Read Your Own Rules Pai

Dec 7, 2017 12:52 PM

thenotoriousbatman

Views

148138

Likes

2885

Dislikes

128

"Despite the fact that the FCC’s net neutrality rules clearly exempt medical services from the ban on uncompetitive paid prioritization, FCC boss Ajit Pai has consistently tried to claim otherwise."

https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/kzg8yy/ajit-pai-net-neutrality-speech

If only this guy would read the very rules he is so set on changing. I've worked in the healthcare technology industry for 5 years and I have never once thought ISPs had any impact on medical services being delivered online. It is usually held up due to complexity, security, healthcare regulations, financial agreements, or our own struggles to get out of our own way.

FP edit: Is this the FP again!? Woot!

That's because he doesn't have to. He just has to read his contract with the ISP's for the big $$$$$

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Ya fuck that guy!!

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

He's a corrupt puppet. Probably sold his ass for not that much money either.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

him and this administration are traitors. never go full GOP

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Idk why but fp edits bug the hell out if me. Its the old sports saying i guess. Act like youve been there befire son

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I'm not your pal, Pai.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

He doesn't deal in facts, he already has deals with Verizon

8 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 3

He should read his actual job description

8 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

He'd first have to prise his head from out of Verizon's CEO's butt.

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

He doesn’t deal in facts, he deals in his own bottom line.

8 years ago | Likes 38 Dislikes 4

*Bottom dollar, to be more precise

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Or just his Bottom in general

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Think something is unfuckable? Wait a while and they'll find it and try to fuck it

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 2

"Rules are for poor people" - Ajit Pai

8 years ago | Likes 137 Dislikes 1

Unfortunately, this seems to be true for most of society, America especially. What a shame.

8 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 0

He violates the 9th amendment other rights kept by the people, which is other rights must not be violated by others. 1/2

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

2/2 By removing net neutrality, you would be crippling the first amendment, which is the right to be heard.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Not quite: You don't actually have the right to be heard. You have the right to speak, and the government can't come down on you for it.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Why isn't he fired yet? :S

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I'm in healthcare IT and problems are usually user error or insurance-related. Or the fact that the hospital conglomorate

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

here is full of bad management. But, even as a patient in the system I haven't had problems with internet based services...

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

"I'm sorry you're bleeding out but your insurance only covers dial-up medical record downloads" - Liberty

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

This guy effectively ruined his career and life after he leaves the FCC. Nobody would hire him he is a PR nightmare.

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 2

Yes and Comcast and ISPs are so worried about bad PR

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

he's gonna coast into a cushy desk job where he's gets paid at least half a mil a year doing barely anything.

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

I have a question... since the Cheeto almost exclusively communicates on Twitter, would ISPs be allowed to charge more for it? I know he (1)

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

can't block people on there, so does equal access to his tweets kind of fall under the same rule? (2)

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Is there a real source for this? That website is known for being extremely biased to the point of twisting facts

8 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 3

Read the article linked in OP. It's in there.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 6

"Is there a different source than the one OP posted?" "Just read the source OP posted"

8 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

Well it is there. "Non-bias data sources." TOC says page 207. So rule 439, it looks like.

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Yeah but you're secretly Hitler can we really trust you? /s

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Dear Ajit Pai

8 years ago | Likes 21 Dislikes 1

Advertised as useful but really just shit.

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

As a fellow healthcare IT I'm sad India cares for about the peoples freedom than the US

8 years ago | Likes 22 Dislikes 1

Also, India never was/is serious about cybersecurity or even cyber crime. It is changing but it'll take a decade at least.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I'm glad India cares. It's much more populous.

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

India cares because it is a huge pain in the ass to implement internet regulation without infra to enforce it. It's virtually non existent.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

He doesn't deal in facts, he deals in disinformation.

8 years ago | Likes 767 Dislikes 5

what about datinformation

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Alternate facts are the best facts

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Cough cough 1984!

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Misinformation

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Only a Sith deals in disinformation

8 years ago | Likes 19 Dislikes 0

He deals in disinternet

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

reminds me of maskirovka.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I bet he also only deals in absolutes

8 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 0

"The FCC's website is fake news!"

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Yesterday on vice he said "Government shouldn't regulate internet". Except it's not the internet being regulated, it is the ISPs 1

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It is like saying regulating electric companies is the same as regulating your toaster. 2

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

What brings more harm? His removal or him staying where he is?

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

trump

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

"I learned it by watching you, dad!" *points at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

He deals in money. ISPs what this and he will deliver. He probably hasn’t read any of it save for the numbers on the checks he gets

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

What's scarier is that no one is talking about the person trump put in place for head of education.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Misinformation *

8 years ago | Likes 39 Dislikes 9

Disinformation - false information intended to mislead, especially propaganda issued by a gov. organization to a rival power or the media.

8 years ago | Likes 44 Dislikes 2

Looks like somebody's been.... Disinformed..

8 years ago | Likes 22 Dislikes 0

*Misinformed, probably.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Or bribery

8 years ago | Likes 96 Dislikes 1

For sure. And i would say that to his face.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

It's not bribery if you call it incentives from major isps

8 years ago | Likes 18 Dislikes 0

A turd by any other name...

8 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 0

This is a problem that democracy needs to address. Lying on issues of public interest should be considered official misconduct.

8 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 0

This would be so easy to exploit its not even funny. Politicians lie so often, the party in power could easily put opponents in jail

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

As if the current system isn't exploited to the max. I'm only talking about statements while in office, about public matters.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Obama claimed "fast and furious" was actually a Bush initiative, which is not true. That was a statement in office about public matters

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

So the links you provided wouldn't qualify, it would be a tool that the opposition could use, not the people in power.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Its the people in power, because the department of justice has to press charges, or house has to vote to impeach

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Similarly, politicians should not be allowed to use the disclosure of the activity of an institution for political statements...

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

And this can only happen if they are legally obligated to thruthly disclose information about their activity that is of public interest.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I'm finding this a bit frustrating, not sure if you understand that the public matters need to be within the scope of their own activity.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

So Hillary Clinton lying about the length of the Benghazi probe is not "within the scope of her activity"?

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

They only have to have similar responsabilities to that of a publicly traded company's CEO when releasing information about the company.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It is already possible for them to be censured by congress of ethics violations. Lying is probably considered an ethics violation

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Pai is a terrorist and a traitor.

8 years ago | Likes 433 Dislikes 32

Seriously, the downvotes?

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 4

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

in league with the rebel alliance. Take him away!

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

How?

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

And a part of the Rebel Alliance! Take him away! Lol but no really fuck that guy with rusty pipe

8 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 0

This is on par with people calling Hillary a nazi or Obama a muslim. A corrupt politician isn't the same as someone blowing up civilians.

8 years ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 8

Terrorism isn't just violence

8 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 5

Yeah, sure; A corrupt guy is the same a violent maniac...seriously, I've seen so many posts on Trump's supporter's idiocy on here, and 1/2

8 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

...now you just do the same as them and pretend it's different ? I'm for net neutrality, but this is borderline mob mentality. 2/2

8 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

Good one. Let's hang this mofo.

8 years ago | Likes 26 Dislikes 5

With some power cords.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Better yet some poorly braided Ethernet cables.

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Why not both?

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Is there no other choice?

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

terrorist is a bit much. He doesnt engage in violent behavior in an effort to push some agenda, he does it with false information. However>

8 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 1

>he is absolutely a traitor.

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 2

If someone deliberately kicked off the 1929 Great Depression would that be considered violent?

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 3

yes, but 1) no one did, and 2) we haven't had even a remotely comparable one since then, soooo whats your point?

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

My point is that extensive disruption to a utility is tantamount to violence.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 3

that would make sense if it put anyone's life in danger. which this doesnt.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

It's not technically treason to merely to sell out your country for personal gain. Also, it's not terrorism to actively harm it legally.

8 years ago | Likes 23 Dislikes 6

It is and as Nürnberg stated, your crimes may be legal at the point where you commit them, but punishment can still come.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

That's true.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

thats literally the definition of treason.

8 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

Nah, treason has other qualifiers, legally. And he could argue he believes it's not harmful all day. Tough to demonstrate treason.

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

whether or not he believes its harmful is immaterial. he's lying to the public he purports to serve, while working for those whose>

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

>whose interests do not align with that of the american public.

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

So it's treason then

8 years ago | Likes 186 Dislikes 1

What about the droid attack on the Wookies?

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

[ghoulish shrieking]

8 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 1

*does a 1080 flip like an absolute madman*

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Wish we still executed treasonous fuckers

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

We have to be at war with the country for it to be treason which is a shame because what the Republicans did to the election should be

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 3

Boooo

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Bies......... Boooobies*

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

...Can...can you get him for that?...If so...do it.

8 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 5

We're still working on getting the president, VP, cabinet, and president's extended family for treason. We have a lot on our plate rn.

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 3

Sorry dude. I don't believe he's guilty of treason. It was a star wars quote

8 years ago | Likes 19 Dislikes 0

Any position of power in the US affecting the country, that sells out, should be considered treason. Same with selling our information.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

That's a hard thing to define to not have it manipulated for political purges

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Can we not still try?

8 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 2

Try not. Do or do not. There is no try.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Are you threatening me master jedi

8 years ago | Likes 56 Dislikes 0

The Senate will decide your fate

8 years ago | Likes 19 Dislikes 0

I am the FCC

8 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 0

8 years ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 0

*autistic screeching*

8 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

Why is this guy still in charge of the FCC?!? For fuck sake!

8 years ago | Likes 405 Dislikes 6

If the slight chance comes that he loses and we keep NN, He won't be head chairman for much longer.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

The guy in charge of the EPA sued them 40 times. Sec of State is gutting his office. Mulvaney wants to blow up CFPB. See a pattern?

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

November 8th, 2016 was your chance to do something about it. Americans decided they hate Net Neutrality as much as Pai does.

8 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 3

It'd be sweet if this guy had gone Super Saiyan

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Because the Republicans are in charge.

8 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 3

Isn’t Trump his boss?

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

hey man, at least the swamp was drained. just because there's some moss, alligators, and leeches still doesn't mean anything

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Cause you elected a clown, remember? It might seem like a long time ago, but it's been hardly a year.

8 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

Because it’s an appointed position that changes depending on who’s in power instead of being independently elected with oversight

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Have you seen who is in charge of the EPA now? Pollution is healthy now btw.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Because Obama went: "This guy can't possibly be that bad." And then Trump went: "Let's make him Head of the FCC!" Then Pai went: "Money~..."

8 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 6

The fcc is staffed with five commissioners. Two are nominated by the party out of power, three by the party in power. Pai is an R.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Republicans want him there. And they control the government.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Same reason we still have trump as potus

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Because the GOP wants him there and y'all guys gave them card blanche. Recommended by Mitch McConnel for a job in the FCC, Trump later

8 years ago | Likes 18 Dislikes 4

Made him head of it. Unless the GOP changes their mind not much will be done

8 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 0

Because, given who holds all the levers of power in DC at the moment, who would you expect to remove him?

8 years ago | Likes 144 Dislikes 5

The Coast Guard

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

None of the whores in power....now. Remember this B.S. at the next election. Also on the state level elections

8 years ago | Likes 56 Dislikes 0

Omg this. Thank you

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Removing him is a DLC

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

A gun owner.

8 years ago | Likes 24 Dislikes 3

that is often stated why we have them, yet i dont see it happening. Tyranny presses forward.

8 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 1

The majority of gun owners support trump, and therefore support pai, and many are anti net neutrality based on that alone. Its crazy.

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 2

Fuck my life

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

What scares me is if Trump is ever impeached, there will be a LOT of angry gun owners...

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Because Donald Trump is President because of fucktard Americans who keep voting against their own self interests for Republican politicians!

8 years ago | Likes 58 Dislikes 16

Instead of investigating Russia for rigging the election, they should investigate ISIS. What if, instead of direct terrorist attacks on the

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

US, they just planted a fat, orange, incompetent, worthless cunt in the oval office?

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Not sure why that was downvoted, it's true, and it's becoming more apparent everyday.

8 years ago | Likes 18 Dislikes 7

We'll show those commie libruls! No socialism in MY 'Murica!!

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

CM Punk has a reaction gif for everything!

8 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

You expect anything less from the best in the world?

8 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 0

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

You should see what the EPA has been up to if you really want to be pissed.

8 years ago | Likes 61 Dislikes 4

What have they been up to

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Thanks to Trump and Pruitt, the Environmental Protection Agency has been turned into the Corporate Protection Agency.

8 years ago | Likes 22 Dislikes 2

One of the scientists he installed had previously concluded that some pollution was healthy to child lungs during development.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

That's because climate change is a Chinese hoax designed to ruin the American economy huuuuuuuuurrrrrrrrrr duuuuurrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

8 years ago | Likes 33 Dislikes 2

"Ruin". New desirable tech on an open market, that's a recipie for an economic boom and prosperous times, the very factor economies rely on.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

What have they been up to?

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Unheard of levels of fuckery

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Instead of the EPA it should be renamed the environmental harming agency to better reflect pruitt's goals.

8 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

Fairly sure anyone that gets funding from them can no longer publish papers supporting climate change

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

"Here's money for research, but don't you dare publish the results of that research"

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

It's freaking insane

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Future Earth is so screwed

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

It's a good thing I was already not planning on having kids.

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Why has it not come out that hackers turned this dude's life inside out yet?

8 years ago | Likes 143 Dislikes 8

The hacks are getting paid too

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 4

Because he’s kind of a big deal and an attack on him will make him a martyr

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

A martyr implies some kind of followers who's believe would get justification by his death.

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Would it though? Everyone I know is either, 'yeah fuck that guy' or 'who the fuck is that'. No one cares..

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

"How did Nixon win? No one I know voted for him"

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Source? I'd love to read up on it but not sure what to google.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

That was a question, not a statement. Nothing like that has happened.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

To your knowledge.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I mean I didn't offer any real tangible info but if you're interested, look too the hacker group Anonymous.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Black hats are rare, politically motivated black hats are even more rare.

8 years ago | Likes 80 Dislikes 0

Yeah but if any hacker wants one thing, it's for the internet to stay open and free..

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Well, not really. A good hacker will still have open access and a packaged system would be easier to hack via social info gathering.

8 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

But, if were hacking to save net neutrality, wouldn't they be white hats?

8 years ago | Likes 20 Dislikes 3

Depends on who's viewing them. Govt - black hat, internet users- white hat

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 7

Black hat just implies some breech of the law

8 years ago | Likes 20 Dislikes 0

Malicious intent, not even legality.

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

At best they'd be gray hat. White hat means they have a *formal* relationship to do penetration testing for the victim.

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Im all fot Pai being penetrated.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

What about Anonymous?

8 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 6

You mean the ones who made Trump (who fully opposes net neutrality (i.e. freedom of speech)) a thing?

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I'm going to laugh at you, for your naivety is very amusing. BTW, Anonymous is a joke. Never should place the hope on strangers, ever.

8 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 3

They're a joke. Wait, no; they're just a meme.

8 years ago | Likes 32 Dislikes 1

They're pretty much a non-entity at this point.

8 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 0

Did I miss something?

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

They've just done nothing of note in the past several years

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0