Consumer data consumption has increased exponentially in a little over a decade. According to broadband insight reports from OpenVault, monthly household data usage has skyrocketed from an...
  • ArugulaZ@kbin.social
    4·
    1 年前

    If Ajit Pai were still in charge, he’d say “Woof woof! The telcos can do anything they want!,” and the Verizon CEO who owns him would pat him on the head and give him a Milk-Bone.

  • FiveMacs@lemmy.ca
    4·
    1 年前

    $$$ and because the ISPs don’t get charged for unethical and blantly illegal activities…

    The real question should be why is the internet not a public utility yet…? Huh FCC/CRTC…?

  • psycrow@lemmy.world
    41·
    1 年前

    Would be wonderful if the FCC did their fucking job for once and banned data caps. Companies like Mediacom abuse the fuck out of them

    • pingveno@lemmy.mlEnglish
      10·
      1 年前

      In short, the Administrative Procedure Act. It sets out the procedures that have to be followed before policy decisions get made. If the FCC doesn’t follow the APA’s procedures exactly, that gives the industry grounds to sue. Even if the industry eventually looses, it would still mean a stay on the new policies during which they would continue to exploit consumers.

      The APA isn’t a bad thing, since it forces federal agencies to be deliberate in making policy decisions that could have far reaching consequences. That said, it does make the government even slower to react to situations that often change quickly. But it has tripped up this administration and previous administrations when they have tried to make hasty decisions, including Trump with his “Muslim ban”.

        • pingveno@lemmy.mlEnglish
          1·
          1 年前

          Yes, there is. At present, most actions that are taken by the board are consensus actions that won’t hit a Democrat-Republican deadlock. Once a chairperson is confirmed, they can start tackling the more contentious stuff that will have 3-2 decisions. Biden’s previous nominee was scuttled after some attention to some mildly spicy tweets that were critical of Fox. He nominated a replacement a month ago and her nomination will likely go smoother.

      • Hot Saucerman@lemmy.mlEnglish
        11·
        1 年前

        I wish informative answers like yours would get the upvotes they deserve. You have my upvote.

        • pingveno@lemmy.mlEnglish
          1·
          1 年前

          Thanks! And it is getting upvotes, with you being the first. After all, I only wrote it a few minutes ago.

          I’m not scrubbing my account on Reddit partially because some of the comments are like the one above. Sure, much of what I wrote is of limited value. But if there is a historian going back through Internet history and using a language processing model to analyze comments, I think my voice is worth leaving there.

      • plz1@lemmy.worldEnglish
        0·
        1 年前

        Is this where the last Net Neutrality request for comments window failed miserably? Like, the FCC did the process, but they let it be provably sabotaged by the industry and went ahead anyways…

        • Hot Saucerman@lemmy.mlEnglish
          1·
          1 年前

          Part of the reason they “went ahead anyways” was painfully obviously because of the FCC chair at the time, Ajit Pai, who had previously been Associate General Counsel at Verizon. They even made a “comedy” video of him being asked to be a toady by Verizon.

          This is because in the US, for it to be considered bribery or quid-pro-quo, you basically have to write a check and in the notes section put “This is a Bribe” otherwise it’s just considered “business” and it’s totally okay for you to make “comedy” videos mocking the people wanting an end to corruption.

        • pingveno@lemmy.mlEnglish
          0·
          1 年前

          No. That saga was the reverse happening. The Obama administration had already gone through the whole procedure to implement net neutrality rules. Ajit Pai under the Trump administration then came in and started the procedure anew to reverse net neutrality. In that sense it “succeeded” in that Pai’s rules were put into place. There was a legal challenge on the basis of the FCC not considering certain factors. This is where being thorough is incredibly important. If even a single spot is missed, implementation can be drawn out even further.

          • underisk@lemmy.mlEnglish
            1·
            1 年前

            I want to point out that Pai did not “come in” during the Trump admin. He killed net neutrality during it, sure, but he was appointed by Obama and held the office long before Trump showed up. It’s really disingenuous to try and portray it as a result of one republican president, it was a team effort.

    • Clairvoidance@kbin.social
      3·
      1 年前

      They are asking ISPs to lay out their best justification so that they can decide whether it’s valid or not. Judging by their wording, they want a good explanation. It’s good to gain understanding of something before we gut it and who better to ask for the ‘best argument for’ than those who enforce it?

    • underisk@lemmy.ml
      2·
      1 年前

      Because they have no intention of correcting it. They’re either doing this to keep up the charade of consumer protection, or gearing up to enshrine the practice in regulation.

  • gmg@beehaw.org
    2·
    1 年前

    Lack of healthy competition. It’s plain to see from the other side of the ocean where I live… Is it maybe one of those things you can only see from afar?

    • FlanFlinger@lemmy.ml
      0·
      1 年前

      €20 every 28 days on a PAYG sim for unlimited 5g in Ireland, it’s just boggling to see what folks in the US and Canada pay

      • gmg@beehaw.org
        1·
        1 年前

        OP was about data caps on landlines… yeah, at first glance I too thought it could only be mobile

  • Hot Saucerman@lemmy.ml
    2·
    1 年前

    What’s going to stop the forms being filled out by industry-controlled bots this time?[1] Last time the FCC took public comment, anti-net-neutrality comments were being made under the names of dead people and people who would later claim they never participated in making comments to the FCC.

    Otherwise, it’s going to be the same dumb shitshow as last time.

    1. https://www.vice.com/en/article/43a5kg/80-percent-net-neutrality-comments-bots-astroturfing ↩︎

    • Spitfire@pawb.social
      1·
      1 年前

      Damn, I forgot all about that. I think one was made under my name and some family, and it was all the same copy-paste letter.

      Did anything ever come of that or did it just get swept under the rug?

    • jubilationtcornpone@sh.itjust.works
      0·
      1 年前

      I used to work in utilities. Electric, not telecom so different set of regulators. What they would do is yank you into and office and tell you something to the effect of: “[Name of Regulatory Body] is considering [issue]. You should really consider going on the public comment section of their website and voicing your [support/opposition depending on corporate stance] for it. It’s not mandatory but you should really consider doing that. It’s very important to our company.”

      It wasn’t “mandatory” but they would repeatedly hound you until you either did it or told them to fuck off, at which point you would be branded a “troublemaker” and they would find ways to punish you.

  • ericthered926@lemm.ee
    2·
    1 年前

    It’s the same reason my complex can force me to pay $100 for Xfinity while my neighbor pays $30 for the exact same service (because they’re in a house).