Ajit Pai Lies (Again) To Congress With Claim Net Neutrality Killed Broadband Investment

from the repetition-forges-reality dept

So, we've kind of been over this. One of the cornerstones of the broadband industry's flimsy and facts-optional assault on net neutrality was that the rules somehow demolished broadband industry investment. Of course the press has noted time and time and time again how that's simply not true.

It's simply not debatable. Close examinations of SEC filings and public earnings reports during the period highlight how this alleged investment apocalypse never actually happened. What's more, CEOs from nearly a dozen ISPs are on public record telling investors (who by law they can't lie to) that the claim was effectively bogus, and that they saw no meaningful impact from the rules. Again, that's not surprising, since many broadband industry executives have also acknowledged the rules, which were discarded last June, really didn't hurt them unless they engaged in anti-competitive behavior.

Still, the false claim gained traction online thanks to industry-linked economists and the usual industry stenographers. These days, the only folks you'll find still clinging to this repeatedly debunked narrative are either ISPs, ISP-linked consultants, or the think tanks, fauxcademics and other policy voices ISPs pay to intentionally muddy the discourse waters. And oh, Ajit Pai, who again this week lied to Congress in claiming that net neutrality was a broadband investment apocalypse. From his testimony during an "oversight" (that term is used loosely) hearing:

"...we’ve returned to the successful light-touch regulatory framework under which the Internet flourished in the United States from 1996 to 2015. Under the heavy-handed regulations adopted by the prior Commission in 2015, network investment declined for two straight years, the first time that had happened outside of a recession in the broadband era."

Except that is, again, not even remotely true. For one, ISPs spent years technically under Title II (cable until 2002 and DSL until 2005) without the sky falling. That was until FCC boss Mike Powell (now the top lobbyist for the cable industry) decided to weaken FCC oversight over broadband monopolies under the bullshit claim it would result in a broadband competition utopia (you may have noticed that didn't happen). Companies like Verizon also like to ignore the fact they were just fine having parts of their businesses regulated under Title II for years--when it was providing the company with notable tax breaks.

And when the FCC did reclassify ISPs as common carriers again under Title II in 2015, the agency used forbearance to prevent applying many of the heavier, utility-style regulations upon ISPs. The FCC also went well out of its way to make it clear that it had no intention of seriously regulating broadband rates, a gift to ISPs that have been abusing their monopoly markets via price hikes and obnoxious fees for nearly two decades now. In short: Title II was never the bogeyman it was portrayed as, and many ISPs were just fine with Title II -- when it fit their political and financial argument du jour.

As for the purported investment dip caused by Title II, numerous major ISPs like Comcast (who boosted CAPEX by 13 percent in 2015) reported an overall increase in investment during that period. At best investment (which is usually dictated by competition) remained flat. And while Ajit Pai has also tried to claim that the rules somehow placed an unfair financial burden on smaller ISPs, the agency's own data disproves those claims as well. In fact, a coalition of thirty small ISPs opposed Pai's historically-unpopular attack on the rules as counterproductive and harmful to a truly competitive internet.

Again, the only reports claiming that net neutrality hurt sector investment come from industry linked economists who intentionally cherry picked very specific, unrelated windows of investment slowdown (like scheduled cable box upgrades ending) and massaged the data to falsely imply net neutrality was to blame. Despite the fact these studies have been debunked by years of journalism and public admissions from the industry itself, Pai and ISP lobbyists enjoy repeating them in the apparent belief that repetition forges reality.

From there, Pai informed Congress that they no longer need to worry about this investment-killing bogeyman thanks to his Orwellian-named "Restoring Internet Freedom Order":

"In the Restoring Internet Freedom Order, which was adopted last December, we stopped regulating the Internet with 1934 rules designed for the Ma Bell telephone monopoly. We strengthened our transparency rules so that broadband providers are required to disclose more information about their network management practices. And we restored the authority of the Federal Trade Commission, our nation’s premier consumer protection agency, to police the practices of Internet service providers—authority the prior Commission had stripped from the FTC in 2015.

You'll be shocked to learn that Pai's still not telling the truth here, either. This industry line that the FCC's 2015 net neutrality rules were somehow "designed for the ma bell telephone monopoly" or impose "archaic, utility-style rules on modern networks" is decidedly false, as we've explained in great detail previously. The claim that ISP transparency rules have been "strengthened" is also false, since Pai effectively replaced tough ISP transparency requirements with the policy equivalent of a pinky swear. Pai's FTC claims are also incorrect, since the FTC lacks the resources or authority to really police broadband providers effectively.

Of course this cavalcade of bullshit is nothing new for Pai, as we saw recently when he claimed that the majority of Americans support his attacks on net neutrality, something survey after survey (another of which was released this week) disproves. Of course countless reporters, citing publicly-available data, have been pointing all of this out for years, not that appears to matter in post-truth America. The bottom line is that net neutrality rules are dead, and Pai ignored the public, the experts, and relied entirely on garbage data to justify killing them. With zero substantive repercussions.

Eventually accountability will likely come for Pai, either in the form of the looming lawsuits by Mozilla and consumer groups, or the inevitable collision between his obvious post-FCC political aspirations and the Millennial voters who are vibrantly aware of just how badly his decision will screw them over the longer haul.


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2018 @ 6:29am

    What's interesting about this latest survey, on the topic of net neutrality support in general, Republicans and Trump Voters favor rules in lower numbers than Democrats and Independents, but don't oppose in significantly higher numbers.

    I can only imagine the the higher percent who aren't sure come from not being told what to think by Fox News.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2018 @ 6:40am

    I wish someone would call him a liar, in Congress, to his face, and order him removed.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      JoeCool (profile), 27 Jul 2018 @ 6:45am

      Re:

      While we're dreaming...

      ...and find him in contempt of Congress and order him jailed until he tells the truth.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Ninja (profile), 27 Jul 2018 @ 7:03am

        Re: Re:

        While we are dreaming...

        ...and provide everybody in the world unlimited supply of hazelnut cream.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2018 @ 7:26am

        Re: Re: Truth? Aye, there's the rub.

        When he says, "...a study has found...", it IS the truth. It leaves out that the study has since been found to be flawed to the point of uselessness, but it is still a true statement.


        When he asys, "I believe...", it IS the truth. It leaves out that he WANTED to believe that way, and ignored evidence to the contrary. But it is still a true statement.


        How about we stick to "facts", and leave "truth" to the philosophers?

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          PaulT (profile), 27 Jul 2018 @ 8:34am

          Re: Re: Re: Truth? Aye, there's the rub.

          Typical Trump tactic too, really. "People say to me (insert absolute bollocks here)" seems to be one of his favourites, but it's so vague and impossible to prove false that it's easy for him to slither away. It's obvious half the time that nobody has ever said anything of the sort to him, but since you can't prove a negative he can lie his ass off about the very basis of what he's building his moves on.

          At least with "a study says...", you can at least get enough details on what the study is, what it really says and its reliability.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      That One Guy (profile), 28 Jul 2018 @ 9:28pm

      Re:

      Though it would never happen, as no politician wants to open the can of worms that is 'it's now acceptable to call out lies in congress', it would be hilarious and easy to do.

      'As it so happens since this topic has come up before I tasked a few of those working for me to look into the numbers related to broadband investment during the period you're talking about. Strangely enough the companies themselves made clear both to their investors and the SEC that investment did not decrease, and in fact in several cases increased.

      My question to you therefore is simple: were they lying to their investors, or are you lying to us?'

      Watching him squirm and try to get out of that would be most entertaining I'm sure.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        PaulT (profile), 30 Jul 2018 @ 1:14am

        Re: Re:

        "Though it would never happen, as no politician wants to open the can of worms that is 'it's now acceptable to call out lies in congress', it would be hilarious and easy to do."

        Well, that did already happen at least once.

        http://edition.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/09/09/joe.wilson/

        Of course, Obama wasn't actually lying and it was just the start of a campaign of misinformation when he was trying to fix the pathetically broken healthcare system over there, but someone did certainly attempt to call out "lies".

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 1 Aug 2018 @ 11:31am

      Re:

      Makes you wonder. Why haven't anyone done so? That is pretty telling.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Ninja (profile), 27 Jul 2018 @ 7:04am

    In another news somebody threw a bucket of water at someone and got them inexplicably wet.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    David, 27 Jul 2018 @ 7:24am

    Look, you are wrong.

    The government-employed expert has been consulted by Congress and has clearly stated that Net Neutrality regulations have harmed broadband investment.

    This is the basis on which political decisions are made carefully and with deliberation.

    Sometimes the opinions of some experts can differ (like which scientific insights a bible passage provides, or whether the uselessness of statements obtained under torture offset the fun and satisfaction derived from it, or whether a president's desires should trump law and constitution in matters of personal happiness like extrajudicial executions). In that case, it makes sense for a government to focus on those experts nominated in the course of its own policy making in order to avoid useless churn by changing policies and opinions back and forth.

    If Congress wanted to hear a plurality of opinions, they could invite other experts but then would have to make an educated decision between various options, and that's the business of experts that are employed for that purpose.

    Like Ajit Pai. He makes it easy to make the decisions the majority in Congress wanted to make anyway.

    Polls may show that 80% of Americans support Net Neutrality but the story Ajit Pai tells is a different one. That's why he is the expert and 80% of Americans aren't. They don't even know what they want.

    Reminds me of the time Obamacare protesters were asked how they'd be inclined towards the Affordable Healthcare Act instead of Obamacare and they were much more in favor.

    If that makes you go "huh?" you are not an average voter and have no business telling Congress how to do its job.

    If you don't have any other questions, I'd like to go back to biting my tabletop now. Thanks for listening.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2018 @ 7:39am

      Re: Look, you are wrong.

      "They don't even know what they want."

      Mate, don't start with that shit. You want to argue that people are mis-guided to want something, you go right ahead.

      But don't try and argue that I don't know what I want.

      What I want is an ISP that doesn't pull bullshit ratings tactics, doesn't add hidden fees, and doesn't even have the option to provide faster or slower lanes to any website.

      I want a dumb pipe. Connect me to the internet, the whole damn internet, without curating, without picking what can be shown and what can't, and let me be free.

      I want the ISPs to have no other options than this, consequences real or imaginary be damned.

      So fuck off with this "don't know what they want" hogwash. I know what I want, and I want it now. I won't get it now, but I want it now.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        David, 27 Jul 2018 @ 7:47am

        Re: Re: Look, you are wrong.

        U.S. attention spans will be the death of me yet.

        TLDR: Doh.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2018 @ 8:10am

          Re: Re: Re: "U.S. attention spans will be the death of me yet."

          Except is almost without doubt from use of "Mate" a serf of the UK -- as are you after that gibe at Americans. NO American EVER uses "mate" that way, nor is it likely any serf we've foolishly let in would continue to use it.

          Besides that, the comment is deliberately provocative. (Yet I'm sure THIS will be censored, but that won't.)

          So the REAL question is: why are two UK serfs writing at length and ardently on Techdirt about policies that will never affect them? It's WEIRD.

          Anyhoo, on topic: WHO THE HELL CARES? All of Techdirt's whining for last year and half, PLUS changes by ISPs, PLUS Ajit Pai's remarks and policies have affected me NOT AT ALL, nor do I ever expect to find ANY effect clearly due to lack of "net neutrality". -- As the AC there so brazenly puts it, "net neutrality" means: wants what wants when wants.

          You CANNOT point to one single problem YET, if ever, just go on with endless ad hom, apparently never noticing that it's FUTILE besides CHILDISH.

          Meanwhile, a glance at Drudge shows important topics that Techdirt totally ignores! WEIRD SITE!

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2018 @ 8:27am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            out_of_the_blue just hates it when due process is enforced.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2018 @ 8:44am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: "U.S. attention spans will be the death of me yet."

            "NO American EVER uses "mate" that way, nor is it likely any serf we've foolishly let in would continue to use it."

            I live in Michigan, ya dumb fuck. Born American citizen. Please take some basic educational courses on language, how it is and can be used by anyone who wishes to do so, and how the internet, and before that, television, radio, and even printed books (you know, those things with word printed on paper) assist in the transference of regional colloquialisms across boundaries.

            Of course it's provocative. The original comment was provocative. I responded in kind to an idiotic assertion that made a broad sweeping generalization of everyone who wants Net Neutrality, and thereby includes me. If it gets flagged for it, and hidden, so be it - the community decided it wasn't worth reading.

            If yours gets flagged and hidden, as they seem to always do, it's also because the community decided it wasn't worth reading.

            If this happens all the time, consistently, then something about what you write is consistently getting a threshold number of people to click the little flag icon (hint: "serfs"). On the odds, the problem is with you.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            PaulT (profile), 27 Jul 2018 @ 8:57am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: "U.S. attention spans will be the death of me yet."

            "NO American EVER uses "mate" that way"

            I've found that some of the ones who've actually travelled outside of your borders do that sometimes, just as there's people who have spent time in the US who've picked up a few American regional sayings. That's what happened when you're not an insulated idiot with no knowledge of the outside world. You actually communicate and share knowledge and ideas, language being one of them.

            "will never affect them"

            Well, unlike some raging assholes, some people care about things that don't affect them personally. Many even have friends and family who are affected directly.

            Even if not, there is a history of money-grubbing psychopaths borrowing the worst of your ideas and using them to attack people on this side of the pond, so we've rather stop you before some asshole over here decides it's a good thing to remove net neutrality here.

            "WHO THE HELL CARES?"

            Judging by your whining on every article about it? You. You care deeply.

            "Meanwhile, a glance at Drudge"

            Lol.

            "important topics that Techdirt totally ignores"|

            Any within the remit of this site? Because I can point to left-leaning sites that have lots of stories also ignored that also don't fit within the remit - difference being their fact content is likely to be higher.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2018 @ 9:49am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: "U.S. attention spans will be the death of me yet."

            Meanwhile, a glance at Drudge shows important topics that Techdirt totally ignores!

            Oh yes because "Orca mom mourns calf death by carrying body on her back for days" is SUCH an important topic to cover.

            Please, don't make me laugh any more, it hurts.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • icon
              PaulT (profile), 30 Jul 2018 @ 1:44am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "U.S. attention spans will be the death of me yet."

              Just for a laugh I wandered over there to see what some of those "important topics" might be...

              "Arkansas woman accused of killing husband after disagreement over porn..."

              "Wife's shock as husband, 26, caught cheating with 72-year-old lover..."

              "Candidate Attacks Opponent Over 'Bigfoot Erotica'... "

              "MAKE AMERICA MATE AGAIN: USA birth rate to boom?"

              I'm pretty sure someone just needs to get laid...

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • identicon
                Anonymous Coward, 30 Jul 2018 @ 5:53am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "U.S. attention spans will be the death of me yet."

                Suddenly the posts where out_of_the_blue mentions stroking himself off and having a copyright erection start making a lot more sense, don't they?

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • identicon
                Anonymous Coward, 30 Jul 2018 @ 6:26am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "U.S. attention spans will be the death of me yet."

                The site is a complete joke, along with Breitbart. At least Fox "tries" to look legit. Though even that is questionable.

                Honestly, I don't know how a site that claims to be an important source of "news" can miss the target that badly.

                And don't even get me started on the design and layout. It's like we went back to the early 90s.

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              • identicon
                Talmyr, 31 Jul 2018 @ 5:56am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "U.S. attention spans will be the death of me yet."

                Sure they aren't just repurposing old Daily Fail Wall of Shame posts? :)

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            lucidrenegade (profile), 27 Jul 2018 @ 10:07am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: "U.S. attention spans will be the death of me yet."

            "Anyhoo, on topic: WHO THE HELL CARES?"

            That's what pretty much everyone here thinks when they see your posts.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2018 @ 3:19pm

            Does it physically hurt to be that stupid?

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2018 @ 8:47am

        Re: Re: Look, you are wrong.

        It's sarcasm OK? Read to the last line.
        Smile, its a new day.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 27 Jul 2018 @ 7:52am

      Re: Look, you are wrong.

      "This is the basis on which political decisions are made carefully and with deliberation."

      Along with bribes (erm, campaign contributions).

      "If that makes you go "huh?" you are not an average voter and have no business telling Congress how to do its job. "

      Congress represents (or are supposed to) their constituents. It is the business of the constituents to tell their representatives what they want. Your assertion that constituents have no business telling Congress what to do leads the rest of us to believe that you are pro-bribery rather than constituent representation.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2018 @ 10:03am

        Re: Re: Look, you are wrong.

        Congress represents (or are supposed to) their constituents. It is the business of the constituents to tell their representatives what they want. Your assertion that constituents have no business telling Congress what to do leads the rest of us to believe that you are pro-bribery rather than constituent representation.

        This. So much this.

        I think that somehow a lot of the American public has been convinced that just because somebody holds an important office (or is a huge celebrity) that they are somehow much smarter than the vast majority of people and obviously know better than we do. This is just sad and wrong.

        People in Congress are no smarter than the average American you meet on the street. They may have a different background, experiences, and education, but that doesn't mean they are so much smarter that we should trust them blindly and assume that they know better than us. That's not how this works, that's not how any of this works.

        And even if they were, that's entirely besides the point. As you pointed out AAC, they are in office to do what the rest of us want, not what they think is best. That means that if we all say jump, they jump. Not the other way around. Even if we're wrong, they are legally obligated, as part of their job description, to represent us.

        But honestly, more often than not, I've seen Congress be completely wrong about things and the majority of the American people be right. When half of Congress probably only barely knows what a smartphone is and how to use it, do you really want to say they are experts on everything? Especially technology topics?

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          David, 27 Jul 2018 @ 10:22am

          Re: Re: Re: Look, you are wrong.

          As you pointed out AAC, they are in office to do what the rest of us want, not what they think is best.

          Uhm, no? The topic was the U.S. You are confusing "republic" with "democracy". The U.S. is the former. The job of a republic's representatives is to act in the interest of the people, the job of a democracy's representatives is to act out the will of the people (or at least of a majority).

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 27 Jul 2018 @ 10:34am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Look, you are wrong.

            According to you, they should represent their biggest contributors.

            No they aren't supposed to have a referendum of their constituency on every issue, but the sure as hell aren't supposed to be significantly influenced by people they do not represent. They should have a sense of what their constituents want, and not just those that belong to THEIR party.

            What big money folks want should not be part of their consideration as that is not necessarily in the interest of the people, that is what big money wants.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Chip, 27 Jul 2018 @ 11:27am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Look, you are wrong.

            Yea! You Sycophaniic "Idiots" dont' GET "it"! WE are a Republic NOT a Democracy! As any "Smart" person will Tell YOU. I am Very Smart. That is why I "say" things like Wthe USE is a Republi not a Democracy, because Very Smart people "always " talk about that. Because we are "smart".

            David would you "like" some of My "leaded" Paint chips? Or did You "bring "your Own!

            Every Nation eats the Paint chips it Deserves!

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2018 @ 12:33pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Look, you are wrong.

            I'm not confusing anything but you are.

            Your statement is self-contradictory. You say the U.S. is a republic, not a democracy, and then immediately say this:

            a democracy's representatives

            Newsflash, that's a form of a republic. There are no representatives in a straight democracy. In a straight democracy, every citizen votes directly on everything. So if you have representatives, you have a form of a republic.

            Now, I will say that the U.S. is also a democracy. First because democracy is a super category of government styles that includes a republic. So no matter what you want to believe, you're still wrong. Second, the U.S. is not a true republic either, it's a mixture of a republic and a democracy and is completely different, not only from classical republics, but most modern republics as well. Our system of government is truly unique.

            In our democratic republic (see what I did there?), the job of a republic's representatives is to REPRESENT the will of the people who elected them AND act in their interests according to that will. This can be found in many of the writings of our founding fathers as how they intended our system of government to work. However, your definition is not that and is exactly what's going on today, our representatives are claiming to "act in our interests" while actually completely ignoring us and doing whatever the hell they want, our will and interests be damned.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2018 @ 7:53am

      Re: Look, you are wrong.

      Such pessimism in the morning is depressing, but I imagine that rational is not too far from what these asshats actually believe. And then they expect everyone to fall in line believing the bullshit. Hahaha, fools - human nature, who knew it was so rebellious?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      I.T. Guy, 27 Jul 2018 @ 8:59am

      Re: Look, you are wrong.

      "They don't even know what they want."

      Really? Maybe a select few... but... if you ask those select few if in addition to paying to connect to the internet they were to have to pay more for this and then another fee for that and another fee for that and this site is slow but this one isn't. My bet is they all will give the same answer.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Will B., 28 Jul 2018 @ 11:13am

      Re: Look, you are wrong.

      Another victim of Poe's Law. Here I thought your sarcasm was painfully obvious, but...

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 1 Aug 2018 @ 11:36am

      Re: Look, you are wrong.

      >>> In that case, it makes sense for a government to focus on those experts nominated in the course of its own policy making in order to avoid useless churn by changing policies and opinions back and forth.

      Except what Pai says doesn't make any sense.

      >>> Like Ajit Pai. He makes it easy to make the decisions the majority in Congress wanted to make anyway.

      This is it, this is the problem.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    I.T. Guy, 27 Jul 2018 @ 7:41am

    I bet he doesn't go outside like a normal human being anymore. I sure as hell wouldn't.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Vidiot (profile), 27 Jul 2018 @ 7:51am

    Maybe if the /s sarcasm flag was more like a 30-foot-wide flaming banner, we wouldn't miss these cues...

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    TDR, 27 Jul 2018 @ 7:56am

    Ajit Pai? More like Ajit Lie. And he should be called that wherever he goes all the time.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2018 @ 8:21am

    we all have heard this before and know that it is true. the question to ask is has anyone even bothered to TRY to tell Congress what really has/is/did happen? i'm not saying they would even listen given the fact that most members are shit scared of losing income, (i mean campaign contributions) but surely someone has the balls to tell them the truth and prove that Pai is nothing but a blue faced liar!!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 1 Aug 2018 @ 11:40am

      Re:

      Your comment simply is clearing Congress of any responsibility to actually KNOW what they are legislating.

      No thank you. They know, they are not stupid. They should know. It is their job to know and legislate accordingly, they just act a fool or act ignorance.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 1 Aug 2018 @ 11:41am

      Re:

      So they let lobbyists in. Receive contributions from lobbyists. But don't know what is happening? Nah.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Toom1275 (profile), 27 Jul 2018 @ 8:41am

    This is probably in one of the links, but it wasn't in the article itself so I'll mention it here:

    Regarding small ISPs:

    In order to counter the coalition of dozens of small ISPs supporting NN and opposing Pai's repeal, Pai responded with... five... small ISPs that he claimed had their investment and growth harmed by NN.

    Except of course the complete opposite was true, as four of them expanded their broadband service significantly, one more than doubling in size, and the one that didn't was instead laying fiber.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Pixelation, 27 Jul 2018 @ 8:43am

    It's time to let Ajit Pai and his masters have their own internet, separate from ours.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    I.T. Guy, 27 Jul 2018 @ 9:01am

    Ajit Pai Lies... grass is green... sky is blue... water is wet.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2018 @ 9:29am

    Re: somehow demolished broadband industry investment

    When big companies reach market saturation in their verticle market, they start looking at horizontal expansion. Most of this horizontal expansion creates book value ONLY, and no real added utility.

    While it easy to argue that the numbers say that the overall market value increases by allowing cross market trade constraints, these are only BOOK values. What is actually happening is the overall utility of the market is decreasing. IOW, percieved value is going up, intrinsic value is going down.

    Which is to say, that killing NN, is absolutely a recipe for a market crash. The players in this case are aware of this. They are simply counting on the fact that if the whole market crashes at once, the blame will get spread around evenly, and they won't be held responsible. Because "Look! it was the FCC's idea!". They will all claim ignorance, hire expensive econ professors to write papers declaring they were all "doing the right thing", and then go buy a bunch of hookers with all the stock holder value they just swindled.

    Killing NN wasn't about growth. And it wasn't even about market share. It was about starting a slow roll towards the kind of economic terrorism we saw in 2008. And the reason for that of course, is that bankers don't innovate. The companies in question cannot and will not create the next generation Internet. The only thing they can do is squeeze as much blood as possible out of the consumer as possible before it arrives. And the way they are going to do that, is to pulverize the whole, fucking, national, economy. Along with a big chunk of the Constitution while they are at it.

    Congress can stop it now, by breaking these companies up. Or they can accelerate the inevitable, by halting mergers, and create a small crash now, avoiding the bigger one later. But most likely what they will do is fuck over the whole country by absorbing the fraud into the national debt like they did in 2008.

    The question of course, is how many times can they do that and have foreign states still regard the U.S. dollar as a reserve currency?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 1 Aug 2018 @ 12:20pm

      Re: Re: somehow demolished broadband industry investment

      >>> perceived value is going up

      I honestly didn't understand this part. I would argue perceived value is going down, thus all those cord cutters (more than expected as per recent TD article).

      >>> killing NN, is absolutely a recipe for a market crash

      Please explain. I really would like to understand this part.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2018 @ 9:41am

    I've said it before and I'll say it again, I can not wait until Musk's Starlink ISP goes live.

    Provided it operates and performs close to his claims (and at this point I see no evidence or reason to doubt it) it should be death to the current ISP monopolies. It will force them to compete or lose massive amounts of subscribers to better and cheaper internet access. And I'd be willing to bet money it will also be a lot more private too.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      David, 27 Jul 2018 @ 10:08am

      Re:

      Uh, I was with you until the "a lot more private too". Tesla is the company that is pulling up car data all the time to debunk fake reviews and exonerate them after crashes of Tesla cars (partly under autopilot). I mean, I can perfectly well understand where they are coming from, wanting to cover their ass, but it's creepy as hell when they do this in a completely nonchalant manner without any kind of pretense at respecting privacy, let alone bothering about judicial oversight, voluntary or not.

      Tesla, and in particular Musk, clearly have a very dim view on privacy. It's not all that related to their impressive performance, but I certainly do hope that it will eventually come to bite them in the ass, hard, eventually and they'll fix their stance regarding their hands in the data cookie jar.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2018 @ 12:11pm

        Re: Re:

        ....Obviously you have never heard of black boxes and data recorders that are standard in almost every vehicle and have been for at least the last decade or two.

        That car data is standard data about the car's operational status. All cars have this capability, not just Tesla. And it's not just cars, pretty much every electronic device has some sort of system that logs standard things like "the engine started at such and such a time and the check engine light was on", or "at timestamp x the dishwasher experienced a motor failure". This data is not only critical for the device to know but also for troubleshooting and diagnostics when something isn't working, or when a car crashes and you need to know if it was a design flaw or user error.

        There's nothing creepy about it. Modern cars can't do what they do without this data, and it's needed for diagnostics and troubleshooting as well as identifying critical design flaws.

        Please, educate yourself before you make yourself look more like a fool than you already do.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    ECA (profile), 27 Jul 2018 @ 1:22pm

    PAI needs a name change..

    Im sorry,
    but his name sounds like a Sweet tasting Desert..
    WE need to call him something BESIDES something great to eat...as Im not going to eat him..
    And everything that comes out of him, ISNT SWEET..

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    mhenriday (profile), 28 Jul 2018 @ 12:25pm

    Lying to the US Congress

    Ajit Pai Lies (Again) To Congress With Claim Net Neutrality Killed Broadband Investment

    Why should anyone be surprised ? For some positions, the ability and willingness to lie tothe Congress is not merely a merit, but a job requirement, cf James Robert Clapper's famous lie to the Congress in his position as Director of National Intelligence (head of the NSA)....

    Henri

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    got_runs? (profile), 29 Jul 2018 @ 5:11am

    Ajit Pai Sh*thole Liar

    Ajit Pai a liar
    Ajit Pai a liar
    Ajit Pai a liar
    Ajit Pai a person who tells lies.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 30 Jul 2018 @ 6:49pm

    Ajit Pai lies because that's his job.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Insider Shop - Show Your Support!

Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.