this post was submitted on 20 Jun 2023
158 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

34870 readers
6 users here now

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.


Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.


Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] pingveno@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No. That saga was the reverse happening. The Obama administration had already gone through the whole procedure to implement net neutrality rules. Ajit Pai under the Trump administration then came in and started the procedure anew to reverse net neutrality. In that sense it "succeeded" in that Pai's rules were put into place. There was a legal challenge on the basis of the FCC not considering certain factors. This is where being thorough is incredibly important. If even a single spot is missed, implementation can be drawn out even further.

[–] underisk@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I want to point out that Pai did not “come in” during the Trump admin. He killed net neutrality during it, sure, but he was appointed by Obama and held the office long before Trump showed up. It’s really disingenuous to try and portray it as a result of one republican president, it was a team effort.

[–] dingus@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Democrats nearly always choosing Republicans for non-elected offices so they "don't look partisan." Republicans always choosing Republicans for non-elected positions because they don't actually give a shit about looking partisan.

This is part of why the FBI has always been run by Republicans. Not once have we had a Democrat in charge of the FBI.

At least the FCC has a slightly better track record. Wheeler was a good FCC chairman.

[–] underisk@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The country would be a lot better off if the Democrats abandoned their devotion to "bipartisanship". It's a one way street that seems to only exist as a convenient roadblock to implementing any kind of positive reforms.