Real confirmation of an attack would be a nice-to-have in this situation. I can see 3 probable realities:<p>1. The sheer volume of commenters and responses took down the system. They cover it by saying a DDoS attack was the cause.
2. They are intent on crippling Net Neutrality anyway, and either designed the system to insufficiently handle traffic and call it a DDos or even DDos themselves.
3. Since there are groups with vested interest in removing net neutrality, and they have deep pockets, I can easily see a few groups moving to protect their interests. In other words, a legitimate DDoS attack.<p>All 3 seem equally likely to me, especially considering Ajit Pai's stance on NN. This is not encouraging as a citizen of the US.
I wonder if anyone else can confirm this somehow.<p>This seems like it would be great cover if you're trying to hide the fact that people a lot of people really dislike what you're doing and are complaining so much your system couldn't take the load. "Oh, it wasn't because lots of people were complaining.... it was a DDOS".
Once again: We screwed up by not making this a campaign issue.<p>Many of the news stations here are affiliated with internet providers. The candidates both took money from the industry. No one was going to make this an issue, and we screwed up by not forcing it to be part of the conversation.<p>Of course we also let the election happen without a major conversation about fracking.
I know for consumer complaints the FCC runs everything through Zendesk, so in theory there is a 3rd party who could verify any claims like this. I wonder if the there's a vendor doing hosting for the comments system as well.
Oh yeah, like these comments really matter this time around.<p>A certain sector of society elects Donald Trump, who appoints the new FCC chair, and they'll do whatever they want within legal possibilities. Do you really think the sector of society which most cares about this rule change will affect the outcome with comments? They will no more do so than scientists will affect the budget of the EPA with comments.
The site works just fine for me.<p><a href="http://www.gofccyourself.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.gofccyourself.com</a><p>press the link "+ Express"<p>I mean i have not posted anything as i am not a US citizen but the form loads and i can fill it in
It may be due to John Oliver (again):<p><a href="http://tumblr.fightforthefuture.org/post/160454924113/fccs-claim-that-site-was-hacked-during-john" rel="nofollow">http://tumblr.fightforthefuture.org/post/160454924113/fccs-c...</a><p><a href="https://www.techdirt.com/blog/netneutrality/articles/20170508/06200037314/john-oliver-net-neutrality-rant-has-crippled-fcc-website-second-time.shtml" rel="nofollow">https://www.techdirt.com/blog/netneutrality/articles/2017050...</a>
Did someone happen to save the John Oliver original video? It shows "This video is not available" for me.<p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92vuuZt7wak" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92vuuZt7wak</a><p>EDIT: was blocked in Canada, thanks NegatioN
In addition to complaining to the FCC individually, Mozilla is accepting signatures for an open letter:<p><a href="https://advocacy.mozilla.org/en-US/net-neutrality" rel="nofollow">https://advocacy.mozilla.org/en-US/net-neutrality</a>
Still doesn't work. They can't even keep their site up, yet they want to dictate policy for the whole Internet. Am I the only one who finds that absurd and beyond fucked up?<p>EDIT: Site works, form submission doesn't. Doesn't sound like a DDoS to me.
Instructions say select your state from the dropdown. State is tagged required. State dropdown is empty and wont let me proceed :) Tried again an hour later and it worked.
Maybe this should never have been something implemented by mere regulation in the first place? The Commission generally disregards bulk comments that repeat the same boilerplate language, has done so for decades, and is looking for logical argument grounded in the law rather than emotional outbursts.<p>How about getting a bill passed in Congress providing for this? There were opportunities. There can be again in the future. Laws are harder to repeal compared to regulations.<p>Besides, I was there when the original ECFS was created. Events like this make me miss the days when paper filings were the norm. You had to think harder about what you were going to say compared to today's emails of rage provoked by a comedian. You had to reflect carefully way back when...prior to mid-1997, that is.