Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NPR)   It only took a 13 minute rant about Net Neutrality, along with a pleading to internet trolls everywhere to help, but John Oliver managed to crash the FCC's commenting system in order to save the internet   (npr.org ) divider line
    More: Hero  
•       •       •

5260 clicks; posted to Politics » on 04 Jun 2014 at 9:59 AM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



120 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2014-06-04 08:21:18 AM  
45,000 comments is probably more then they have ever gotten.  I wonder if they'll care.  Obama can't run again, and the FCC chair will go back to work for the cable companies for a hefty salary, especially if he delivers the goods.
 
2014-06-04 08:26:23 AM  

EvilEgg: 45,000 comments is probably more then they have ever gotten.


2000 was the previous record

EvilEgg: I wonder if they'll care.


eh, one can hope
 
2014-06-04 08:27:19 AM  
Just to be clear, they've gotten 45,000 comments since May. John Oliver did not cause 45,000 comments to be received.
 
2014-06-04 08:35:20 AM  

Pocket Ninja: Just to be clear, they've gotten 45,000 comments since May. John Oliver did not cause 45,000 comments to be received.


I tried to log on at the beginning of his bit and it was already at 40k, if I remember. And it stopped working on my first attempt.
 
2014-06-04 09:30:24 AM  
The best part of notice and comment rulemaking is that under the APA, the FCC is  required to read all of those comments and consider all "relevant" material.
 
2014-06-04 10:02:02 AM  

Rincewind53: The best part of notice and comment rulemaking is that under the APA, the FCC is  requiredto read all of those comments and consider all "relevant" material.


"I don't recall the details of those comments"
--Decision maker who didn't read them at all.
 
2014-06-04 10:02:55 AM  

Rincewind53: The best part of notice and comment rulemaking is that under the APA, the FCC is  required to read all of those comments and consider all "relevant" material.


All that means is that some poor interns will have to read them all and then do a basic summary to the commissioners.
 
2014-06-04 10:07:04 AM  
That's all well and good, but at the end, it's the big money that will talk.

The only hope is that, there are big money involved on the side that would help average Joe as well.
 
2014-06-04 10:07:13 AM  

sdd2000: Rincewind53: The best part of notice and comment rulemaking is that under the APA, the FCC is  required to read all of those comments and consider all "relevant" material.

All that means is that some poor interns will have to read them all and then do a basic summary to the commissioners.


Maybe "Eat a bag of dicks" will be filed as relevant in the Library of Congress.
 
2014-06-04 10:07:50 AM  

EvilEgg: 45,000 comments is probably more then they have ever gotten.  I wonder if they'll care.  Obama can't run again, and the FCC chair will go back to work for the cable companies for a hefty salary, especially if he delivers the goods.


"If you believe all the hard work you've done for change will not matter in the face of your percieved injustice, you never deserved change the first place."

-Hagbard Celine
"Never Whistle While You're Pissing"
 
2014-06-04 10:09:08 AM  

sdd2000: Rincewind53: The best part of notice and comment rulemaking is that under the APA, the FCC is  required to read all of those comments and consider all "relevant" material.

All that means is that some poor interns will have to read them all and then do a basic summary to the commissioners.


How do you guarantee that someone read something unless you test them? Since there is no testing system, the interns will most likely browse FARK and at the end of the day, compile an imaginary list.
 
2014-06-04 10:12:20 AM  

mayIFark: sdd2000: Rincewind53: The best part of notice and comment rulemaking is that under the APA, the FCC is  required to read all of those comments and consider all "relevant" material.

All that means is that some poor interns will have to read them all and then do a basic summary to the commissioners.

How do you guarantee that someone read something unless you test them? Since there is no testing system, the interns will most likely browse FARK and at the end of the day, compile an imaginary list.


They're all public, you can read them yourself. The ones I was able to read before were actually quite well written.

Funny enough, it individually converts them to pdf to display it. Probably not the best way to do things.
 
2014-06-04 10:13:16 AM  

Jaden Smith First of His Name: sdd2000: Rincewind53: The best part of notice and comment rulemaking is that under the APA, the FCC is  required to read all of those comments and consider all "relevant" material.

All that means is that some poor interns will have to read them all and then do a basic summary to the commissioners.

Maybe "Eat a bag of dicks" will be filed as relevant in the Library of Congress.


In this case, it should.
 
2014-06-04 10:13:27 AM  
Why the Belo, Gannett or Sinclair owned TV stations here claimed Oliver incited hackers to destroy the system.  Gannett and Sinclair own two each.  Seems if there's no internet, they could broadcast even more stale stories as breaking news and we'd have to listen to Voice of America for news from the outside..
 
2014-06-04 10:13:28 AM  
I emailed them a couple of weeks ago. It wasnt until after the show that they responded to me with a generic bs letter.
 
2014-06-04 10:16:52 AM  

Nemo's Brother: I emailed them a couple of weeks ago. It wasnt until after the show that they responded to me with a generic bs letter.


According to the Article they have received over 300,000 e-mails in addition to the 45,000 comments.  That system was probably overloaded as well.
 
2014-06-04 10:18:13 AM  

Nadie_AZ: Pocket Ninja: Just to be clear, they've gotten 45,000 comments since May. John Oliver did not cause 45,000 comments to be received.

I tried to log on at the beginning of his bit and it was already at 40k, if I remember. And it stopped working on my first attempt.


When I commented a couple days ago it did take a few attempts, and the "last 30 days" total was over 47,000.
I'd be curious to see what the total number of comments was.
 
2014-06-04 10:18:29 AM  

rjakobi: EvilEgg: 45,000 comments is probably more then they have ever gotten.  I wonder if they'll care.  Obama can't run again, and the FCC chair will go back to work for the cable companies for a hefty salary, especially if he delivers the goods.

"If you believe all the hard work you've done for change will not matter in the face of your percieved injustice, you never deserved change the first place."

-Hagbard Celine Rand Paul
"Never Whistle While You're Pissing" Vedas of the AquaBuddha

 
2014-06-04 10:18:39 AM  

Nemo's Brother: I emailed them a couple of weeks ago. It wasnt until after the show that they responded to me with a generic bs letter.


Hey, you might need to take a dump, then discover your toilet paper roll is empty.  Then you'll be thanking the FCC.
 
2014-06-04 10:18:45 AM  

Rincewind53: The best part of notice and comment rulemaking is that under the APA, the FCC is  required to read all of those comments and consider all "relevant" material.


www.wwe.com
I'd do what they told me to, too.
 
2014-06-04 10:19:40 AM  
CGP Grey did it less-funnily, but earlier
 
2014-06-04 10:22:38 AM  
Comments without checks attached will be disregarded.
Yours Truly,
The FCC
 
2014-06-04 10:22:40 AM  

mayIFark: sdd2000: Rincewind53: The best part of notice and comment rulemaking is that under the APA, the FCC is  required to read all of those comments and consider all "relevant" material.

All that means is that some poor interns will have to read them all and then do a basic summary to the commissioners.

How do you guarantee that someone read something unless you test them? Since there is no testing system, the interns will most likely browse FARK and at the end of the day, compile an imaginary list.


There is a congressional oversight committee here are the members in case you want to remind them it is an election year and lots of people are against what the FCC is trying to do.
 
2014-06-04 10:22:51 AM  
Unfortunately, the comments aren't going to matter with this particular verdict.
 
2014-06-04 10:26:02 AM  
"Fly, my pretties!" -- I loved that
 
2014-06-04 10:28:05 AM  

fiddlehead: Unfortunately, the comments aren't going to matter with this particular verdict.


Unless pressure is put on the the Energy and Commerce Committee in fact there is a new media ownership hearing in a week,  people should let the committee members know this issue needs to be raised and considered part of media ownership laws.

http://energycommerce.house.gov/press-release/subcommittee-explore-m ed ia-ownership-21st-century
 
2014-06-04 10:28:21 AM  
And yet when it is pointed out that one of the reasons libs are so stupid is because they get all of their news from comedy sites they always deny it.

B,b,b,but Fox news!!!
 
2014-06-04 10:29:44 AM  

mayIFark: That's all well and good, but at the end, it's the big money that will talk.

The only hope is that, there are big money involved on the side that would help average Joe as well.


Surely logic dictates the big money on both sides of the business spectrum end up winning from the end of net neutrality - big ISPs will win out over small ISPs as they have enough customers to make websites care enough to pay out to those ISPs, conversely big websites are likely to get very good deals - as big names like Google or Netflix running slow on one ISP will cause some customers to choose another, so they aren't likely to have to pay as much compared to less well known websites (or startups) to get the same speeds.
 
2014-06-04 10:32:11 AM  
What annoys me most about all of this is that it's one of these no-brainer things that both Liberals and Conservatives agree on.  Liberals like net neutrality because it promotes equality for all users, and Conservatives like it because it promotes free-market competition on the internet.  The only people who have an interest against net neutrality are ISP shareholders.

And yet, here we are, hoping that our elected representatives deign to listen to the will of virtually ALL of the people.
 
2014-06-04 10:33:18 AM  

CMYK and PMS: And yet when it is pointed out that one of the reasons libs are so stupid is because they get all of their news from comedy sites they always deny it.

B,b,b,but Fox news!!!


The sad part is that liberals who get their news from comedy sites are still smarter than conservatives that get their news from "news" sites.
 
2014-06-04 10:34:27 AM  

HMS_Blinkin: Conservatives like it because it promotes free-market competition on the internet.


No they don't.  At least not the freep set.  They got their marching orders and it's "government is using it to stifle competition".
 
2014-06-04 10:36:33 AM  

CMYK and PMS: And yet when it is pointed out that one of the reasons libs are so stupid is because they get all of their news from comedy sites they always deny it.

B,b,b,but Fox news!!!


I think of it this way, if you're not interested in current events, why would you tune into a comedy news show that often satirizes political doings?  Satire isn't funny if you don't have an understanding of how things really work.

/It's probably also why modern conservative humour is profoundly unfunny... it depends on the audience having a mistaken view of the world
 
2014-06-04 10:38:44 AM  

HMS_Blinkin: What annoys me most about all of this is that it's one of these no-brainer things that both Liberals and Conservatives agree on.  Liberals like net neutrality because it promotes equality for all users, and Conservatives like it because it promotes free-market competition on the internet.  The only people who have an interest against net neutrality are ISP shareholders.

And yet, here we are, hoping that our elected representatives deign to listen to the will of virtually ALL of the people.


That's why Republicans are trying to eliminate NN completely, because they want free-market competition.

LOL
 
2014-06-04 10:39:01 AM  
"Blame former  Daily Show fake-newscaster and comedian John Oliver..."

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I am almost positive that he's really reporting the news.
 
2014-06-04 10:39:42 AM  

CMYK and PMS: And yet when it is pointed out that one of the reasons libs are so stupid is because they get all of their news from comedy sites they always deny it.


we tend to deny that we're stupid because often times we biatchslap your reasons around like a pinata since you just repeat lies to make a point

but please, explain to me how the news being discussed on the comedy news shows is all false
 
2014-06-04 10:39:46 AM  

xria: mayIFark: That's all well and good, but at the end, it's the big money that will talk.

The only hope is that, there are big money involved on the side that would help average Joe as well.

Surely logic dictates the big money on both sides of the business spectrum end up winning from the end of net neutrality - big ISPs will win out over small ISPs as they have enough customers to make websites care enough to pay out to those ISPs, conversely big websites are likely to get very good deals - as big names like Google or Netflix running slow on one ISP will cause some customers to choose another, so they aren't likely to have to pay as much compared to less well known websites (or startups) to get the same speeds.


I'd certainly imagine there'll be a point at which the big name sites decide their interests are best served by using their opposition as leverage to negotiate with ISPs to get the best deal for themselves in a post-neutrality era. That's when we're really screwed.
 
2014-06-04 10:40:50 AM  

HMS_Blinkin: What annoys me most about all of this is that it's one of these no-brainer things that both Liberals and Conservatives agree on.  Liberals like net neutrality because it promotes equality for all users, and Conservatives like it because it promotes free-market competition on the internet.  The only people who have an interest against net neutrality are ISP shareholders.

And yet, here we are, hoping that our elected representatives deign to listen to the will of virtually ALL of the people.


This definitely could be one of those things future historians point to when they write the book "Rise and Fall of the American Empire"

It is a no brainer decision. The most reviled companies in history against the majority of the voting populace. what will it take? A patriotic call to arms three years from now when a tribesman in Africa pays less and has faster broadband than Cuyahoga Falls?
 
2014-06-04 10:41:20 AM  

fiddlehead: Unfortunately, the comments aren't going to matter with this particular verdict.


Well, obviously Tom Weller doesn't give a fark what the people think (the FCC has in the past bowed to the demands of a few hundred letters from angry prudes; several hundred thousand emails and comments should have resulted in an immediate reversal on Net Neutrality... but then Weller and fellow FCC bigwigs wouldn't get cushy jobs at various cable companies in 2016), but the hope is that the outcry is loud enough that elected officials take note.
 
2014-06-04 10:45:55 AM  

dr.zaeus: "Blame former  Daily Show fake-newscaster and comedian John Oliver..."

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I am almost positive that he's really reporting the news.


The "news" doesn't like it when the "fake news" takes them to task for the stupid shiat they do.  There's a lot of contempt for The Daily Show among "real reporters".
 
2014-06-04 10:50:41 AM  

EvilEgg: The sad part is that liberals who get their news from comedy sites are still smarter than conservatives that get their news from "news" sites.


Indeed.
 
2014-06-04 10:51:46 AM  

ikanreed: The "news" doesn't like it when the "fake news" takes them to task for the stupid shiat they do. There's a lot of contempt for The Daily Show among "real reporters".


Their contempt should be for the fact that they're not free to report the news because of the editorial biases of the people that own companies that broadcast the "news".  Comedy news is probably one of the least restrictive formats since HBO and Comedy Central are just happy to have successful shows.
 
2014-06-04 10:57:00 AM  

xria: mayIFark: That's all well and good, but at the end, it's the big money that will talk.

The only hope is that, there are big money involved on the side that would help average Joe as well.

Surely logic dictates the big money on both sides of the business spectrum end up winning from the end of net neutrality - big ISPs will win out over small ISPs as they have enough customers to make websites care enough to pay out to those ISPs, conversely big websites are likely to get very good deals - as big names like Google or Netflix running slow on one ISP will cause some customers to choose another, so they aren't likely to have to pay as much compared to less well known websites (or startups) to get the same speeds.


This is kind of what I don't get about the whole net neutrality debate. Why don't the people who are essentially the content creators (the websites) realize they have the power. I mean say you are Netflix, and an ISP is jerking you around, slowing down your speeds or trying to charge you more than other sites. What would stop netflix from changing things so that Netflix isn't available to subscribers to that ISP. Do that and subscribers would probably lose it, and the ISP would probably take a pretty big hit and come crawling back to netflix pretty fast with a better offer.
 
2014-06-04 10:57:26 AM  

Mercutio74: ikanreed: The "news" doesn't like it when the "fake news" takes them to task for the stupid shiat they do. There's a lot of contempt for The Daily Show among "real reporters".

Their contempt should be for the fact that they're not free to report the news because of the editorial biases of the people that own companies that broadcast the "news".  Comedy news is probably one of the least restrictive formats since HBO and Comedy Central are just happy to have successful shows.


That's part of it, but there's also the issue of access and prestige. They can't take someone to task without risking losing access, which is important for their career and their ego. Satirical news never had access in the first place, so they have nothing to lose.
 
2014-06-04 10:57:49 AM  

somedude210: EvilEgg: 45,000 comments is probably more then they have ever gotten.

2000 was the previous record


Perhaps for their online comment system, but hardly a record.  The FCC received some 4 million letters within 6 months of the "Petition against God" which protested the use of the public spectrum (as opposed to commercial spectrum) for religious broadcasters.

That petition was in 1974, it has been long resolved, but people still circulate emails about it, and the FCC still gets complaints.  Last I heard, the total number was around 50 million.
 
2014-06-04 10:59:14 AM  

HMS_Blinkin: What annoys me most about all of this is that it's one of these no-brainer things that both Liberals and Conservatives agree on.  Liberals like net neutrality because it promotes equality for all users, and Conservatives like it because it promotes free-market competition on the internet. The only people who have an interest against net neutrality are ISP shareholders.

And yet, here we are, hoping that our elected representatives deign to listen to the will of virtually ALL of the people.


Unfortunately every major "conservative" in office today thinks free markets means the FCC should let the big ISP's do whatever they want.
 
2014-06-04 11:01:25 AM  

ikanreed: dr.zaeus: "Blame former  Daily Show fake-newscaster and comedian John Oliver..."

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I am almost positive that he's really reporting the news.

The "news" doesn't like it when the "fake news" takes them to task for the stupid shiat they do.  There's a lot of contempt for The Daily Show among "real reporters".


I just figured that term was used because the Daily Show has often referred to itself as a fake news show.
 
2014-06-04 11:03:25 AM  

mechgreg: This is kind of what I don't get about the whole net neutrality debate. Why don't the people who are essentially the content creators (the websites) realize they have the power. I mean say you are Netflix, and an ISP is jerking you around, slowing down your speeds or trying to charge you more than other sites. What would stop netflix from changing things so that Netflix isn't available to subscribers to that ISP. Do that and subscribers would probably lose it, and the ISP would probably take a pretty big hit and come crawling back to netflix pretty fast with a better offer.

Most Internet users only have a choice of one ISP.

Netflix might try something like that, but that leaves the door wide open to another well-funded company that WAS willing to pay the extortion. Very few CEOs are willing to risk shareholder value like that.

Incidentally, Comcast hosts at their site many Netflix caching servers. Your video actually isn't generated at Netflix's site but at Comcast anyway.  So the non-neutrality plan isn't even needed for the purpose of providing quality streaming.
 
2014-06-04 11:04:42 AM  

mechgreg: What would stop netflix from changing things so that Netflix isn't available to subscribers to that ISP. Do that and subscribers would probably lose it, and the ISP would probably take a pretty big hit and come crawling back to netflix pretty fast with a better offer.


Most subscribers only have one high-speed ISP available to them.
 
2014-06-04 11:08:10 AM  

sdd2000: Rincewind53: The best part of notice and comment rulemaking is that under the APA, the FCC is  required to read all of those comments and consider all "relevant" material.

All that means is that some poor interns will have to read them all and then do a basic summary to the commissioners.



TLDR everyone hates you right now except for the "free market derr" knob slobbers.
 
2014-06-04 11:08:32 AM  

AntiNerd: mechgreg: This is kind of what I don't get about the whole net neutrality debate. Why don't the people who are essentially the content creators (the websites) realize they have the power. I mean say you are Netflix, and an ISP is jerking you around, slowing down your speeds or trying to charge you more than other sites. What would stop netflix from changing things so that Netflix isn't available to subscribers to that ISP. Do that and subscribers would probably lose it, and the ISP would probably take a pretty big hit and come crawling back to netflix pretty fast with a better offer.
Most Internet users only have a choice of one ISP.

Netflix might try something like that, but that leaves the door wide open to another well-funded company that WAS willing to pay the extortion. Very few CEOs are willing to risk shareholder value like that.

Incidentally, Comcast hosts at their site many Netflix caching servers. Your video actually isn't generated at Netflix's site but at Comcast anyway.  So the non-neutrality plan isn't even needed for the purpose of providing quality streaming.


Right I forgot about the one ISP thing. Although it is not that different in Canada, as I basically have two choices. And I totally see the risk of pulling your content, although isn't that really not that different from what AMC did awhile back when certain cable providers were jerking them around, pulled their channels (I am not sure how that panned out though)?
 
Displayed 50 of 120 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report