[opendtv] Re: TV Technology: FCC Comment Filing System Flooded
- From: Craig Birkmaier <brewmastercraig@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 13 May 2017 11:31:48 -0400
On May 12, 2017, at 9:23 PM, Manfredi, Albert E
<albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Craig Birkmaier wrote:
We know for fact that the FCC was inundated with comments in favor
of the Open Internet Order in 2014.
And we read many of them too.
Yup. It was easy as you could read one response and know exactly what the other
799,999 identical responses said.
We know that hundreds of thousands of these comments were
identical and machine generated by bots.
No, you proclaimed this.
No Bert. This was thoroughly documented i 2014, just as the analysts
documented similar tactics by their opposition this week to the current NPRM.
There was never any denying that the very vast majority of LEGITIMATE
comments, last time around, were in favor of a neutrality mandate. I even
read some that were opposed to neutrality, but were clearly written by
clueless slogan-spouting yahoos. People who were claiming, in short, that
they wanted the Internet to be neutral RATHER THAN for it to be "controlled
by the government." But no one disputed the result, last time around.
We all want the Internet to be neutral.
But the poor suckers who supported the Open Internet Order were duped. They got
heavy handed regulation that immediately started to pick winners and losers.
And now they believe that going back to "neutrality" is going to make the
Internet less neutral.
This is to be expected, as schools no longer teach critical thinking skills.
They now teach how to protect yourself from speech that you do not agree with.
But now, when the opposition starts to use the SAME spaming
techniques, the media is having a fit!
It doesn't matter what "the media" say, Craig. All that matters is that this
time too, a huge number of people responded, and the FCC saw fit to pretend
that the DOS attack was not from comments being posted.
Of course it matters what the media says Bert. The Snowflakes are waiting for
their marching orders. They need John Oliver to tell them what to say...
Rather than to admit that it was those who favored repealing a neutrality
mandate who benefitted from disrupting the process.
It was the Russians Bert!
;-)
In short, all that matters, Craig, is that the vast majority of people are
aware that a very few special interests threaten neutrality, and they want a
guarantee that this won't be allowed to happen. Both times, same result. I
ask again: What made Chairman Pai think anything had changed?
You are 100% correct Bert.
The problem is that BOTH SIDES are making this argument. And both sides are
CORRECT (kinda).
That's what happens when politicians and regulators choose winners and losers.
Each side plays off the other.
The article Monty posted yesterday about the review of the fundamentally
How could you possibly know whether the responses are in favor
of or against the NPRM Bert?
One, you can read for yourself the reactions to his blog. 100% opposed to his
repealing of a neutrality mandate. Okay, not a huge sample, but 100%? That
says something.
It's a freaking BLOG Bert. What else would you expect?
Why don't you look at the blogs from the opposing points of view?
Apparently it is only possible to have one point of view in this debate.
And two more clues. I posted a comment by Chairman Pai today, plus his
attempt to hide who was trying to disrupt this process, both of which make it
pretty clear which way the winds are blowing, Craig.
FAKE NEWS.
If responses had been any different, you know he wouldn't try to bolster his
position using the response of 19 government-run ISPs! Imagine that. (And
parenthetically, of course municipal ISPs wouldn't need to be regulated by a
neutrality mandate. Trivially easy to solve that problem.)
Only you could make this argument.
The municipal systems were on very solid ground, stating the obvious:
The Open Internet Order is forcing them to expend significant resources to feed
the regulatory bureaucracy. There is no valid reason for this.
The article that Monty posted yesterday about re-opening the FTC vs AT&T ruling
by the 9th Circuit is critical to this discussion.
The REALITY is that EVERYONE agrees about the fundamentals of Net Neutrality,
despite the fact that there is NO legal definition - something that Congress
create. The issue is how to enforce violations of whatever Net neutrality
means. ANd the reality is that there were no significant problems with the
Internet under the FTC, but that real competitive issues have come into play
after the FCC started regulating the portion of the Internet that it "touches."
We will live through this Bert.
Bottom line Bert has NO FAITH in competition.
Bottom line, Craig has no concept of what competition is. Craig thinks that
MVPDs compete more than enough. What's more, Craig thinks that his little
streaming boxes, designed specifically to foster collusion, which restrict
the owners to only a handful of pay-TV sites, are perfectly okay.
This from the guy who told us that it was perfectly OK for the broadcast
networks to block their content if it was being accessed by Google TV.
FAKE NEUTRALITY!
It's called competition Bert. There are stories in the news now that Apple and
Amazon may have reached an agreement for Amazon to offer a Prime app for Apple
TV.
The marketplace deals with these issues Bert.
Yes we have way too much crony capitalism, and EVERYONE has the right to
question whether they are being screwed when corporations and politicians
collude to reduce competition.
But the audacity for YOU to say that special interests could control the
Internet, when special interests have complete control over almost everything
on TV borders on insanity.
Well, I'll grant him that his little boxes, designed for collusion, can
easily by avoided. Not so easy to avoid non-neutral ISP behavior, on the
other hand.
Except it never happened...
Regards
Craig
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
Other related posts:
