Yesterday, 12:25 PM
There were a slew of ways I could have tried to categorize this thread offering.
I could have made it about "rampant capitalistic profiteering,"
it could have been about "commercial capturing of regulatory agencies,"
or maybe, "Trump's already enabling PITA ideas... to favor the "Big" sectors."
Perhaps it was possible to avoid all and any of those 'perspectives' but just going down the road of thought which include,
"makes no difference who is president, or what they might "say" they'll do."
Trump has selected someone he feels can lead the The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) who had already "weighed in" on an issue while standing in opposition to a legal confrontation over at the FCC. The short version is that someone determined that the "Industry standard" ideation about things like "data caps" and "usage-based charging" represented an abuse by the industry, to extract unreasonable profit from the public... after research and consideration the FCC brought it's remedy to the industry. The industry collectively cried "Foul!" Mounting a cadre of lawyers to bring legal challenges to the effort. Beginning from "The FCC has no jurisdiction!" to "It's "best" for the people."
The potential would-be new leader of the FCC will be of the "It's good for the people variety."
This seems to be on a trajectory with a similar timid and weak challenge to the industry narrative of "bandwidth" throttling... Doesn't that still happen, despite challenges?
It seems that every time the "FCC "is in play, I can anticipate me getting heartburn.
They are so weak as to have become a simple tool for the gatekeepers.
The consumer gets to pretend the internet is a 'flow' of water in a pipe which the industry owns. It's not. There is no pipe. They get to pretend that they are "controlling the flow" for the benefit of the consumers... as if there was such a thing a virtual scarcity. But hey, that's just me.
I won't ever deny that I had come to feel a Trump presidency was preferable to a Harris... but this kowtowing to "big business" makes me uncomfortable...
Inspired from ArsTechnica: Cable companies and Trump’s FCC chair agree: Data caps are good for you
There are a number of other threads I have attempted dealing with the FCC, which I think is on a level with the "BLM (Bureau of Land Management)" of old. It seems either deliberately neutered (as if it were just a "show" agency - a placeholder) or as complete infiltration operation by the commercial powers of the nation.
Thanks for listening to me think this through...
I could have made it about "rampant capitalistic profiteering,"
it could have been about "commercial capturing of regulatory agencies,"
or maybe, "Trump's already enabling PITA ideas... to favor the "Big" sectors."
Perhaps it was possible to avoid all and any of those 'perspectives' but just going down the road of thought which include,
"makes no difference who is president, or what they might "say" they'll do."
Trump has selected someone he feels can lead the The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) who had already "weighed in" on an issue while standing in opposition to a legal confrontation over at the FCC. The short version is that someone determined that the "Industry standard" ideation about things like "data caps" and "usage-based charging" represented an abuse by the industry, to extract unreasonable profit from the public... after research and consideration the FCC brought it's remedy to the industry. The industry collectively cried "Foul!" Mounting a cadre of lawyers to bring legal challenges to the effort. Beginning from "The FCC has no jurisdiction!" to "It's "best" for the people."
The potential would-be new leader of the FCC will be of the "It's good for the people variety."
This seems to be on a trajectory with a similar timid and weak challenge to the industry narrative of "bandwidth" throttling... Doesn't that still happen, despite challenges?
It seems that every time the "FCC "is in play, I can anticipate me getting heartburn.
They are so weak as to have become a simple tool for the gatekeepers.
The consumer gets to pretend the internet is a 'flow' of water in a pipe which the industry owns. It's not. There is no pipe. They get to pretend that they are "controlling the flow" for the benefit of the consumers... as if there was such a thing a virtual scarcity. But hey, that's just me.
I won't ever deny that I had come to feel a Trump presidency was preferable to a Harris... but this kowtowing to "big business" makes me uncomfortable...
Inspired from ArsTechnica: Cable companies and Trump’s FCC chair agree: Data caps are good for you
There are a number of other threads I have attempted dealing with the FCC, which I think is on a level with the "BLM (Bureau of Land Management)" of old. It seems either deliberately neutered (as if it were just a "show" agency - a placeholder) or as complete infiltration operation by the commercial powers of the nation.
Thanks for listening to me think this through...
