This is old news, well known and literally the whole "comments" was a sham anyway.<p>The voting was controlled by 5 people and split on party lines 3-2 [0]. NN was never actually up for debate.<p>[0] <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality_in_the_United_States#Rollback_of_Obama-era_rules" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality_in_the_United_S...</a> - last paragraph
I try to shy away from politics on this website but I can't shake this nagging feeling that this says something important about the current state of the US and the world. I am not a US citizen nor a resident, nor am I a Russian citizen or resident, so my opinions are absolutely subjective.<p>I feel like whenever an external agent such as Russia opens up the troll farms, the US gets all up in arms about the threat to democracy and how its poor country is under assault by the big bad meanies sending their virtual gargoyles to pray on its innocent citizens and influence their voting habits and put whoever they want in charge of the country and oh woe me, <i>while</i> they are doing it to their own citizens!<p>I don't hear Russia on the world stage as vocal about it as the US, if anything I'm hearing a lot more pragmatic (not something everyone agrees with) geopolitical discussion coming from that side, and I don't hear about them actively targeting their own citizens in "psyops" with the same fervor as the US.<p>Of course, this could mean that the press is free in the US and totally controlled in Russia so of course we hear only one side of the story, but I have this nagging feeling that whereas Russian government is actively and directly sabotaging its citizens, the US is engaged in far more psychologically dangerous activities targeting its state of being, and that the most damage is done by internal forces, not by external baddies.<p>I dunno, might be totally off, who knows...
The story is that citizen have nothing to gain from anti net neutrality laws. So basically, all comments against net neutrality are either faked or by someone who has skin in the game.<p>People ought to go to jail for this kind of crap.
What would you except in a country where most politicians depends on bribes from the rich? First you buy the worst politicians money can get. Then you purchase "public opinion" to back them up when they push your agendas.
Wait, so a lobby group was behind it all? /s<p>The reality is no one is surprised, and the lack of surprise is exactly why the system is broken. Let’s hope the states advocate for Net Neutrality.
I noticed this while looking through comments while they were still taking submissions. I was outraged. I told everyone I knew who cared. I can’t understand how this story isn’t bigger.<p>I would be much happier if at the time there was a counter force to spam submissions of the opposite opinion and at least make it abundantly clear that the whole thing was a farce. It’s wild that the FCC chair had the gaul to claim the public was against net neutrality from these submissions.
Astroturfing, troll farms, and AI driven slide bots are the future of discourse where the stakes are high and the conversation is in any way connected to the internet.<p>This will affect all parties on all sides of all debates.<p>I have no idea what this means for society or what should be done about it.
I am no lawyer, but I would assume that posting as another person online by filling out their name, en masse, is illegal.<p>I would imagine it's slander, fraud, and a number of other crimes.
I guess my question is why did Buzzfeed write this now? Didn't we know that dead people and Barack Obama were sending in anti-net neutrality comments in 2017?
I thought the public comments were a chance for experts or stakeholders to give their opinion of what should be done. I wouldn't be surprised if federal groups just ignored any template submissions. The public comments aren't a voting system, and the number if comments for or against a proposal has little meaning.
I don't think the comments mattered at all. At most, they provided political cover for the move. Ajit Pai was always going to ram this through. However, the corruption of the public comment system will also give our next president the political cover to change back and, hopefully, enshrine the change in law rather than easily changeable policy.
Details on Jeff Kao's analysis of the comments from 2017: <a href="https://medium.com/hackernoon/more-than-a-million-pro-repeal-net-neutrality-comments-were-likely-faked-e9f0e3ed36a6" rel="nofollow">https://medium.com/hackernoon/more-than-a-million-pro-repeal...</a>
Of course, no telecom executive will face any consequences for this. No jail time, no slap on the wrist. Business as usual in the good old United States.
There is a very close analogy from the past which may explain why net neutrality is a good idea: railways and Standard Oil. Rockfeller making special deals with the railways prioritizing his traffic directly resulted in the worst monopoly in U.S. history, putting millions of people in misery. If that isn't an example of why critical communication channels should be equally available to everyone i don't know what is.