this post was submitted on 14 Dec 2023
476 points (99.8% liked)

Technology

58366 readers
5187 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

FCC votes to ban termination fees for cable and satellite services::FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel cast the deciding vote to ban cable and satellite companies from issuing early termination fees.

top 18 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Ghostalmedia 122 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I like having a FCC that is actually working for the public, and not lobbyists. This is nice.

The Trump / Ajit Pai days sucked.

[–] foggy 37 points 9 months ago (3 children)

Ajit Pai was appointed as commissioner of the FCC by Obama, on the recommendation of Mitch McConnell.

It's a weird pill to swallow.

Pai was commissioner until 2017 when Trump gave him a promotion to Chairman.

He did plenty of damage to the US as commissioner, but it wasn't until 2017 that he lead the effort on taking away net neutrality.

[–] roofuskit 20 points 9 months ago

That's how it works. The opposing party picks their commissioners and the president appointments them.

[–] Spiralvortexisalie 9 points 9 months ago

As George Carlin got cheers for, and I regularly receive jeers for, it is a big club and we are not in it. The Establishment loves these identity politics, because it is always someone else being the bad guy, not you know, all the bad guys on stage actively being horrible people, thats only something the other side does, not our benevolent side.

[–] youngGoku 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

net neutrality

Would that have protected Firefox users from YouTube's throttling speeds of anyone using the Firefox client?

[–] foggy 3 points 9 months ago

Kinda but more like on ISPs. Like google paying Comcast to serve their content faster than, say, my website.

And Like, throttling your connection below what you pay for. Artificial Fast lanes for data. Stuff like that.

Here's a gpt summary since we the humans don't think much anymore:

The repeal of net neutrality raised several key issues:

  1. Potential for Content Discrimination: Without net neutrality, ISPs could favor certain websites or services through higher speeds or better access, potentially leading to a skewed online ecosystem favoring larger, established companies.

  2. Threat to Free Speech: ISPs could potentially block or throttle access to specific content, which raises concerns about censorship and the free flow of information.

  3. Impact on Competition: Smaller businesses and startups might find it harder to compete if they can't afford the costs for prioritization, which larger companies can easily pay. This could stifle innovation and market diversity.

  4. Increased Costs for Consumers: There were concerns that ISPs could introduce tiered pricing models, charging extra for access to certain websites or faster speeds, potentially leading to increased internet costs for consumers.

  5. Quality of Service: ISPs might provide faster connections to paying websites, while non-paying sites could suffer from slower speeds, affecting the user experience.

  6. Digital Divide Concerns: The repeal could exacerbate the digital divide. People in rural or economically disadvantaged areas might face limited access to a full range of internet services compared to those in more affluent areas.

[–] RalphFurley 79 points 9 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 23 points 9 months ago (1 children)

And the oversized Reese's coffee mug he rode in on.

[–] Cornelius_Wangenheim 16 points 9 months ago

Or better yet, with it.

[–] hark 30 points 9 months ago (1 children)

This is great but also decades late.

[–] Viking_Hippie 14 points 9 months ago

That's how it goes with a government of one party who only wants bad things and one that wants some good things but extremely slowly so it doesn't upset their owner donors too much.

[–] ThePantser 21 points 9 months ago

Can it extend to ISPs too? Please. And automakers, and any company?

[–] markr 11 points 9 months ago

So I assume the fascist knobs will initiate a law suit to block this.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I'm in favor of this, but how did it pass when "two out of four commissioners voted against the measure"?

[–] killeronthecorner 24 points 9 months ago

Should say two out of five. A third Democrat was approved earlier this year

[–] [email protected] 7 points 9 months ago
[–] foggy 7 points 9 months ago

It'd be nice if they did more.

Same with the FTC.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago

Which influential politician had to pay a fee and got salty? I'll only believe it wasn't that if they make it retroactive from 1980 onward.