
Tom Wheeler Resigns from the FCC - espeed
https://www.wired.com/2016/12/tom-wheeler-resigns-fcc-long-net-neutrality/
======
quasse
I was recently at a conference in DC called "Transforming Communities:
Broadband Goals for 2017 and Beyond" which was largely focused on public
policy related to the lack of real broadband in America. Gigi Sohn, who is the
counselor to the chairman of the FCC, spoke.

She was very candid about the position of the FCC and the fact that she was
finally able to speak her mind because this was going to be one of her last
public appearances as a government official. One thing that stuck me was what
she said about Tom[1]: "He actually believes that the consumer, the american
people, are his clients. He's said that from the first day and he'll say that
the day he leaves. Trust me, he doesn't like any of the companies [laughter]".
The loss of the current administration of the FCC (including but not limited
to Tom) will be a great loss for the American people in my opinion.

The conference was interesting and somewhat sad, because it was planned before
the election and probably with the assumption that the new administration
would not be totally hostile. Instead of the original direction of "here's
what we've done and how we plan to carry these goals forward" it ended up
being more of a retrospective on progress that had been made at the federal
level that was about to be erased.

From the people I saw, there did not seem to be anyone there representing the
new administration.

[1]
[https://youtu.be/O5drVTSpH5g?list=LLDlLvM2YAVFtSXvebIrlE0A&t...](https://youtu.be/O5drVTSpH5g?list=LLDlLvM2YAVFtSXvebIrlE0A&t=6509)

~~~
hueving
It's worth noting that whenever there is a change of parties in control, the
incumbent party is always going to lament the fact that it's the end of the
world. Time will tell if the new FCC administration is actually bad for the
consumer.

~~~
croon
While I in many scenarios in theory could agree with you, this portrayal is
very disingenous unless you think Net Neutrality is somehow bad for consumers,
because going off party politics on these issues, this WILL be bad.

~~~
mr_spothawk
I think Net Neutrality is bad for consumers, because it entrenches dependance
on eg. Comcast. Instead, if we'd just let Comcast do whatever it wants with
its networks (yes, we have stupidly built a lot of laws/rules around network
sharing, that enable nasty behavior by Comcast, et. al.), then they'd jack up
the price for whatever they want and (in a handwaving way) we'd have a market
for citizen built mesh-networks.

Those are great things.

as a further stretch of the imagination... Fuck Video Bandwidth... why are we
encouraging more Netflix with Net Neutrality? Do we really want more
television?

Fuck codifying anything about Comcast's business into legal frameworks
(laws/regulations/etc...)... let's do what humans have done for many many
thousands of years, and communicate among ourselves, instead of through the
king's network.

And, to be sure, Comcast is King. Well, money is... Or we wouldn't be worried
about FCC chair change-over.

/rant

[ edit - thanks for the down votes ]

~~~
Spivak
So what you're arguing is that NN is artificially keeping the cost of network
access down? That's actually an argument I haven't heard before. Thus the only
companies that can afford to eat the cost of NN are huge ISPs. I don't know
whether this is true or not but I'm at least interested.

NN is largely independent of the _type_ of content being sent over the
network. NN helps Netflix because they're in competition with services that
are owned by or partner with ISPs -- it doesn't, on the surface, seem to
foster the creation of more streaming services.

Comcast was extremely anti-NN because they want to push cable and their own
streaming services via network restrictions. I'm not sure what part of CC's
business is begin codified into NN regulations or what nasty behavior it
enables.

------
schmatz
I had a chance to meet Tom Wheeler to discuss net neutrality in the summer of
2014. It was coming off of a bad press cycle for him (John Oliver calling him
a dingo), so I didn't know what to expect.

He was extremely reasonable and very receptive to the needs of the tech
community and small businesses. I came away from the meeting pleasantly
surprised and have been happy with his actions during his tenure. Sad to see
him go.

~~~
johansch
That may have been the exact moment that John Oliver jumped the shark.

~~~
jandrese
John Oliver was hardly alone in their skepticism that a former lobbyist would
make for a good FCC chairman, but I think everybody can agree that he has been
a pleasant surprise.

------
bluetwo
One of the problems with Net Neutrality is that techies (us) and the media
have both had a hard time explaining it clearly.

Meanwhile those opposed have been able to come up with analogies that while
false and misleading, are easily understood.

What is the best way to explain the concept that can be quickly understood by
those that are non-technical?

~~~
rudyfink
If all roads were owned by companies, should it be OK for UPS to charge FedEx
or ambulances more to drive on its roads?

This is imperfect, obviously, but I think it gets close to the core issues
fairly concisely.

Frankly, I, as a citizen, think you should be allowed to sell the pipe, what
goes over the pipe, or what the consumer connects to the pipe, but only one of
the three. I like that this has reasonably clear divisions and provides
competing interests that keep the other parties in check.

~~~
witty_username
Yes, UPS should because different vehicles cause different amounts of wear to
the roads and take up different amounts of space.

~~~
AgentK20
But can we truly say that these for-profit, mostly un-regulated telecom
providers whose mandate is to make money for their shareholders, will put that
money towards "wear to the roads" and "upgrading the road system"? How many
homes in America don't have access to Broadband internet? IN 2016?

Even more, how do we know that these telecom providers will only charge as
much as is needed for the maintenance of the roads, and not just slap on more
costs?

We can't even really blame the telecom companies for this, either, as they do
have a responsibility to their shareholders to make as much money as possible,
but in a monopolized market, as ISPs are in most cities in America, the
government has to step in at some point to protect the consumer's interests.

~~~
witty_username
> But can we truly say that these for-profit, mostly un-regulated telecom
> providers whose mandate is to make money for their shareholders, will put
> that money towards "wear to the roads" and "upgrading the road system"?

Yes, because of competition or the threat of competition. This works for CPU
vendors and toll roads; why shouldn't it work for internet service (which is
rather fungible)?

> How many homes in America don't have access to Broadband internet? IN 2016?

I don't know; what are you trying to tell me? Are you saying it's too little
or everyone has broadband internet?

> We can't even really blame the telecom companies for this, either, as they
> do have a responsibility to their shareholders to make as much money as
> possible, but in a monopolized market, as ISPs are in most cities in
> America, the government has to step in at some point to protect the
> consumer's interests.

Assuming a monopoly:

a) Wouldn't antitrust law work if the ISP tried to prioritize their own pages
(like their streaming video services)?

b) If people wanted net neutrality the ISP would offer such a plan. But then
you might say the ISP will price that too high. But why didn't they price
normal non-neutral internet service too high then? The threat of competition
forces them to price plans reasonably.

------
ComputerGuru
This isn't really news, more of a mere formality. The federal government
department heads are all expected to resign or be fired when there's a regime
shift in the Oval Office (party change).

~~~
turbohedgehog
Incorrect. FCC commissioners serve a term and Wheeler's term was up June 30,
2018, so this is an early resignation and opens up a spot for Obama or Trump
to fill.

~~~
shawn-butler
According to sources on the hill, his resignation is part of a deal to ensure
Jessica Rosenworcel gets confirmed for an additional term.

They won't fill up the spot until the next administration.

~~~
trynewideas
That's what he was saying he'd do a week ago. The Senate convened on Saturday
without acting on Rosenworcel ([http://www.politico.com/tipsheets/morning-
tech/2016/12/tech-...](http://www.politico.com/tipsheets/morning-
tech/2016/12/tech-heads-to-trump-tower-this-week-217815)) and Wheeler quit
anyway, so Trump gets a 2-1 majority to start his term.

~~~
nroach
This resignation is very bad for consumers. I'd hoped that Wheeler would stick
it out and at least be present to bring consumer perspectives to the
discussion and get consumer concerns on the record in commission meetings. But
I can understand why he wouldn't personally want to finish out his term as a
lame duck dissenter.

------
shawnfratis2
What I'm curious to know, is how will any of this truly affect users who
aren't necessarily streaming/torrenting/big bandwidth users, like those who
focus on education, research, computer sciences, among others. Not meaning to
sound too vague, but speaking for myself, most of the Internet-related things
I depend on don't necessarily involve constant high-bandwidth usage (like
online gaming, for example). If the internet gets completely throttled I want
to know what I have to look forward to.

~~~
subway
Throttling is far from the only sort of shenanigans ISPs like to play on their
subscribers. A very cynical view might be that any (potentially
innovative/interesting) network protocols that aren't easily productized will
suffer from deprioritization to the point of becoming unusable. The ISP's
response will be that you have no business doing that over a home connection,
and that you need to pay 10x for a Business class connection.

------
qwertyuiop924
Dammit. We were so close. So close.

Hang in there, guys..

~~~
calebm
I'm assuming you're referring to getting Net Neutrality? If so, I have a
similar sentiment.

------
ryandrake
Got an error when clicking on that link:

"Wired.com is not included in your Comcast Internet Basic package. Click here
to upgrade to Comcast Internet Extreme for $9.99 more a month, for access to
Wired.com and twenty other premium web sites!"

~~~
ronnier
This type of thing has been said for years. I placed a long bet with a friend
7 years ago when he said "in 5 years" we'll have what was described above.
Hasn't happened. Won't happen.

~~~
JamilD
There's a reason it hasn't happened yet; it's not some sort of deterministic
process. Many people worked hard to stop it from happening, and a new FCC
chairman could change the status quo.

~~~
nitrogen
As another example of a self-defeating prophecy, consider Y2K. There was no
major disaster because thousands of people worked incredibly hard to make sure
there was no disaster.

Sometimes working in technology feels like working stage crew -- the audience
doesn't give a crap about your existence until you screw up.

------
tedunangst
Wait, he's the cable industry shill, right? So this is the best news ever?

~~~
shmerl
He was the opposite in the recent times. Unlike any of his predecessors, he
pushed a tremendous amount of consumer friendly policies and curbed
monopolistic abuses of incumbents. He failed to repeal anti-competitive local
state laws which ban municipal Internet, but he managed to pass Net Neutrality
rules.

It would be a pity if all that effort will be dismantled by corrupted
commissioners backed by monopolists who hate competition and progress.

~~~
radicaldreamer
Absolutely, he pushed a lot of things forward, as well as cracking down on
obvious things like bandwidth capped accounts advertised as "unlimited" etc.

------
peterkelly
... and announces return to Outback Australia

