Call your representitives about Net Neutrality!

[Blank]

People of E! I highly encourage you to write and call your representatives to say you support Title Two Net Neutrality rules. The FCC Chairman is looking to roll back those rules within the next few weeks. If that happens, you could be denied access to this site by your ISP, or ISPs could ask Elliquiy to pay extra for a "fast lane" which would in turn run our site into the ground with its limited funds.

Again, I implore you to let your voice be heard as citizens of the internet. It is only in your best interest as a consumer and member of the internet to have Net Neutrality rules.

Thanks for reading and hope you have a wonderful day.

[Verasaille]

Adding this as a warning, again, call your COngress people today.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/21/technology/fcc-net-neutrality.html?_r=0

[Scribbles]

I'm not American but I've been keeping an eye on this whole Net Neutrality debacle and I wanted to ask, is this basically the citizenry against the politicians (again)?

From my perspective, it appears as if both democrat and republic politicians are keeping awfully quiet about this. And while Trump may be the one in charge, it was actually Obama that opened the doorway for this by appointing Ajit Pai. Meanwhile, on the ground, it seems that people from both sides are against this.

For what it's worth, I hope the overwhelming pushback succeeds against the December vote...

[RedRose]

As a foreigner I'm forever fascinated by the concept of calling your politicians. I would never think of it, and they would never pick up. I'd probably be speaking to some secretary of a secretary who would tell me this isn't possible.

[Lustful Bride]

As a foreigner I'm forever fascinated by the concept of calling your politicians. I would never think of it, and they would never pick up. I'd probably be speaking to some secretary of a secretary who would tell me this isn't possible.

I personally enjoy it, gives us a more direct measure of letting our representatives know how mad we are. >:)

[Verasaille]

I'm not American but I've been keeping an eye on this whole Net Neutrality debacle and I wanted to ask, is this basically the citizenry against the politicians (again)?

From my perspective, it appears as if both democrat and republic politicians are keeping awfully quiet about this. And while Trump may be the one in charge, it was actually Obama that opened the doorway for this by appointing Ajit Pai. Meanwhile, on the ground, it seems that people from both sides are against this.

For what it's worth, I hope the overwhelming pushback succeeds against the December vote...

I am not sure where you got your information, but Obama was the one who urged the net neutrality issue as well as all the Democrats. Ajit Pai is a Republican, and he is operating under Donald Trump. I found this article, maybe it helps to explain:

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/11/22/565962178/fccs-pai-heavy-handed-net-neutrality-rules-are-stifling-the-internet

[Verasaille]

I found this article as well, where it states that Trump appointed Ajit Pai.

http://www.thisisinsider.com/net-neutrality-fcc-ajit-pai-trump-plan-meaning-2017-11

[Blythe]

I am not sure where you got your information, but Obama was the one who urged the net neutrality issue as well as all the Democrats. Ajit Pai is a Republican, and he is operating under Donald Trump. I found this article, maybe it helps to explain:

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/11/22/565962178/fccs-pai-heavy-handed-net-neutrality-rules-are-stifling-the-internet

I think Scribbles might be referring to the fact that Ajit Pai has served in various positions in the FCC before he became Chairman, and he was indeed nominated by Obama in 2011 (and confirmed in 2012) to the commission for a Repulican Party seat on it. He was specifically recommended to Obama for a place in the commission by Mitch McConnell. Ajit Pai has a history of working with the FCC before he specifically became chairman, after all.

Trump, however, is the one who specifically nominated him for chairman this year, and he was confirmed for that in October.

[Blythe]

Ah, and since I can't edit--that being said, Ajit Pai as the chairman is pretty awful. He's probably one of the biggest threats to net neutrality we face here in the States. Am fairly sure Vekseid's mentioned Ajit Pai here on E before as being quite the threat in this regard. Ajit Pai and Jeff Sessions, I think.

[TheGlyphstone]

As a foreigner I'm forever fascinated by the concept of calling your politicians. I would never think of it, and they would never pick up. I'd probably be speaking to some secretary of a secretary who would tell me this isn't possible.

Above the local/state level, I doubt many of our politicians actually pick up the phone either. They've got answering machines and email boxes to get constituent feedback.

[Missy]

Some employ people to handle replies though. My "rep" gave me a bullshit reply on it last time so I decided I would make it clear it's a deal breaker this time, hopefuly I'm not the only one in my area.

[Lustful Bride]

Some employ people to handle replies though. My "rep" gave me a bullshit reply on it last time so I decided I would make it clear it's a deal breaker this time, hopefuly I'm not the only one in my area.

If we all make more than enough noise they will listen.

[Missy]

I'm hopeful that people will get pissed off and stay pissed long enough to see a lot of the current fucks find their way to the axe stump.


Although really problems like this will never go away as long as money is such a central aspect of politics.

[Lustful Bride]

Although really problems like this will never go away as long as money is such a central aspect of politics.

True, but if we work hard we can mitigate it enough so that it is less of a problem. Corruption will always be there, like a cancer, but we can cut enough of it out to stop the major damage that it does. We just have to keep an eye out for it and never be afraid to face it, no matter what side it comes from, or how high.

[Trieste]

Net Neutrality is not one of my chosen battles* but I've been keeping an eye on it. It does seem to be another of those cases of politicians against the populace - or, rather, of donors against the populace. Because, really, that's what matters to politicians with several tough races coming up: money.

Above the local/state level, I doubt many of our politicians actually pick up the phone either. They've got answering machines and email boxes to get constituent feedback.

My Congressman will answer if he's in the office and you ask for him. You have to know to ask for the Congressman directly, and he has to be in the office. But he'll talk to you. He compared himself to Einstein during his last town hall, so I always greet him with the nickname 'Einstein' when I talk to him. It always goes something like,

"Hey, Einstein, how's tricks?"
*long pause* "How can I help you, Mrs. Kazyth?"
"Well, I was wondering what your statement is on ..."

My state is a one-party consent state with recordings, so I record the calls and post his statements to social media. I fucking love being a pain in his ass, the knuckle-dragger.

So yeah, you can get in the metaphorical faces of even national reps. And my state reps answer the phones themselves. The governor doesn't, but that's because he's too busy hanging out with Sheriff Joe (Arpaio).

*

It's not that I don't care about it; it's just that my Indivisible chapter has working groups on issues and asks each person to step up on a max of two issues, plus whatever need-to-move-now protests get distributed. We've found that in the beginning, we were all trying to care about all of the issues and we all got burned out. We have a solid number of people working on Net Neutrality, though, and we're one of the few local Indivisible chapters that actually freaking knows what it is. Mostly due to the fact that my chapter has active members under the age of 70.

[Missy]

True, but if we work hard we can mitigate it enough so that it is less of a problem. Corruption will always be there, like a cancer, but we can cut enough of it out to stop the major damage that it does. We just have to keep an eye out for it and never be afraid to face it, no matter what side it comes from, or how high.

Most citizens are too complacent for this to become a reality. Most don't even know how they're being disenfranchised or they don't have enough direct contact with it to care.

[Scribbles]

I think Scribbles might be referring to the fact that Ajit Pai has served in various positions in the FCC before he became Chairman, and he was indeed nominated by Obama in 2011 (and confirmed in 2012) to the commission for a Repulican Party seat on it. He was specifically recommended to Obama for a place in the commission by Mitch McConnell. Ajit Pai has a history of working with the FCC before he specifically became chairman, after all.

Trump, however, is the one who specifically nominated him for chairman this year, and he was confirmed for that in October.

Yup, that's what I was referring to, but I was unaware that Obama wasn't the one who personally appointed him as chair; that fact was apparently glossed over in the media I followed. I hate how the narrative can change with the slightest missed detail...

[Trieste]

Most citizens are too complacent for this to become a reality. Most don't even know how they're being disenfranchised or they don't have enough direct contact with it to care.

Are you talking about in the US? Because if so, this statement is a bit too broad-brush. There are manymanymany areas where voter registration is in full swing and where outreach is at a fever pitch. We probably won’t see Aussie-style compulsory voting anytime soon but there is more than one area where volunteers are fighting like hell to get voter turnout up and to get voter education more accessible, and the stats show it’s working.

Yup, that's what I was referring to, but I was unaware that Obama wasn't the one who personally appointed him as chair; that fact was apparently glossed over in the media I followed. I hate how the narrative can change with the slightest missed detail...

To be fair, after DeVos managed to get through, I feel like a lot of the media coverage of nominees has fallen off.

[Lustful Bride]

Most citizens are too complacent for this to become a reality. Most don't even know how they're being disenfranchised or they don't have enough direct contact with it to care.

The sudden swift in power to put more Dems in charge, and the recent election of multiple LGBTQA+ candidates speaks to the contrary :)

Are you talking about in the US? Because if so, this statement is a bit too broad-brush. There are manymanymany areas where voter registration is in full swing and where outreach is at a fever pitch. We probably won’t see Aussie-style compulsory voting anytime soon but there is more than one area where volunteers are fighting like hell to get voter turnout up and to get voter education more accessible, and the stats show it’s working.

+1

Though I don't think Compulsory voting might work for the US. Each country is different and what works for one may have the opposite results in another. As with many things people suggest should happen in the US (Lower drinking age, allowing red light districts, etc) I always feel that people are too hasty in wanting to apply other laws to a place which has developed differently for most of its history. Its like wanting to put a square peg into a round hole because it fits well into another hole. :P

[Trigon]

I think its about time that I chime in: There appears to be no evidence that the backlash against Ajit Pai's attempts to repeal it is having any effect. Furthermore, the FCC voting process already appears to be compromised with fake anti-net neutrality comments.


Will it get through? Most likely the answer appears to be a firm yes. As an expat living abroad, this is just too painful to watch, though I will not suffer any consequences from this. The rest of the world has weaker net neutrality laws to be sure, but there is doesn't appear to be the same risk of corporate monopolization/url] that you would otherwise have in the United States. Probably since out here there are other mechanisms and consumer protection laws that would otherwise prevent such an unequal playing field in the first place...

I feel like I'm on a lifeboat, watching the Titanic.

[Verasaille]

As much as the liberals are trying to wake people up, the people who support removing net neutrality are going to regret ignoring this.

https://www.facebook.com/HuffPost/videos/559134087764076/

[Trieste]

As much as the liberals are trying to wake people up, the people who support removing net neutrality are going to regret ignoring this.

https://www.facebook.com/HuffPost/videos/559134087764076/

*tries to watch video on internet connection that's been slow as fuck the last several days, sighs as video pauses to buffer several times every second*

Right, because it's the internet companies that are suffering.  >:(

[Verasaille]

If regulations are in effect keeping the little start up companies from entering the market, then the only way out of this pickle is to set up state sponsored internet like utilities, where the big companies are made to provide service to the rural areas that do not currently have it. This would of course make government involved in the industry, which a lot of people do not want. It would be better if everyone could get internet speeds of the highest broadband, but that takes time, as the big companies have to expand in areas that do not have a lot of people.

So to those of you who don't get good service have to make that choice. You either live in a more populated area where there is a high speed connection possible, or you pay the price for expensive satellite coverage, if it is available. It all comes down to the choices we make in where we live. And yes I know sometimes you have no choice but to live where you can afford to live.

Right now I wish there was a way I could move to Canada!

[Trieste]

Yeah, I live in a metro area that is renowned for really good internet service, and mine still sucks a fair amount. The consumer choice in the US right now is not 'not suck' or 'suck', it's 'sucks' and 'sucks more'. I would say that the Internet really needs to be a public utility at this point, except that there is so much corruption in utility management around here that I'm afraid it would make things worse, not better. We literally have people from the corporation commission being indicted on corruption and bribery charges, and in another county citizens are suing their local utility company for fraudulent rate hikes (approved by that same corporation commission, I might add).

The corruption in general is tiresome and needs to go. I feel like the US just assumes that corruption is something that happens as a side effect of government and business - but it isn't. I, for one, would like better.

[Verasaille]

I know it varies around the country. Unfortunately I think that corruption is a human condition we have to constantly fight. Very sad to think that humanity has sunk so low to be this way. Not that everyone is corrupt, but even as Christians have to admit, in the bible it even says we all have sinned. There is no such thing as innocence, except maybe in the very young. That does not mean we should ignore it. We should all try to be better.

On the other hand, I do believe that everyone is capable of acting in a morally responsible and compassionate way. It is a matter of choice. I know I am a long ways from perfect! Sorry if I am offending anyone, not intended.

As for internet service, I have it fairly good, but I have to pay dearly for it. If the prices go up, I will be forced to drop it. As will many others. It would be bad for business to cut so much of the population out of the internet, but if the idea of Capitalism is to take advantage of need and provide for that and profit from it, then I guess they will find out how many people actually 'need' internet service.

[Trigon]

The corruption in general is tiresome and needs to go. I feel like the US just assumes that corruption is something that happens as a side effect of government and business - but it isn't. I, for one, would like better.

It's worse then that; in the USA the corruption has long since been legalized. Every other nation on the planet has to at least go through the trouble of hiding it or pretending it doesn't exist, including even very repressive regimes like China. But in the USA, many will just shrug and take it as the normal state of affairs. A very odd sentiment to have if I say so myself.

[Trieste]

Agreed. Like, corruption is a human condition but that doesn't mean that you don't fight it with things like transparency laws, anti-corruption statutes, and stiff penalties for being found corrupt. The US (not you specifically, Verasaille, just in general) seems to be like "oh well can't help it so ... *gestures vaguely*"

Bruh

It doesn't have to be that way.

[Trigon]

Welp, for what its worth I have pulled the plug on Verizon and start relying on sim cards moving forward.

[Lustful Bride]

It's worse then that; in the USA the corruption has long since been legalized. Every other nation on the planet has to at least go through the trouble of hiding it or pretending it doesn't exist, including even very repressive regimes like China. But in the USA, many will just shrug and take it as the normal state of affairs. A very odd sentiment to have if I say so myself.

Personally I like that about my country. Yes we know corruption is real, we at least have the guts to admit it. :P

[Trigon]

Personally I like that about my country. Yes we know corruption is real, we at least have the guts to admit it. :P

Awareness of corruption is definitely not unique to Americans. The key difference is the attitude taken towards it... the American government is unique in that it has nothing to fear from its own citizenry by openly displaying its corruption.

[Blank]

Calling is more important than you think. When you call, you get added to a number of people who raised concern over an issue.  If enough people call, they will have to start to weigh the value of that public opinion. 

"If x number of people have called me, my people care about this issue, I should fight for this issue." or if they are more selfishly driven "If I don't do this, I risk not being reelected. I had best do this."

Sure, there is a risk that it may not amount to anything. But the difference of the cost of doing nothing vs. doing something is rather small.  At the bare minimum, you could go here and write a short letter to your reps expressing your concern. Hit send, then carry on your way.  Or go to www.gofccyourself.com and write a short complaint about how you are for Net Neutrality and Title 2 common carrier for ISPs.  These two things can take a total of 5 to 10 minutes.

Heck, if enough people contact their reps, they might think to start putting in laws so we don't have to have this fight every few months.

[Trigon]

Heck, if enough people contact their reps, they might think to start putting in laws so we don't have to have this fight every few months.

The events of the past couple of weeks would suggest otherwise. At this point I would say that the Net Neutrality repeal in the USA is a foregone conclusion.

[Scribbles]

The events of the past couple of weeks would suggest otherwise. At this point I would say that the Net Neutrality repeal in the USA is a foregone conclusion.

Not quite yet, hopefully, as apparently some are already planning to drag the FCC to court should they go ahead and dismantle Net Neutrality.

On the bright side, in such an instance, it sounds as if the FCC would be at a disadvantage as they'd have to convince the courts that they had legitimate reasons for changing the rules, and everyone knows they don't. After all, an overwhelming majority of Americans are FOR Net Neutrality, all of Ajit Pai's previous concerns (before Net Neutrality) were proven to be unfounded, and his current concerns with Net Neutrality have been debunked by multiple people with absolutely zero response from the FCC (all they do is parrot their already countered points or cherry pick criticisms which play them as the victim). On the other hand, it's probably going to be a colossal waste of money and time, even if the public win.

[Trigon]

Is that the grand strategy now, relying on the courts to save your skins from the corporate juggernaut? Need I remind you that this is the same court system that also voted in favour of Citizens United and also allowed Trump's Muslim ban to be reinstated...

[Scribbles]

Is that the grand strategy now, relying on the courts to save your skins from the corporate juggernaut? Need I remind you that this is the same court system that also voted in favour of Citizens United and also allowed Trump's Muslim ban to be reinstated...

I didn't realize the courts were so contentious to some; they did rule in favour of same-sex marriages after all and upheld Net Neutrality when previously contested. I'm just stating that I don't believe Americans are going to shrug their shoulders and say, "Oh well," should the FCC repeal Net Neutrality. I thought that might bring a bit of hope or maybe a smile rather than despair. I'm really not sure such a path should be ignored just because there is some dislike for previous judgements, better to expend all available options to save Net Neutrality.

[Trigon]

I didn't realize the courts were so contentious to some; they did rule in favour of same-sex marriages after all and upheld Net Neutrality when previously contested. I'm just stating that I don't believe Americans are going to shrug their shoulders and say, "Oh well," should the FCC repeal Net Neutrality. I thought that might bring a bit of hope or maybe a smile rather than despair. I'm really not sure such a path should be ignored just because there is some dislike for previous judgements, better to expend all available options to save Net Neutrality.

Yes it is true there is wide ranging support for the principle of net neutrality. However the following problems are:

-A profound lack of understanding as to how deep the corruption and rot actually extends
-The refusal to believe that their nation is no longer a democracy in any meaningful sense.
-Generalised political apathy by the American population at large.

My point was that the strategy of relying on the courts is desperate at best, and carries no guarantees.

But then, I'm not in the USA anymore, so feel free to draw your own conclusions. The jet-stream of bullshit emanating from the FCC ultimately won't have any affect on me in any case...

[Trigon]

*effect

[Trieste]

As much as the Citizen's United ruling sucked, the federal rep did step into the SCOTUS and offer up an argument that ended up leading to the ability of Congress to ban books. Not the smartest move, starshine. I was listening to those arguments again the other day on an episode of More Perfect and reminded of how ham-handed the attorney ended up looking ...

(I have a lot of sympathy. While I was doing testimony training in grad school, my instructor got me to imply that not everyone has DNA or some such ludicrous thing during rehearsal testimony. You ever want to feel tied up in circles, you should try training as an expert witness.)

[elone]

From my congressman, Rob Whittman, R-VA

This man is the worst of the worst. A trump Republican and then some. I write him scathing emails all the time. He usually answers with something that has nothing to do with what I wrote about. I am still waiting on a reply to his stance on this boondoggle that gives it all up to AT&T, Verizon, and the like. Cannot believe he gets re-elected time and time again in a landslide. That is what happens when there is gerrymandering and live in a rural area of the south.

Dear Friend-

As you may know, on November 21, 2017 the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman, Ajit Pai, circulated a draft of his Restoring Internet Freedom Order to his fellow Commissioners. This order would repeal recent internet regulations set during the end of the Obama Administration and would go back to a “light-touch” regulatory style that the U.S. has used for decades.

In the 1990s, President Clinton and a Republican Congress made it our national policy to preserve a free market for the Internet “unfettered by Federal or State regulation.” This was our national policy through the remainder of the Clinton Administration, Bush Administration, and a majority of the Obama Administration. However, two years ago, the FCC changed its course through a party line vote. They agreed upon implementing what we call Title II regulations on the internet. However, in the two years since that FCC decision, broadband network investment dropped more than 5.6%—the first time a decline has happened outside of a recession. I believe if we were to continue with Title II regulations, Virginians who live in rural areas with limited internet may have to wait years to get more broadband.

I believe Chairman Pai’s Restoring Internet Freedom Order would return us to the successful, market-based framework under which the Internet developed and flourished and would preserve Internet freedom for all Americans. The decision would relinquish much of the FCC’s regulatory power back to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) who have historically been responsible for monitoring anti-competitive business practices.

Additionally, the FCC should move to require increased transparency from internet service providers; this would allow for start-ups and small businesses to have the appropriate information they need to innovate and blossom while simultaneously allowing consumers to purchase the best plans offered. I believe that the world-wide-web is inherently not a place to be dictated and policed by lawyers and bureaucrats, rather it should be open and easy for anyone who wants access.

Makes it sound like it is a good thing, of course that is how he gets re elected. It is always, "get government out of our lives" unless, of course it benefits his party.

[Valerian]

Rallies in support of Net Neutrality are being organized across the U.S. over the next few days.  There's a tool here where you can find a rally near you, or organize one if there isn't one already.

[Backdraft]

Wanna know the scariest part about this? Guess what EMS, fire and police officers use to locate your house when you call 911.

Google Maps.

Guess what EMS providers use as a quick reference guide when they come across an illness or injury they haven't seen in a while.

Google.

Guess what firefighters use when they don't have access to an ERG for hazardous materials incidents.

Google and Poison Control.

Wanna know how police get access to criminal databases?

The internet.

Wanna know what responders use when they can't use Google Maps?

An out-of-date atlas that might not even have your road on it. Or worse, they ask for directions from dispatch or passers-by. Do you really want your firefighters trying to figure out which field was "Ol' Bessie's favorite grazing spot" so they know when to turn right?

Wanna know what EMS providers do when they don't have fast access to their protocols via an app, or don't know what their patient is presenting with?

They consult online medical control—tying up a physician at the hospital for several minutes at a time, per patient, per call. Guess what happens if two medics call at the same time and there's only one free doctor?

"Hold, please..."

Wanna know what happens if a HAZMAT team or fire department doesn't have access to an ERG or the internet? They call dispatch. Wanna know what they're going to do?

Google it.

Dissolution of Net Neutrality isn't just a consumer issue, it could cost lives.

[FarFetched]

Aaaand it’s now dead.

Petitions do nothing for bribed chairmen in a corporation’s pocket. As expected, nothing short of a gun to their head will make them do anything not in their own interest.

[Lustful Bride]

Aaaand it’s now dead.

Petitions do nothing for bribed chairmen in a corporation’s pocket. As expected, nothing short of a gun to their head will make them do anything not in their own interest.

Taking it abit too far there.

But it is not over. We keep a stiff upper lip and keep protesting, keep petitioning, keep fighting.

[FarFetched]

I apologize- I don’t usually get this aggravated online (nor talk politics). I am very certain I’m not wrong, though. Something more than petitions are required. At this point, the ways the US can resolve this is limited. Either congress can step in (which would be difficult), we could find a way to fire FCC chairmen based on their actions or public dissatisfaction, or we could make Net Neutrality the only financially viable option ISPs have.

[Valerian]

There are several lawsuits already poised to hit the courts about this, at least.  With any luck something good will happen there.

[TheGlyphstone]

We loat a battle, but there are plenty more to fight and our victory record so far is pretty solid.

[CaptainNexus616]

I'm currently aware of approximately 18 states have banded together to sue the FCC. That's within just the last few hours. Imagine a day from now.

[Laughing Hyena]

And we have been calling congress like crazy. They have 60 days to repeal the vote by the FCC as well.

[Trieste]

And for current intents and purposes, Alabama turned into a swing state overnight. That's going to fluster Congress.

[Lustful Bride]

And we have been calling congress like crazy. They have 60 days to repeal the vote by the FCC as well.

+1 If they want to be a pain in our ass with this, then we sure as hell will be a major pain in their ass. >:)

[CaptainNexus616]

+1 If they want to be a pain in our ass with this, then we sure as hell will be a major pain in their ass. >:)

We'll be the pain in entire freaking body if we must.

[Arianna]

Just something useful in my opinion.

[Oniya]

Well, at least our AG is on the ball.  *grumbles something about a certain PA legislator and his tendency to robo-call during dinner*

[Ket]

Well, at least our AG is on the ball.  *grumbles something about a certain PA legislator and his tendency to robo-call during dinner*

At least you're not in the used car salesman's district.

[Aov]

Sorry for being so pessimistic, but as someone that has been watching this slow-moving train-wreck form a couple thousand miles away, the end of Net Neutrality in America seems to be more and more certain as time goes by.

The vote passes through FCC, despite public outcry. States plan to sue FCC, but I'm willing to believe FCC and its "investors" have more than enough power to walk around these lawsuits. And it makes the state representatives look like they care about their people. Everyone has what they want (except for the citizens, of course).

[Lustful Bride]

Sorry for being so pessimistic, but as someone that has been watching this slow-moving train-wreck form a couple thousand miles away, the end of Net Neutrality in America seems to be more and more certain as time goes by.

The vote passes through FCC, despite public outcry. States plan to sue FCC, but I'm willing to believe FCC and its "investors" have more than enough power to walk around these lawsuits. And it makes the state representatives look like they care about their people. Everyone has what they want (except for the citizens, of course).

Be that as it may, its better to lose with some real effort than just to flop over and be stepped on.

[Valerian]

It may not be safe to assume that the FCC will have bottomless resources for a prolonged court battle, either, considering how many established federal agencies the current administration is determined to defund / eliminate.  In any case, many states are also looking at passing state laws that will enforce net neutrality within their borders.  Pai claims the FCC could overrule such laws, but that's been tested in federal court before and the judges have disagreed.

[Trieste]

Yeah, the courts tend to allow states to impose stricter regulations piecemeal; it's when the states try to allow something that the feds have banned that courts tend to side with the federal government, at least in many cases. Marijuana and gay marriage notwithstanding.

[Skynet]

Since it is not entirely impossible that ISPs may slowdown or even outright block Elliquiy, how prudent would it be to copy-paste our stories and find alternate means of contacting long-time writing partners and friends?

I take it that the biggest websites will be fine, but I'd rather plan ahead than wake up one day and discover I have to pay $20 to $30 more a month just to log onto here, if not outright unable to get on here at all.

[Skynet]

Clarification: by copy-paste our stories, I mean save them into Word Documents and the like to ensure we still can access the work we poured blood, sweat, and tears into?

[DominantPoet]

If you're worried, back up the stories you wish to do so into word documents regardless. You can always update the backups with each new post periodically. While I think it's unlikely Elliquiy would be blocked on purpose or throttled or anything like that, should anything come to pass due to your IP's actions, at least you'll have the backups none the less.

At this point, I think the bigger worry is paying to access high profile sites and the like and having your speeds throttled unless you fork over more money for priority access each month. Even though it was repealed, there's a lot happening right now, everyone trying to figure out who can do what, who can sue who, the politicians possibly attempting to overturn the FCC decision, all of that. When the first IP starts doing some shit, however, is when people will see more clearly what they should be worried about, I would think.

[Arianna]

When the first IP starts doing some shit, however, is when people will see more clearly what they should be worried about, I would think.

This.
I think the Reps were using this whole idea as their biggest argument: nothing happened prior to NetNeutrality, why would it now? One can only hope, until all is said and done, that we won't get to prove them wrong.

[Sethala]

I may be showing my technical ineptitude here, but if an ISP starts blocking traffic to a website, wouldn't it be possible to circumvent it with some sort of VPN or proxy server?  (Assuming they're not throttling/blocking connection to said VPN, at least.)

[Oniya]

I may be showing my technical ineptitude here, but if an ISP starts blocking traffic to a website, wouldn't it be possible to circumvent it with some sort of VPN or proxy server?  (Assuming they're not throttling/blocking connection to said VPN, at least.)

Technical ineptitude is what will keep most people from exploring alternatives.  (I'm honestly not sure, myself, how VPN usage would affect a deliberate throttling attempt.)  The end result is that those 'average users' are going to either pay more for 'premium access' or not use the sites in question.  One gets more money in the ISP's pocket, the other ends up starving out the website that the ISP has chosen to throttle (or drives people to 'ISP-approved' sites).

More technical users could probably find some way around it, and would then have to decide how to use that power.

[FarFetched]

CS major here. A VPN wouldn’t do anything I’m afraid. If they throttled all incoming traffic, it would include VPNs, making them even slower than normal connections.

[Oniya]

CS major here. A VPN wouldn’t do anything I’m afraid. If they throttled all incoming traffic, it would include VPNs, making them even slower than normal connections.

But what if it was a single site (or multiple particular sites) being throttled?  Like suppose (as in the past), that Comcast had an issue with Netflix.  Comcast throttles data from Netflix, customers complain, Netflix caves, speeds go back up.  (Source here.  Would using a VPN make a difference there?

[Sethala]

Side question:  Net Neutrality rules made it so companies had to treat all data equally, so they can't throttle speed to Netflix but keep fast speed to Youtube, for instance.  But companies could throttle all data, such as after hitting a certain speed cap (such as many prepaid cell phone providers offering so many gigs of data at 4G speed and throttling speed after that), right?  As long as they didn't let something through the throttled speed?

[Oniya]

I believe plans like that already exist.  I know I've seen a couple of people talk about how relatives complain about bandwidth usage without understanding what features actually use the most bandwidth.

[FarFetched]

But what if it was a single site (or multiple particular sites) being throttled?  Like suppose (as in the past), that Comcast had an issue with Netflix.  Comcast throttles data from Netflix, customers complain, Netflix caves, speeds go back up.  (Source here.  Would using a VPN make a difference there?

Unfortunately no. All a VPN does is mask the source of a connection by going through an intermediary computer. ISPs won’t know that you in specific are connecting to a throttled site, but it won’t change the connection speed, since the ISPs would be slowing down all traffic regardless of source.

[TheGlyphstone]

That was going to be my guess. A VPN affects/masks your origin point, but it doesn't change your destination point, and throttling happens at the destination.

[Lustful Bride]

So I don't know if its true but apparently Canada is now having its own issue of removing Net Neutrality. Can anyone confirm or explain?

http://allthecanadianpolitics.tumblr.com/post/168700807704/bell-cineplex-rogers-and-shaw-are-trying-to#notes

[Lustful Bride]

There is still hope! Congress is acting! Look!

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/4585

[Arianna]

There is still hope! Congress is acting! Look!

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/4585

This is awesome  :o

[Sara Nilsson]

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/01/50-senators-will-vote-for-net-neutrality-but-they-need-one-more-republican/

Fight is still ongoing. If you have a republican congressman(woman) CALL!!!!!!

[Oniya]

*dusts the thread off*

This just popped up in my recommended articles.  Call your Senators and let them know what you think.  And remember, midterm elections are coming up soon!

https://www.theverge.com/2018/5/9/17333108/net-neutrality-congressional-review-act-cra-resolution-vote-senate

[TheHangedOne]

Well, supposedly today is the day that Net Neutrality dies. Though, it's liable to be a slow death, if it doesn't get resuscitated.  hard to see where the chips are going to fall, but I know at least one of my state Senators is a real firebrand and will probably SPARTA! kick someone off a building in his rampage. At 71, I would not fight with Markey. That old dog has sharp teeth, and he's meaning to use 'em.

http://www.ncsl.org/research/telecommunications-and-information-technology/net-neutrality-legislation-in-states.aspx

That might be of interest to anybody that wants to check out what individual states are doing, in terms of trying to enact their own laws/legislation, whether on the level of their own state, or making federal appeals; you know, all that fun jazz.

[Lustful Bride]

Is there any more news on this? I heard California passed a law fighting the removal of Net Neutrality but im not sure about anything else.

[TheHangedOne]

Is there any more news on this? I heard California passed a law fighting the removal of Net Neutrality but im not sure about anything else.

Most of what I'm seeing is from the 9th, 10th, and 11th; or just rehashing and reposting.  Tracking legislation through things like the link I posted previously is what I intend to do, but legislative battles usually take weeks, if not months.

[Vekseid]

Is there any more news on this? I heard California passed a law fighting the removal of Net Neutrality but im not sure about anything else.

A lot of states have laws either passed or waiting requiring NN provisions for any ISP that does business with the state. So far only Washington's is both 1) passed and 2) in full effect.

In addition to this, the actual repeal is going to face legal challenges, as changing this rule requires legal justification and it will need to pass that measure in the court system.

If Democrats manage to take back the Senate (unlikely, but possible) some other options open up, as they'll almost certainly have control of the House in that situation and some Republican senators will defect to override vetos and provide cloture.