cannot fly. You also cannot fly. Look at the cool lack of contradictions here.

You are not getting it. By getting rid of Title II they have given up their authority to regulate ISPs. Therefore, where does their authority to keep states from regulating ISPs come from?

[Soldati Senza Confini]

I cannot fly. You also cannot fly. Look at the cool lack of contradictions here.

You are not getting it. By getting rid of Title II they have given up their authority to regulate ISPs. Therefore, where does their authority to keep states from regulating ISPs come from?

From the fact that they are a federal agency and can tell the states what to do.

And they haven't given up their authority to regulate ISPs.

[The Flutterlands]

You are not getting it. By getting rid of Title II they have given up their authority to regulate ISPs. Therefore, where does their authority to keep states from regulating ISPs come from?

From the fact that they are a federal agency and can tell the states what to do.

And they haven't given up their authority to regulate ISPs.

Yes they have. They can't regulate ISPs without title II.

[Telconi]

From the fact that they are a federal agency and can tell the states what to do.

And they haven't given up their authority to regulate ISPs.

Yes they have. They can't regulate ISPs without title II.

TIL Title II of TCA1934 is the only law ever...

[Soldati Senza Confini]

From the fact that they are a federal agency and can tell the states what to do.

And they haven't given up their authority to regulate ISPs.

Yes they have. They can't regulate ISPs without title II.

Yes, they can.

[The Flutterlands]

They can't and should not make "no regulation" in of itself a regulation...

[Telconi]

They can't and should not make "no regulation" in of itself a regulation...

That's just like, your opinion man...

[Soldati Senza Confini]

They can't and should not make "no regulation" in of itself a regulation...

Except this isn't what happened.

They only switched ISPs from being regulated under Title II back to Title I. That's not "no regulation".

[Ifreann]

Exactly what law do you believe the FCC is failing to execute?

By ultimately saying there should be no laws regulating ISPs and thus leaving us at the mercy of their relentless greed and monetization of the internet EA style...

Exactly what law do you believe the FCC is failing to execute?

Repeated for emphasis. Tell me the law they are not executing.

---

The FCC is a federal agency, they can preempt the states from doing stuff in so far as it falls within the agency's purview. Federal trumps State.

They didn't say they lack the authority to regulate ISPs, what Pai said was that the switch to Title II was overly broad (which is kinda true, you do need a balanced law that won't end up becoming a tool to bludgeon each side depending on the political whim of the FCC and the current administration in power if you want long-term stability in net neutrality).

Ajit Pai called Net Neutrality federal overreach. He claims that the FCC shouldn't regulate while at the same time saying states can't regulate. He is basically saying that ISPs, just five big companies in the whole country, should not be regulated at all. That fucker thinks that ISPs should do what they want, when they want at the expense of over 300 million people. He is a corporate shill and the worse of Trump's appointees.

Ajit Pai, as you have been told before, was appointed by Obama on the recommendation of McConnell. Trump promoted him.

[The Flutterlands]

They can't and should not make "no regulation" in of itself a regulation...

Except this isn't what happened.

They only switched ISPs from being regulated under Title II back to Title I. That's not "no regulation".

The FCC can't regulate title I communications. Only the FTC can and they are fucking useless on this issue

https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/arti ... rality-law

California should go full force on this. Tell the ISP lobbyist to fuck themselves. Tell the FCC to fuck themselves, and if the Courts side with the FCC tell them to go fuck themselves. There should be net neutrality now and there should be net neutrality forever even if the Federal Government declares Civil War on the defiant states.