this post was submitted on 02 Jan 2025
585 points (99.2% liked)

Technology

60279 readers
4129 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
585
FCC’s Net Neutrality Rules Struck Down by Federal Appeals Court (www.nytimes.com)
submitted 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) by cm0002@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
190 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

ETA: Paywall bypass link: https://archive.is/vyU15

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 35 points 4 days ago (2 children)

otoh:

Mike Masnick @mmasnick.bsky.social‬

I mean, this is a terrible (if unsurprising) decision, but I'm left wondering how Brendan Carr is going to still try to claim regulatory authority over social media companies...

There is no possible consistency between "ISPs can throttle and block, but edge services cannot..." ‪nilay patel‬ ‪@reckless.bsky.social‬

2h

Sixth Circuit decision striking down net neutrality doesn’t even remotely pass the sniff test lol www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf...

January 2, 2025 at 3:11 PM

https://bsky.app/profile/mmasnick.bsky.social/post/3lerv476tes22

[–] YarHarSuperstar@lemmy.world 12 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Can you please explain what this means? I'm not sure I understand correctly.

[–] Bumblefumble@lemm.ee 39 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Trump wants to weaponise the FCC to go against social media companies who "ban free speech" or whatever, just like Elon complained about before buying Twitter, and like all other right wingers are so mad about. But if the FCC doesn't have any authority to regulate ISPs, why should it have authority to regulate social media companies. Not that the courts seem to care about precedent anymore, but that's the silver lining they are looking for.

[–] YarHarSuperstar@lemmy.world 10 points 4 days ago

Thank you for the explanation, that makes sense

[–] ubergeek@lemmy.today 2 points 4 days ago

The FCC has authority to punish whomever is the enemy of Reich Wingers, and Trump more specifically. Nothing more, nothing less.

Can the FCC punish a social media company for censoring the approved ideology? Yes. Can the FCC punish a social media company for not censoring the approved ideology? Yes. Can telcos be punished by the FCC for the same two things above? Yes.

It's all about punishing the enemy, not logical consistency.

[–] skulblaka@sh.itjust.works 8 points 4 days ago (1 children)

It means that folks are still expecting logic and consistency out of US lawmakers.

[–] UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 days ago

Like trying to pass gun control with a political party vocally advocating for the purge? Or after a insurrection? or after police brutality across the nation captured on high definition cameras during a protest about police brutality?

www.socialistRA.org

[–] ubergeek@lemmy.today 5 points 4 days ago

Bottom line: precedent, rulings, laws, etc have no bearing on the courts.

What matters to the courts is paying back for the favor of appointment. Which means they will rule whatever our oligarchs tell them to rule.