ZunaSuperTaker
261639
8759
288
FCC Chairman and former Verizon lawyer Ajit Pai remains determined to gut net neutrality.
If he succeeds, Internet providers will gain new powers to block sites and apps, charge users more money, or force companies to pay expensive “prioritization” fees just to reach you.
He's not even trying to pretend that he's running a legitimate process. He’s suppressed key evidence[1], ignored issues like fake comments,[2][3] and refused to comply with transparency laws that would hold his agency to account.[4] This is corruption, plain and simple.
In the next few days, the Senate will hold a crucial vote that will determine whether Pai is reconfirmed as Chairman of the FCC. Take a second to click here and tell your Senator to fire Pai and save the open web while there’s still time.
There’s no shortage of reasons to fire Pai. Since he took the reins of the FCC, he celebrated the death of privacy rules that stop Internet providers like Comcast from collecting and selling your personal, sensitive information to advertisers.
Then he launched his all out attack on net neutrality protections that keep the web free from censorship, throttling, and extra fees. But we can stop him.
The Senate could reconfirm Pai in the next few days. Sign our #FirePai petition now to tell your representatives: "A vote for Ajit Pai is a vote against the Internet."
We’re counting on you,
Josh, Evan, and the team at Fight for the Future
Footnotes:
[1] https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/09/fcc-makes-net-neutrality-complaints-public-but-too-late-to-stop-repeal/
[2] https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/08/democrats-want-investigation-of-net-neutrality-comment-system-outage/
[3] https://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome/?toURL=https://www.forbes.com/sites/tonybradley/2017/05/26/victims-demand-fcc-remove-fake-anti-net-neutrality-comments/
[4] https://gizmodo.com/fcc-sued-over-failure-to-comply-with-transparency-law-a-179764463
For chairman:https://actionnetwork.org/petitions/tell-your-senators-fire-ajit-pai-the-fcc-chairman-trying-to-kill-net-neutrality
Edit: I didn't realize that people were real name please use my username and yes and so viral too wow
WellintheNavy
This is why a Deathnote would be nice to have.
Clown2Clown
He even looks like a sack of shit.
POWAAAAAAAAAAAAR
If John Oliver's theory about Congress is correct, I SHOULD support Pai if my senator is Ted Cruz, then Cruz supports Pai, then (1/2)
POWAAAAAAAAAAAAR
(2/2) the Senate tells Cruz to go fuck himself, and then they vote against Cruz and Pai, therefore saving net neutrality.
spacemonkey127
He looks like the type of guy that would take credit for the work of everyone else while working on a project.
cbale2000
Because a government-controlled internet would be so much free-er... #greatfirewallofchina
Seedster5
It's over. The end. The only way to stop this is if the guy drops dead. I'll pray if I have to.
shitonyourmom
Sorry, but no. This is the GOP. They picked him and he is literally enacting their cause. The answer is vote the GOP out.
MeinPanzerBringsAllZeJerrysToMeinYard
Can u even english
fedoras
I can now internet
3dmunddant3s
Engrish? How can engrish I?
JoSTL15
I think they had a stroke
Pineappleinthedesert
You* ?*
ItsActuallyDavidNow
But how did you get that big’ol red X in the title?
rtillerson1
I would like to know that as well
sonof
The good news is that premiums will drop by $2,500 per family and you can keep your current plan and doctor. We can read all about it after.
usernametakenisthestoryofmylife
No. His arguement is that under the current model, carriers have no incentive to invest, which is partially true according to telcos. 1/n>
usernametakenisthestoryofmylife
But truth be told, AT&T, Verizon, etc. are making plenty of money off current business model. Yes, new model would be more lucrative, 2/n>
usernametakenisthestoryofmylife
And this is where Douchenozzle fits in. He's been basically bought by the telcos. Fuck him and his waek arguments, we need experts to 3/n>
usernametakenisthestoryofmylife
stand up to him and argue with facts. He's not a tech expert, and that needs to be brought out. His motive needs to be brought to light.
beautifulsunshine87
Why is he doing this though? Is he being paid off?
TheHeadOfAlfredoGarcia
Because he’s a garden-variety Republican, and modern Republican dogma says that corporations should be able to do whoever they want
TheVampireDante
His ideas pass, he leaves the FCC and then works himself into one of the companies that would benefit from the new restrictions, cash grab.
damspam
Formerly worked for Verizon but nah I'm sure he's totally on the level.
circlebreaker
@ZunaSuperTaker Found him. https://www.facebook.com/ajitvpai His profile pic. was changed to a white square jpg, but there's one pic of him.
OsoLoco1313
As a Canadian I say...Kick his ass to the curb!
Strostkovy
I just hate that fucking mug
MatrimBloodyCauthon
The same amount, less or more than Trumo? Because he doesn't come close in my eyes
OaksParcel
I agree. Also, his coffee cup is annoying.
Counterfit
I actually like the mug, but I hate how he won't STFU about it. It's neat, but not nearly as clever as he tries to make it.
ThisIsGod
Do you think he takes it home and uses it casually with breakfast? Does it fit in the sink or does he have to put it in the dishwasher?
50m31AW
My guess is that the the mug IS the sink
TheMershedPerderder
Break his mug, than make sure no one will sell him another one over the internet.
Birdie87
It has to make up for something else that he dose not have. But I too hate that cup
Syikho
My son has the same mug but smaller, it also came with a bag of mini Reese's. It however didn't come with a giant asshat attached.
Darkspire
Sold separately. Rather expensive though, only corporations can really afford him.
SpaceGK
I wonder if this picture with that mug actually caused even a slight fluctuation to Hershey's stock prices
ThatsGrimKraken
Somehow I doubt it, but what do I know, I'm not an avid sales researcher or anything.
Swallowtailxx
Yeah mugs that big make tea go cold really fast.
MechanusIncarnate
I'd think it would retain heat for longer, as the volume of the heat reservoir grows faster than the cooling surface area. (cube vs square)
Swallowtailxx
You clearly haven't tried it with tea.
strongbadia7
I just want to drop his stupid fucking mug in the breakroom sink. Fuck you, dude.
TheCeilingIsLava
You are the most decent person in the comments. Everyone else just wants to kill him or poop on him.
klj126
Can i do all three?
TheCeilingIsLava
There are many legal and moral guidelines that tell us not to kill people. if you ignore them there's this thing called prison
klj126
Its only illegal if i get caught. Its not like they can find my dna
Appl3sSauc3
Yes, because more government regulation is always a good thing. Screw net neutrality, let the best rise to the top.
omh1
You mean the wealthiest? because without net neutrality any online business is literally buying its customer base, no competition allowed
OMFGWhatHaveWeDONE
https://imgur.com/L2bRHf6
MechanusIncarnate
People keep misinterpreting that. When you drain spaghetti, you are left with noodles. When you drain the swamp, you get muck, as promised.
KanyeWesticularCancer
I’m pretty sure my reps know me personally on account of me calling them probably once or twice a week
Spys1x
Its called title 2 not net neutrality and the internet was fine before title 2's implementation. Why have the government control internet?
omh1
The laws were added because ISPs were throttling and disrupting p2p traffic 2005-2014ish, title2 is just the form net neutrality laws took
omh1
the FCC tried multiple times to create net neutrality laws, the striped down version of title 2 was the only form of the laws that passed
TheCeilingIsLava
Exactly! The throttling distopia can't happen, it is imagined! We've seen a world without Title II - for most of the internet's history.
omh1
It did happen thou, the FCC having to step in when ISPs were throttling, or intentionally disrupting p2p traffic is what prompted NN laws
12rt2345g342563
Is this the retarded talking point that's being passed around to uninformed old white people now? "The internet was fine before dagnabbit!"
12rt2345g342563
Without understanding any context of what this is about?
malexmatt
It's no less stupid than the transposed cable package ad people post. I've come around on Net Neutrality, but because 1/
malexmatt
the EFF supports it, not because of idiot propaganda. 2/2
ILikedTheirOldStuffBetter
God, this guy is just right up there with the pharmabro Martin Skrelli in the most punchable faces category.
AsABiologistWhoIsNotFunAtParties
And this guy even did something wrong!
[deleted]
[deleted]
Cheomesh
Securities Fraud is no joke.
AsABiologistWhoIsNotFunAtParties
Fair enough, I'd amend my comment to "And what the public hates this guy for is actually justified!"
absinthemindedprofessor
Amen
fightfightfightlosewinfight
Don't forget Milo Yapanapadoopalis.
frankxcid
Net neutrality is garbage. Instead of allowing people to vote with their wallet you people want to trust the government instead
imgurdemocratcirclejerk
Torn on this one just due to the big ISPs crushing competition. Sadly the government might nlbeour only recourse. I really hate to say that.
frankxcid
Isps are competing for your business. The proof is Verizon capitulating to unlimited plans recently because of competition
omh1
Net Neutrality is letting people vote with their wallet, the same laws apply to the electrical grid, and transport companies
omh1
it exists to prevent infrastructure companies from picking who gets access to their infrastructure, ie a trucking company only allowing 1
omh1
grocery store to receive stock, forcing the rest to wait until the first has every location fully stocked and only then delivering to them
frankxcid
Net neutrality is government artificially restricting the market. Internet not like utilities. At this moment I have access to 3 different
frankxcid
3 different isps. There is no way to access 3 gas suppliers or electrical suppliers
omh1
That is a somewhat unique situation to be in, large swaths of the state have 1 ISP, what market is net neutrality restricting? The laws only
omh1
affect what an ISP can do to traffic on their network, specifically they cannot treat traffic differently depending on its source
WeHadAnAgreementToNeverComeHereAgainSoRunAwayNow
"if want to fire this guy, then you can now internet"
soaksloginwood
They should take YOUR internet away for posting that title.
Thrishul
I think you have to call your senators office to make a difference. Tweeting and emailing does not work.
sundaymondayhippyday
Hard copy with letters, envelopes and all they are documents that have to read, filed and stored!
crashcar22
Clicking on your provided link the website said welcome back Alexandria! I wonder if the website thought I was you
awkwarddoubleletters
i got it too.
Screwdizzle
Sorry, but everything this site has said about this issue is partisan drivel.
HypnoChanger
I've never once heard a good argument for killing net neutrality beyond "We can trust these guys! We don't need laws for this!"
Screwdizzle
"Net neutrality" is a nonsense word at this point. Title II is a law written in 1934 for radio and gives the gov almost total control.
HypnoChanger
The only reason we use Title II is because an ISP sued to try to stop the FCC from enforcing Net Neutrality. Which means they absolutely 1/
HypnoChanger
have plans to break net neutrality the moment they can get away with it. They wouldn't waste the money otherwise.
Screwdizzle
It was shoved in by Obama in '14 to save face after the elections. The Dems love it because they want to control everything.
Screwdizzle
If you read the Rep responses, they say a better solution is needed. TItle II does not stop ISPs from charging Google, etc.
Screwdizzle
Also I'm not sure how we jump from Google having to pay more to paid fast lanes. You're complaining about a problem that doesn't exist.
Sionas
There's dumb fucks who actually support this guy. Trash
revelator
They're called "economists."
Idsertian
I prefer "cunts".
12rt2345g342563
Why would an economist want to wall off the most productive part of the world economy in the past 20 years.
12rt2345g342563
The internet facilitates economic activity.
chiefs86
Because you're not walling it off. You're removing potential government intervention. You're only getting one side of this argument.
onlyhalfghost
no, actually, most economists also think removing net neutrality is a bad idea. You're thinking "Verizon executives."
revelator
There aren't too many economists that are pro net neutrality. Either opposed, or unsure. http://www.igmchicago.org/surveys/net-neutrality-ii
onlyhalfghost
That survey's question has very little to do with net neutrality; you might as well ask if they support paying for higher bandwidth.
revelator
The actual wording of the question AND respondents' comments make it clear they understand this is not merely about bandwidth.
12rt2345g342563
That's nonsense. The question is structured in such a way to make it seem as if net neutrality is only about charging more for data usage.
revelator
"let companies that send video etc to consumers pay more to ISPs for the right to send that traffic using faster or higher quality service"
revelator
E.g. allow companies like Netflix have priority with their traffic. Quite clearly about something other than plain data usage.
theprincessearth12311
Fuck this guy
letstalknews
With a bigggggg dick
UnlicensedDoc
These attacks will continue as long as Verizon, AT&T, etc. have the power to affect government, unfortunately. We must always be alert.
StaticVoidFalafel
I hope he get fired for the sake if freedom
theshinobi23
Fuck AJit from the Appalachian Mountains.
lncorrectGrammerNazi
IUnderstoodThatReference.jpg
ActuallyBaffled
That'd be generous, I'd say fuck this guy up.
Niggawhat
ididntchoosethegingerlifethegingerlifechoseme
Keep in mind he's a Republican! Remember that next time you're go to the polls folks...
RelativeVelocity
It's weird that people would vote Republican when the Democrats are so incorruptible and sin free and always transparent. Oh wait...
boomshakalack
I mean relatively speaking the kinda are.
K1ltu
I mean the Democrats aren't the ones that just tried to take 30 million Peoples Insurance they're not perfect but they're not genocidal
Shohanna
YET!! Is the missing operative word you are looking for! O.o
ididntchoosethegingerlifethegingerlifechoseme
Yeah great argument. PEOPLE WHO FIGHT NAZIS ALSO MAKE MISTAKES, GUESS WE SHOULD JUST BE NAZIS THEN...
HecticHero
So by your logic, Antifa isn't a domestic terrorism organization?
ididntchoosethegingerlifethegingerlifechoseme
No. You're an idiot. Your argument is idiotic. If you have children, they're probably dumb sacks of shit. Get it together, you stupid fuck.
VaderFan2187
That's not what he was saying.
ididntchoosethegingerlifethegingerlifechoseme
No? Explain why.
DNJANinSFL
So what you're saying is right now nobody is controlling the internet, monitoring our activity, censoring and getting paid for it??
shitonyourmom
As far as traffic, no, there isn't. Your ISP cannot control the speed at which you browse or what you're allowed to (for now).
NotAIIHeroesWearCapes
Not to this extent man. Yes your isps gather you into and what you do but they can't throttle your speed when you are on pornhub
DNJANinSFL
Ever use Google or Facebook and get custom advertisements? Cell phones throttle speeds all the time. Still not good, just saying it happens
omh1
monitoring yes, censoring probably to some extent, but not straight up profiteering off treating the entire internet like toll roads
DNJANinSFL
How do companies like Google and Facebook make money? How do they get those advertisements specific for you? It already is a toll road
omh1
that isn't a toll road, a toll road would be the ISP who you are paying to access the internet then asking google for $100M or they slow
omh1
their site to the point that everyone just uses bing, because shitty search results now are better then good search results in 2 min
whydotheycometometodie
If net neutrality is removed, controls & failures in one network will affect others. This removes survivability features of the internet.
TheCeilingIsLava
Before the Title II categorization, everything was the same as it is now. The throttling distopia was already impossible.
omh1
prior to the early 2000's the level of throttling people are afraid of was prohibitively expensive, efforts to make net neutrality laws
omh1
prior to the early 2000's the level of throttling people are afraid of was prohibitively expensive, efforts to make net neutrality laws
omh1
started in 2005, and took nearly a decade to actually become law, prompted by ISPs starting to throttle based on content type
DNJANinSFL
Throttling is only 1 part of the whole thing. Plus why can't tech companies develop lighter leaner methods? mp3 vs avi, I don't mind paying
TheCeilingIsLava
They wish they could develop their own standards. But they shouldn't. and usually can't. besides, MPEG is already working miracles!
DNJANinSFL
Yep it is, all until something better comes along. Why wouldn't or shouldn't something better come along?
whydotheycometometodie
Only individual throttling to prevent individual abuse is allowed. Removing Net Neutrality allows throttling across entire networks at once
TheCeilingIsLava
It never happened. it was never a problem. it never made a single headline. The injustices we praise Title II for solving never existed.
whydotheycometometodie
Title II redefines "common carrier" 706 redefines "broadband". ISPs are now common carriers and regulated like pipeline/trucking companies
omh1
The mid 2000s through 2014 when ISPs were throttling p2p traffic? Comcast was literally sued over it by the FCC - case: 600 F.3d 642
GlynStlln
No, no, no no. Do not say that it is because he is trying to take away free internet, because politicians don't care. Instead say it is (1)
MalthusAndreusDrake
right! please get rid of him for his corruption!
mph5mph
You're hired.
CongratsYouAreHereNow
no no no no. say because i disagree with him and if you don't fire him, i'll do everything in my power to fire YOU!
GlynStlln
Pai's position isn't one based on public support, and using your vote and support to pull someone from a position simply because they (1)
GlynStlln
don't follow your beliefs (no matter how valid) would make you no better than the ones we are trying to remove. This needs to be done (2)
omh1
That pretty much exactly how a democratic government works thou? If politician A doesn't vote the way I want, I will vote for politician B
IwentLookingForWhatTheBiggestIdiotHasToSayAndHereYouAre
maybe, but it works on the ones who make the decisions
CongratsYouAreHereNow
don't we all vote for the people we feel agree with our beliefs the most? if i elect you to lead and you don't stand up for what i believe
CongratsYouAreHereNow
in, you're getting the sack. we need to remind these fuckers that we hold their jobs in our hands
GlynStlln
from a strictly legal standpoint, despite his beliefs this needs to be a punishment for the ILLEGAL actions and acts he committed. Not (3)
GlynStlln
because of his views and stances on policy. After Pai is out of office, THEN we can go back to the net neutrality stance, but until then (4)
ChallengerDeep
You're right and folks here don't understand politics. "No one will really understand politics until they understand that politicians [1/N]
ChallengerDeep
are not trying to solve our problems. They are trying to solve their own problems -- of which getting elected and re-elected are [2/3]
ChallengerDeep
No. 1 and No. 2. Whatever is No. 3 is far behind". -- Thomas Sowell
CongratsYouAreHereNow
thank you sir, i assume you're not one of the 50 people that down voted me? hahahaha
GlynStlln
because of the corruption and illegal actions he is taking. I support net neutraility 100%, but you can't fire someone for not (2)
PrincessChub
Well actually, he's a public rep which means if enough citizens support net neutrality you actually can fire him for not supporting it.
dumptrucksrock
Because he many other counts of corruption are just not as important.
lcplspanky
Especially since last time I emailed my state government on the issue, I got back like 5 emails saying they agreed with him. Colorado
kirbfucius
Same in North Carolina.
AdmiralButtStuff
Our Senators fucking suck dude... And I say this coming from SC where we have Lindsey Graham's lying psychotic ass.
kirbfucius
We managed to get Duke Energy sycophant McCrory out. Hopefully 2018 goes that way, too.
GlynStlln
supporting net neutrality, but you can fire someone for corruption, suppressing evidence, and refusal to comply with transparency laws. (3)
janlevinson
Do our senators care about corruption?
Seggs
whos your senator?
TheOvy
Pai serves at the pleasure of Congress and the President. They don't owe him a confirmation, regardless of his conduct. It's not a firing.
Chakra5
Not a confirmation. His term is up and congress must renew or he hits the bricks.
TheOvy
A congressional vote is tantamount to confirmation. In the political world, it's strange to consider it as anything else
GlynStlln
attack him on THAT front. Senators dont care about your net neutrality rights, or else this wouldn't even be up for debate. Attack the (4)
GlynStlln
legitimate illegal actions he has taken, for a definite chance at removing this shit stain from office. (5) End rant.
[deleted]
[deleted]
strcmdman
So much this. Your actions may even educate those on the receiving end.
JimmyWalkerTexasRanger
This lovely cascade of point (numbers and otherwise) agreement is brilliant. Passionate and logically delivered. Cheers.
icelandicsealbear
Telling them your stance on net neutrality will inform them on the voters stance on the issue. Right now they only know what the corps...
ShamelessRepostin
This is prefect. God speed m8
talos2
It is completely acceptable to replace him because the people don't believe he represents their interests.
TheVampireDante
Also (if needed) remind them that their details may be amongst the material he'd propose companies could sell, should ruffle a few feathers.
extremeblueness
What about an argument from free speech?
Thorslax
Can you make a post about that, please?
SLTWWS
Keep being you