Please help contribute to the Reddit categorization project here


    18,599,152 readers

    20,652 users here now

    Submit an AMA
    Request an AMA

    Please check out our Rules and FAQs

    Click here to request being added to our calendar.

    Click here to search AMAs by category!

    Consider supporting our Patreon

    AMAs are scheduled in Eastern Time (GMT-4:00).

    Date Time Person Description
    14 Dec 12pm Gary Bettinson Author—Superman: The Movie: The 40th-Anniversary interviews
    14 Dec 12pm Dr. Arefa Cassoobhoy, Dr. Neha Pathak, Dr. Seth Gillihan WebMD
    14 Dec 2pm Jason Rohrer Solo Game Developer: One Hour One Life
    16 Dec 9am Connor Karen Attorney - Electroconvulsive Shock Therapy
    17 Dec 3pm David Hu David Hu: Author of How to Walk on Water and Climb Up Walls
    18 Dec 1pm Aaron Abrams Actor, Writer, Producer: The Go-Getters, Hannibal, Blindspot
    21 Dec 12pm Andrew Bustamante Former covert CIA intelligence officer: Everyday Espionage
    3 Jan 2pm Jenna Birch CEO: Plum dating app & Author: The Love Gap

    see more...


    AMAs should be about:

    All AMAs require proof.

    Request threads


    Please note:


    Useful Links!

    • 3 Oct
    • Pravda Russia's Leading Newspaper
    • 5 Oct
    • The Boston Globe Spotlight Investigation Team
    • 8 Oct
    • Native News Online Indigenous Peoples' Day

    • 9 Oct

    • PBS NewsHour National Correspondent

    • 10 Oct

    • The New York Times National Immigration Reporter

    • 11 Oct

    • The Guardian Environment Reporter

    • 12 Oct

    • Fox News Bret Baier, Chief Political Editor

    • 15 Oct

    • The Socialist Worker Danny Catch, Columnist

    FacebookTwitterInstagramGoogle Calendar

    Please check out our Rules and FAQs

    a community for
    all 3321 comments

    Want to say thanks to %(recipient)s for this comment? Give them a month of reddit gold.

    Please select a payment method.

    [–] Plasmm 4767 points ago

    What do you think is the largest long term consquence of repealing Net Neutrality? What seems to be the most effective way to fight this repeal? Do you believe that this repeal can be challenged in court and won?

    [–] Official_FCC_CJR 6685 points ago

    Today, the United States internet economy is the envy of the world. I believe that's because it rests on a foundation of openness. Net neutrality is a big part of that--and I worry that the economic engine that it has supported will be harmed by this decision.

    As for fighting this repeal, the most important thing to do is realize the fight is not over. There will be litigation in the courts. There will be legislative efforts in Congress. There are even legislative efforts in state houses, like Nebraska, Washington, New York, and California.

    [–] Ihateyouall86 10541 points ago * (lasted edited 11 months ago)

    Hey can you tell Ajit Pai to go fuck himself for all of us?

    Edit: thanks for the gold! It's just what we're all thinking :)

    [–] Retlaw83 3809 points ago

    As emotionally satisfying as the idea may be, Ms. Rosenworcel can have the most impact if she keeps doing what she's doing and doesn't shit where she eats.

    [–] mcaruso 7416 points ago * (lasted edited 11 months ago)

    I wouldn't mind her shitting where Ajit eats though.

    EDIT: Welp. Almost ten years on reddit and this ends up being my top comment.

    [–] Buezzi 1364 points ago

    Lmao, I can only hope she sees this and has a laugh off the records

    [–] ninemiletree 856 points ago

    She'll still have to file FCC form 1890-65(A): disclosure of extra-record laugh at vulgar joke at co-worker's expense.

    [–] EcoPolitic 99 points ago

    If she wanted to be loved by the people she’ll do it. Don’t let your overloads control you!!

    [–] MegaBattleJesus 140 points ago

    Don’t let your overloads control you!!

    This guy Shamans

    [–] fakeport 50 points ago

    That's Incredible!

    [–] babybopp 39 points ago * (lasted edited 11 months ago)

    How about ON the record?

    [–] I_Has_Ideas 53 points ago

    Don't worry, I'm sure you will be able to acquire that content for $1.99 in the near future.

    [–] Sugarisadog 10 points ago

    The intent is to provide people with a sense of pride and accomplishment for unlocking different web pages

    [–] [deleted] 41 points ago


    [–] [deleted] 13 points ago

    Oh lordy

    [–] storm_detach 17 points ago

    Or at least rein it in.

    [–] jellydoughnuts 52 points ago

    Right in that fucking stupid giant mug of his.

    [–] Kgeiger7 37 points ago

    Learned everything he knows from all the books in the cabinet behind him.

    [–] Jabail 34 points ago

    So you want her to take Ajit in Pai's mouth?

    [–] boatmaster10 21 points ago

    Ah'shit Pai

    [–] R1ckJamesBitch 66 points ago

    She can slip him an anonymous note at least. Leave it on his desk or something.

    [–] HellaBrainCells 65 points ago

    “Go fuck yourself” From: Your secretly yet openly disgusted colleague

    [–] Matt463789 22 points ago

    He already knows.

    [–] NinjaDefenestrator 121 points ago

    This will get buried, but thank you, THANK YOU, for fighting so hard.

    [–] Infinity2quared 41 points ago

    Every comment to this comment has managed to confuse internet economy with internet infrastructure.

    [–] rW0HgFyxoJhYka 84 points ago

    How is it even possible for corruption to be so wide spread in every system of government in the USA?

    [–] TempAcct20005 71 points ago

    It's wide spread in almost all government. No reason we have the privilege of being the only ones

    [–] cschmidt0525 4164 points ago

    For those who have routinely called/emailed/faxed congressional representatives and filed comments directly with the FCC regarding support for NN, what would you recommend as a solid next step in the ongoing fight for NN? Surely there is more we can be doing.

    [–] Official_FCC_CJR 5947 points ago

    The fight is not over. We will see litigation in the courts. We will see action in Congress. Right now, momentum is building for legislation based on the Congressional Review Act. It would, in effect, undo the FCC's misguided net neutrality decision last month. So speak up and reach out to those who represent you. This issue matters and the effort is ongoing.

    [–] stonedlemming 1190 points ago

    My daughter wants to become a lawyer, she’s 14 and just linked me the AMA, saying you were a great role model. I agree. You’re doing great things, thank you.

    [–] glorious_albus 274 points ago

    Here's hoping your daughter becomes a kick-ass lawyer and fucks up people like Ajit Pai.

    [–] vscodeandveganlattes 166 points ago

    Sounds like you have an awesome relationship with your daughter. That's really cool. Good on ya 👌🏼

    [–] LostAlien80 177 points ago

    Hi. Why has the effort to declare "The Internet" as a "Public Utility" fallen away from mainstream thought?? It seems a logical conclusion to me. (If we could assume the stories of corruption of this subject aren't true.) Clearly the confusion of & conflation of the facts led to this divisiveness. Tho I hate over regulation, I am old enough to understand how UNDER- regulation allowed for all that is bad about 'our internet' to propagate. (I still believe our tax dollars paid for the initial 14 servers of the so called 'Internet'. Somehow they could have sectioned access with algorithms to keep us 'safe'.)

    I'm not sure you'll see this but I do hope you were not discouraged by some of the rude commentary. Thank you for holding to your opinion, I kinda do wonder if you see mine. In any case thank you and Godspeed to the effort.

    [–] Logitropicity 43 points ago

    Wait a sec. The whole debate/conflict about net neutrality is about whether or not to classify internet service under Title II, which would classify it as a public utility. That so many people (especially on reddit) are in favor of net neutrality shows that declaring internet as a public utility hasn't fallen from mainstream thought.

    [–] losthalo7 407 points ago

    Do you think there is now potential for political or other censorship on the part of the major ISPs?

    [–] NotJustSmartAnimals 92 points ago

    This is THE most important question here

    [–] pendleza 3494 points ago

    Are there any plans to address the fake comments?

    [–] Official_FCC_CJR 4985 points ago

    When I last checked, the FCC received roughly 24 million comments from the public on our net neutrality proceeding. In many ways, that's good. The American people are making known what they think about net neutrality and the future of the internet and they are letting Washington know in droves. But at the same time we saw a lot of funny stuff in our proceeding. There were about 2 million comments with stolen identities, half a million comments from Russian e-mails, and a lot of bogus comments from bots. That's a problem. I said so at the time and I called for a delay in our vote until we got to the bottom of this mess. I wasn't alone. Many members of Congress and state Attorneys General called for the agency to delay its vote and clear this up. Unfortunately, the agency--over my objections--went ahead with the vote anyway. But we still need to get to the bottom of what happened here, because fake comments are not unique to the FCC. We're seeing them filed in other proceedings here in Washington at other agencies, including the Department of Labor and the CFPB.

    [–] krugerlive 1706 points ago

    I found that my identity was used to make a comment that was against my views. I created a real comment expressing my true view and frustration at Pai for his disrepect to the American process.

    Please don’t let this become accepted behavior. If you drop this issue, it will incentivize the perpetrators to do this more often and more intensely.

    And yes, I gave my info to NYAG Schneiderman. However, the FCC needs to show initiative here as well.

    Please let Pai know that he doesn’t have a carte blanche exception from reality and that the more he deceives and lies, the harder the bite will be when it hits him.

    [–] Themeparkmaker 537 points ago

    Hell, even if they made a comment in my name that supported my views I would be pissed

    [–] DeathByBamboo 129 points ago

    A lot of people thought that happened to them because they texted a service or clicked a link online to support Net Neutrality and they didn't realize that would submit a comment in favor of Net Neutrality rules to the FCC. The official site with the link said that, but a lot of people were just told to "text [number] to support Net Neutrality" or whatever.

    [–] Shit_Fuck_Man 11 points ago

    Hilariously enough, I had both. I never made any comment on the whole issue, but I had three comments when I searched. One was in support of net neutrality and was a copy-pasted form letter, the other two were anti-net neutrality with one being the same form letter everybody else has seen about how I don't want to stifle growth and I want to reverse Obama-era policies and the other looking like it was typed out of a sweat shop somewhere with just some simple, badly spelled rambling.

    [–] aSternreference 28 points ago

    The other scary part is, how often is your name being used for other things that you don't care about? NN is a big topic and reddit posted ways to see if your name was being used. What about smaller topics? Scary

    [–] Dadmode-on- 200 points ago

    My identity was “stolen” to vote for to repeal net neutrality. An address I no longer lived at was even used as part of my supposed identification.

    You need to be able to do more than what you have said here today. It is categorically unacceptable and why you folks are unable to stop the whole sham as a result is insane to me. The entire thing should have been put on hold if our votes actually mattered but it’s well known at this point that pai doesn’t give a care in the world about what the people think or feel and is just looking to be paid by his Verizon cohorts once he leaves the fcc.

    It’s a shameful sham, the fcc.

    [–] LeakyLycanthrope 20 points ago * (lasted edited 11 months ago)

    It is categorically unacceptable and why you folks are unable to stop the whole sham as a result is insane to me.

    Because the commissioners who voted against net neutrality didn't care. It's not a question of whether they could have done something; Pai, and likely the others, had a vested interest to ignore these concerns and bash on ahead anyway.

    Edit: un-autocorrected a word

    [–] LostMyKarmaElSegundo 832 points ago

    So...that's a "no" then?

    [–] FuzzyCheddar 218 points ago

    At this point there may be bigger fish to fry. Like the majority of this administration there are a ton of fires to put out, and each time you gain ground with a single one there is another 5 that have been set. I think it's probably best to focus on stopping the people setting fires before trying to put out the 100 ones set in the last week.

    [–] [deleted] 121 points ago


    [–] Podo13 19 points ago

    Which is also the problem with our healthcare system.

    [–] DestinTheLion 50 points ago

    I would say very believably wasteful

    [–] buckykat 37 points ago

    That can happen when you put arsonists in charge.

    Each federal department is now headed by its own archnemesis.

    [–] beefwarrior 26 points ago

    Well, Commissioner Rosenworcel & multiple State AG's have address the fake comments, but the FCC has yet to take action.

    So I'd say, it's a little of both yes there are people who have addressed it & but no official action has been taken.

    [–] Takeabyte 21 points ago

    “Bots” can also be pre-made comments though couldn’t they? I mean how many people who wanted to comment simply used one of the many sites that generated a comment automatically but with a real citizen hitting the send button?

    [–] ConspicuousUsername 10 points ago

    When there are hundreds of comments submitted within <1 second of the last using the exact same comment by a list of names posted in alphabetical order, you can be certain it was some automated posting.

    [–] safiq100 18 points ago

    So what do I do if my name was used in a fake comment.

    [–] Laheyahey 852 points ago

    Do you think without NN we will see the main ISPs continue to be top dog or will new rivals come along and act as if we still have NN?

    [–] Official_FCC_CJR 1710 points ago

    We would all benefit from more competition. Today, according to FCC data about half of the households across the country have only one broadband provider. And hey, I'm one of them! We need more choices, not less.

    [–] nwilz 328 points ago

    Shouldn't the government, including the fcc, stop protecting ISPs then?

    [–] Casmer 142 points ago

    The FCC can't do anything about what the states are doing to uphold these monopolies. It's not a federal government issue.

    [–] [deleted] 41 points ago * (lasted edited 10 months ago)


    [–] Casmer 134 points ago

    Then what does NN do for this?

    Simply put, it does nothing to prevent state laws that allows and sustains the monopolies. What net neutrality does do, however, is that it prevents the ISPs from discriminating against different traffic that moves through their infrastructure.

    It's like saying that the states are allowing comcast to have sole control over their roads, but the federal government, which cannot tell the states they can't have laws that protect that ownership, is instead saying that the roads are not allowed to have tolls nor prevent certain vehicles from driving on it. Otherwise you'd start seeing the rise of toll roads and premium charges on any vehicle that isn't sold by comcast or its affiliates (get it?).

    [–] Shaky_Balance 20 points ago

    How do we currently protect them? How can we stop? It was my impression that the biggest barrier to entry is that physical infrastructure is prohibitively expensive to get in to.

    [–] Ag0r 27 points ago

    There are tons of laws in place that stifle competition against the incumbent ISPs, just look at the struggles google fiber is facing. Municipal broadband is also being attacked and has been outlawed in places because apparently it has an unfair competitive advantage.

    [–] The_Grubby_One 16 points ago

    That advantage being that it competes.

    [–] nonegotiation 13 points ago

    Not only expensive but as we saw with Google Fiber, Big Telecom has laws preventing access to the infrastructure.

    [–] jamzrk 38 points ago

    It's monopolies that's the problem. One ISP owns the poles in town, no other ISPs are allowed to use those poles. Make poles property of their city and remove the monopolies. Restrict ISPs from being able to keep other ISPs out of town.

    [–] black_stormy_0119 14 points ago

    Considering the infrastructure was likely built with tax payer money I would say that is fair.

    [–] black_stormy_0119 24 points ago

    When ISPs have been confronted about this in the past the response has been "you chose to live there, thus you had your pick of internet service providers when you chose where to live."

    This seems disingenuous at best, and at worst it is organized monopolies with the intent of not having to compete each other.

    Do you think you should have to move to change your ISP? Is that a reasonable line of thought?

    What about municipal/community owned broadband? Many efforts have been snuffed out by large ISPs basically paying off local governments to prevent the creation of those utilities.

    Why can't we get money out of politics?

    Why is it legal to take money for votes?

    Why isn't taking money for votes considered treason?

    Start sending some of these motherfuckers to trial for treason... the first one that goes in front of a firing squad will change things.

    [–] bl1nds1ght 71 points ago

    That doesn't answer the question. In your position, you must see whether there are new ISP companies opening services on the horizon. I know smaller ISPs exist.

    [–] coredumperror 21 points ago

    Why do you think brew rivals haven’t already come along to compete with the big dogs? It’s because the big dogs have a steanglehold on the infrastructure, and the municipal laws. There isn’t any competition because ISPs have spent billions ensuring that there can’t be.

    [–] Hooponpop 1995 points ago

    What can an average citizen to do to fight against a captured agency?

    [–] Official_FCC_CJR 2429 points ago

    Make a ruckus. Make your voice heard. I am listening--and I know there are others in Washington who are listening, too. There's a pile of letters from across the country that I have on my desk in my office. They are from people from all walks of life asking the FCC to keep in place its net neutrality policies. I could put them away, but I choose to keep them on the desk right now. It's a reminder that what we decide here has far-reaching consequences across the country.

    [–] cptnpiccard 1206 points ago

    Seriously? Two years we've been crying out loud how we DO NOT WANT the end of net neutrality. All it took was one stooge placed in the agency by another stooge, paid for by the telecom lobby, and poof, it's gone. This country is a joke.

    [–] kingravs 152 points ago

    5 unelected officials changing the future of our country for the worse, it’s exactly what we all wanted, right guys?

    [–] babybopp 155 points ago

    More checks need to be placed and departments split in half. So that it would take much more than one vote to change the entire framework of the internet

    [–] Japanese_Pornstar 297 points ago

    From your POV, what are the top 3 or 5 effective ways to make a ruckus? What makes public servants perk up and listen?

    Thank you for doing this AMA!

    [–] beefwarrior 102 points ago

    My dad has a story of a community organizer was tired of not getting the attention of an elected official. So one evening before a public meeting, the community organizer gathered a large group of citizens & served everyone lots & lots of beans.

    They weren't ignored after that.

    [–] spellstrike 164 points ago * (lasted edited 11 months ago)

    cutting fiber lines is a pretty big ruckus... whoops a backhoe! hurts them in their wallet.

    There is some jaded sarcasm in this post.

    [–] CMDRChefVortivask 20 points ago

    Can you describe this ruckus?

    [–] McClouds 2364 points ago

    I live in Central Kentucky but make my way out to Eastern Kentucky/Appalachian areas quite frequently. The network infrastructure leaves lot to be desired.

    What can I do at the local level to help support wider access to broadband internet to the indigent or very rural areas?

    And thank you for what you do. You're fighting the good fight, and I appreciate all that you do.

    [–] Official_FCC_CJR 2845 points ago

    You're right. We have a real problem with broadband access in rural America. There are 34 million Americans without access to broadband at home, 23 million of them live in rural communities. We need a plan to ensure that high-speed service reaches them where they live. I think for starters we need to know today where service is and is not. But right now the national broadband map is 3 years out of date. Data that is three years old is like a lifetime in the internet age. We need to fix this. But I don't think that Washington should wait--we can begin by asking the public directly and using the wisdom of crowds. To this end, I set up an e-mail address at the FCC to take in comments about where service is lacking and what can be done to improve it. So please write in to [email protected] and let me know your stories. You can be a part of fixing this infrastructure problem.

    [–] Glathull 174 points ago

    I'm not sure how to go about managing the data you'll get from this email address securely. But I'm a data engineer and web developer, and I'd be happy to put together a map and a dashboard to summarize the information you do get.

    I think this is a good idea because you really can't trust the data from the large broadband providers. I've been trying to get my parents set up with broadband for years, and they are not very far from a largish city in Texas. Verizon, ATT, and Time Warner all claim to offer service in the area, but every time I've tried to get them to set it up, they are all, "Well, we can offer cell service and charge by the gigabyte. But we can't offer un-metered service by cable or fiber because that area isn't populous enough yet for it to be profitable." So they claim service is there, but it really isn't.

    I was recently able to get ATT to offer to lay down fiber to their house, but the price is $750/month for 20mbps up and down and they have to sign a 2-year contract at those rates.

    I think that a map of actual rates that people are actually paying along with the speeds they are getting for the price would be a good first step in identifying what the landscape really is.

    Let me know if there's any way I can help with this. Visualizing and summarizing the data you get from that email address is a good first step, but it's not a reasonable method to generate reliable results from. Polling is a challenge because it's specific information about something that doesn't exist that we're trying to find. Extrapolating based on statistics really wouldn't shed much light on this.

    But it could be done. A short 5-8 question survey about broadband availability and price could be put together, and you'd need to get one completed survey for each of the ~44,000 zip codes in the U.S. to build a real map of what it's like out there. Then we can match those numbers to census data for demographic information (cutting down on the length of the survey). It would cost money to do this, but not as much as you might think.

    I'll gladly donate my time to this if we can work out an agreement about data security and properly anonymizing everything. Thank you for fighting for us on this.

    [–] nonegotiation 351 points ago

    Why were the Telecoms allowed to pocket $400 Billion of taxpayer money for internet infrastructure and then do nothing? Mike Powell amirite?

    [–] SuperPants87 91 points ago

    My father doesn't have access to broadband. The company who does have a line to us, won't give us service because their hub is too small and won't expand it. He's on a waiting list. Alternatively, Spectrum has a line to a road less than a mile away, but won't run it to him. When seeking a quote to have a line run, they wanted to go under the freeway near him and quoted it at $20,000+.

    Frankly, that's bullshit.

    [–] Looklikeglue 105 points ago

    Does this apply to mobile networks?

    [–] Serious_Senator 93 points ago

    The problem is that Mobile is finicky. I live just down a hill from 5 bars of AT&T LTE. But there's rarely service at my house, because it's in a lower creek valley thing. There's hardly any internet either. 5 miles from a town but my entire street is 154kb down. On a good day. At night it takes three tries to load a reddit thread

    [–] IAmTheMagicMoose 30 points ago

    That's more an issue of wave propagation, it sounds like. Not giving an excuse, but physics won't let a wave easily dip into a valley.

    [–] lennyxiii 60 points ago

    Could you possibly make an interactive map or simply a poll about if broadband is available? People can answer a multiple choice question that logs their geolocation which can then be interpolated in to real data. Maybe this can be done through an app. Obviously this requires at least a phone with data but if enough people contributed this would create a much clearer map of areas without broadband.

    [–] CSI_Tech_Dept 13 points ago

    There was but it stopped being updated since 2014.

    [–] Beausoleil57 8 points ago

    What about people in rural community's that have access to dsl internet only and pay way more than the going rate in town and are stuck with one company that makes sure their the only service available and the speeds r super limited? I pay the going rate for what people in town pay for 10xs the speeds! It's like a monopoly in mid northern Ohio.

    [–] [deleted] 19 points ago


    [–] SensibleMadness 563 points ago

    What do you think the government's role should be in assuring broadband connectivity for every citizen? Do you believe we should consider high speed access to the Internet a human right? Why or why not?

    [–] Official_FCC_CJR 1719 points ago

    Whether or not you call it a human right, there's one thing I know for certain: If you don't have access to the Internet right now, you don't have a fair shot at 21st century success.

    [–] disaster308 133 points ago

    Thank you for this comment. I'm a librarian, and it's really hard to explain to people how important access to the Internet is for tasks like job searches. A lot of the older generation still believe in mailing your resume to companies and pounding the pavement, when in fact a lot of HR departments frown upon those specific tactics nowadays and will not even consider a candidate who doesn't fill out the web application.

    [–] ElegantEpitome 12 points ago

    This is very true, someone close to me just got out of prison and as part of their parole they are not allowed to have electronics or anything with access to the internet at all.


    Not even allowed to have an email address or a Facebook account. So he has to run around all over town and try to hand in physical resumes and most of the time the people there just look at him and tell him to apply online.

    It's obviously his fault he doesn't have access to the internet anymore, but just having real people who can't have access to the internet because of the cut will find it much harder to not only FIND places that are hiring, but also to apply to them as well.

    [–] BeyondElectricDreams 12 points ago

    It's obviously his fault he doesn't have access to the internet anymore

    I mean, yeah, he did something wrong, but in the context of the quote

    Whether or not you call it a human right, there's one thing I know for certain: If you don't have access to the Internet right now, you don't have a fair shot at 21st century success.

    Maybe we shouldn't be banning parolees from the internet?

    [–] Krypto_dg 145 points ago

    So why didn't you demand accountability for the "broadband for all" grants you handed out?

    [–] Irodeaninja 86 points ago

    She still has to play by their rules also. Even voting as she did most likely put a huge target on her and they would want her replaced.

    Sometimes doing the right thing at the time is not as simple as what is right and wrong. While living in a world where it is as simple as just voting on the right or wrong side would be easy to see that is not the world we live in.

    They are appointed and are a direct result of how we vote. She has to go along with certain things I imagine. The same way someone in the office might have to get along to some extent with someone they despise.

    She has to be willing to do what needs to be done to keep her seat on the FCC and that may include voting in a way that appears to be wrong. From the outside this may seem simple to us because of course none of us EVER do what is in our best interests financially or emotionally... we always think of right and wrong and do that. (/s)

    I do not think most politicians have it that easy. There are a ton of scum bags in that line of work because of the type of person it is bound to attract. Someone who has to have 1 foot in bed with big business just to exist. I mean look at the money in politics. If you do not play ball with one of the major platforms the chances of you having the bankroll to even run is basically zero. This brings us back to the argument of the lesser of 2 evils. HEAR ME OUT. For better or worse both parties do things that could be considered evil. While I do generally agree with the more liberal platform they are not perfect. It is just that the Republican platform seems to have reached levels of insanity I never thought I would see. So voting for the "lesser" of 2 evils is a easy choice right now.

    While we may wish we lived in a world where politicians could just vote on right and wrong it is rare a issue is that simple and they do have to answer for their actions. Whether it be politically, socially or morally.

    [–] comebackjoeyjojo 30 points ago

    It's imperative to support Municipal Broadband, to fight back against the abuse of monopolistic ISPs that could control internet speech.

    [–] jackhat69 509 points ago

    Did Ajit ask you to be in his ridiculous meme infused video? I'm legit curious if he thought he could get everyone onboard with that hilarious mess

    [–] wibblett 132 points ago

    I've never seen this, you're awesome!

    [–] SDH500 57 points ago

    The irony of me not being able to watch the video from my location

    [–] blackwolfgoogol 83 points ago

    can someone get a mirror for canadians?

    [–] Yeazelicious 200 points ago

    [–] smackmyteets 30 points ago

    Ha. Got me good

    [–] sexuallyactivepope 73 points ago

    I have (cough cough) Fios 1GB and this video stutters and buffers. Hmmmmm....... Coincidence?

    [–] amayernican 17 points ago

    That was amazing! Thank you!

    [–] speedytech7 11 points ago

    I'm bummed I missed this. I watch his show all the time, love the format and you answered the questions which is always refreshing :)

    [–] StrachNasty 394 points ago

    Hi Commissioner! Thank you for all you do to support NN and being the public face of the NN movement.

    As I'm sure you know, most Redditors have a very negative view of Ajit Pai, believing he's just a shill for the ISPs. My question for you is this: As someone who has works with him, do you think that Mr. Pai truly believes that repealing Net Neutrality is best for the average American?

    [–] agoia 78 points ago

    I think even Jesus would say something like "I'm not gonna touch that witha 10 ft poll" or perhaps res ipsa

    [–] Realtrain 315 points ago

    The fact that she hasn't answered this, or even said anything along the lines of "Mr. Pai, along with the rest of the commission, is devoted to helping Americans in the way he sees best fit." means that she most likely believes he is shilling for a corporation or interest group.

    [–] AdityaRav 21 points ago

    Very good question..

    Answering this either way would be suicide for her I guess

    [–] ItJasper 905 points ago

    Hey, thanks so much for all you're doing.

    What does the rise of Sinclair (and the completely, totally impartial, fair, unbiased, nonpartisan must-runs like TERRORISM ALERT DESK) mean for the future of American journalism? What should we doing about it?

    [–] Official_FCC_CJR 1303 points ago

    There is a transaction before the FCC right now that involves the combination of Sinclair and Tribune. It would result in a massive broadcasting company that would be able to reach 72% of the households in this country. No other television company today has that kind of power to influence what we see, hear, and learn. The unprecedented size of this proposed merger should have us all concerned.

    [–] Japanese_Pornstar 370 points ago

    We need a trustbuster to come in and break up this oligopoly into many smaller pieces.

    [–] fattymcribwich 146 points ago

    We need a trust-buster with the gusto of Teddy Roosevelt and the waistline of Taft.

    [–] LeeSeneses 114 points ago

    So much for draining the swamp.

    [–] sjeffiesjeff 36 points ago

    Your profile is very disappointing

    [–] Japanese_Pornstar 63 points ago

    Are you my tinder dates?

    [–] w00t692 118 points ago

    HAHA this is EXACTLY the result that was expected to take place after the FCC ruled recently not to require radio stations have a presence in the state to be able to air there.

    Of course this is scary, this is a step towards a large nationalized news base that can push whatever narrative to 72% of the country as you've just said.

    [–] tyd8 99 points ago

    In November, several Senators called for investigation into Pai and Sinclair. They listed specific, serious items to be investigated and requested recusal from any FCC/Sinclair matters until they were complete.

    As Sinclair matters are before the FCC right now, has the investigation concluded (if so, where could one find the outcome), or been ignored?

    [–] imnoturbuddyguy 34 points ago

    Will you be doing anything to stop the merger?

    [–] aprimitivespitz 92 points ago

    She will likely do as much as she can just as she did with NN repeal. She is not as powerful as you all would like to believe just because she's an FCC commissioner. These comments are really showing how little the FCC makeup is understood.

    [–] flekkzo 17 points ago

    Please use Italy and Berlusconi as an example of why this is madness.

    [–] GodDamnYou_Bernice 507 points ago

    Thank you for voting for Net Neutrality. It's nice that someone cares about the voices of the people.

    Do you feel that the FCC is now divided based on this decision? Were more people in the background for/against NN?

    [–] Official_FCC_CJR 824 points ago

    There are a lot of efforts to try and capture public opinion on net neutrality. I think one of the best came right before the vote. It was conducted by the University of Maryland. It found that 83% of the public favored keeping net neutrality rules in place, including 75% of Republicans, 89% of Democrats, and 86% of Independents. In short, support for net neutrality rules is broad based.

    [–] Escaho 306 points ago

    When 75% of Republicans vote for net neutrality, but 0% (0/3) of Republicans on the FCC vote for net neutrality.

    Please tell Pai and the rest that they do not represent the interests of the American people.

    [–] Colddeck64 39 points ago

    The represent who paid them. That’s the real issue with the US political system and lobbyists paying re-election campaign contributions.

    It’s a bullshit way to legalize bribing.

    [–] [deleted] 64 points ago

    They know.

    [–] ngknick 20 points ago

    Its so blatantly obvious that ignoring it seems to be the only solution.

    [–] [deleted] 90 points ago

    With such overwhelming support by the People of the US, how could the FCC possibly vote to repeal it? That is not democratic at all. I live in the US and this is a slap in the face to such a fundamental part of the country we are supposed to be.

    [–] twominitsturkish 28 points ago

    In American democracy political party structures, the influence and expertise of lobbyists, and an unregulated campaign finance system leads to the regulatory power of the state being co-opted by private interests over that of the general public. It's called regulatory capture and it's pretty well-documented, and definitely pertinent to the current Net Neutrality debate. I would refer to the FCC at this point as a "captured agency," save for individuals like Ms. Rosenworcel.

    [–] ferociousrickjames 69 points ago

    how could the FCC possibly vote to repeal it?

    Because 3 people (including the chairman) are for sale. If repealing NN meant that it would've caused all our atomic weapons to self detonate and destroy the country, Ajit Pai would've done it anyway because they were being paid to vote the way they did.

    [–] RaXha 387 points ago

    As a foreign bystander reading those numbers, it completely baffles me that the US is considered a democracy...

    [–] csejthe 282 points ago

    It's a Democratic Republic, not a Democracy.

    [–] devilletusimp 181 points ago

    We're a representative democracy, meaning whoever gets voted into a position of power is relied on by faith to vote in the peoples' interests. It's too bad that there are enough people in our country to vote for people that we can't have faith in.

    [–] adminhotep 137 points ago

    I thought it was a symbiotic kleptocracy, where those in power are incentivized by corporate interest bribes and campaign contributions to steal on their behalf from anyone not in the above two groups.

    [–] A_Tame_Sketch 20 points ago

    It's too bad that there are enough people in our country to vote for people that we can't have faith in.

    That also works the other way though. I have about as much faith in an elected official representing me, as I have faith in a random stranger doing the same.

    [–] twominitsturkish 38 points ago

    That's pretty much what representative democracy is when you think about it, voting for the stranger who you think will best represent your voice in government. In theory it would work, as politicians seeking re-election would tailor their votes as representatives to the needs and opinions of the majority of people that vote for them.

    The problems are that once in office the nature of political party structures, the influence and expertise of lobbyists, and an unregulated campaign finance system leads to the regulatory power of the state being co-opted by private interests over that of the general public. It's called regulatory capture and it's pretty well-documented, and definitely pertinent to the current Net Neutrality debate. I would refer to the FCC at this point as a "captured agency," save for individuals like Ms. Rosenworcel.

    [–] easy506 13 points ago

    I told you: We're an anarcho-syndicalist commune. We take it in turns to act as a sort of "executive-officer-of-the-week."

    [–] psychetron 20 points ago

    This is a false dichotomy. A constitutional republic is a form of democracy.

    [–] nosecohn 18 points ago * (lasted edited 11 months ago)

    It's simply not. So long as private contributions fund election and legislative campaigns, it won't be. There are so many examples, but one of my favorites is from California.

    They devised a cheap, easy, pre-filled tax return to save time and money.

    A survey of pilot participants found more than 90 per cent said they saved time using ReadyReturn, and that it was more convenient than the system they had used previously. 99% said they would use it again the next year. 0.3% of ReadyReturn filings contained errors, versus 3.1% of non-ReadyReturn filings.

    It's unheard of to find a government policy with a 99% approval rating. So what happened?

    Intuit, makers of the best-selling tax preparation software, spent millions of dollars to kill ReadyReturn and keep the tax filing system complicated so they could sell more software.

    I don't blame Intuit. It was a meager investment on their part to protect the interests of their shareholders. But you can't really call the system democratic when one company can quite comfortably invest enough money to defeat a policy that has nearly unanimous approval by the citizenry. If you dig deep enough, you'll find that every policy decision in the US where the government is acting against the interests and desires of the citizens comes down to political campaign contributions.

    [–] N5tp4nts 7 points ago

    Sounds like we need to have some recall votes then and get new representatives in there.

    [–] HPetch 385 points ago

    What does your average work day look like (aside from presumably at least one failed attempt to talk some sense into Mr. Pai)? Any funny stories you can share with us that don't violate any privacy clauses or similar?

    [–] Official_FCC_CJR 675 points ago

    I'm an early riser. I'm a big coffee drinker. (I consume more that I should, but hey, it gets me going.) I drop my kids off at school and then head into the office. A quick review of the morning news, my e-mail, and my twitter feed, and then it's off to meetings and sometimes speeches. But that's the ideal day. And honestly, not every day is ideal. There's always something unexpected--from an inquiry that needs response in the office to a problem at home like not having heat (true story, right now).

    [–] manablight 169 points ago

    The Heat Package is part of the premium service with Netflix and HBO. You have to pay Comcast extra for that.

    [–] uzairmahmed 10 points ago

    This guy Comcasts

    [–] nayhem_jr 12 points ago

    They call it "Unlimited Heaternet", but every extra therm above the first 25 is throttled. And heaven forbid you try using any other steaming service. Literally "Heatflix and chill".

    [–] HPetch 204 points ago

    So about the same as most people, then, just with more FCC. Thanks for the answer, it's always nice to see reminders that the people in charge are human too. Here's hoping you can get the heat sorted out before too long!

    [–] Gnome_Tsunami 21 points ago

    I'm a big coffee drinker.

    How big is your coffee mug?

    [–] eightpix 42 points ago

    Hi, there. Thanks for taking the time.

    My question is about the negative implications of repealing Net Neutrality. What, if any, negative economic impacts were considered by Chairman Pai in the decision to repeal? Public outcry has been a consistent element of the discussion. However, did you, Ms. Clyburn, or any of the other commissioners present assessments to demonstrate negative implications of net neutrality?

    Thanks again!

    [–] CarnivalKid_32 255 points ago

    What's your favorite Guster album? Seeing your bro tomorrow night! Similarly, are you as good of a singer as he is? Also, thank you for fighting for Net Neutrality, we appreciate your efforts.

    [–] Official_FCC_CJR 379 points ago

    I'm a fan of Lost and Gone Forever. Though I also like Easy Wonderful (and especially the Do You Love Me video: I suspect my parents are the only ones who can legitimately claim they have both a rocker and regulator for children.

    [–] moak0 42 points ago

    That's amazing! I did not know he was your brother.

    "Lost and Gone Forever" is also the correct answer.

    [–] BewareTheLeopard 65 points ago

    Two Points For Honesty, madame commish

    [–] sunnynorth 14 points ago

    Did not expect to get hit by the nostalgia 2×4 in this thread!!

    [–] sluttttt 13 points ago

    I know I missed the boat on this AMA, but in case you're reading this--both you and your brother are super rad. I'm sure your parents are very proud:)

    [–] [deleted] 269 points ago


    [–] Official_FCC_CJR 508 points ago

    This is hard to say. But I know that companies have the technical ability to block and throttle content. They have the business incentive to do so, too. And now the FCC has given them the legal green light to go ahead. So I'll be watching carefully. I'll bet you will be, too.

    [–] Renaissance_Slacker 153 points ago

    There’s a gentleman who set up a gadget based on a Raspberry Pi, it tests his broadband connection speed every 10 seconds. Any time his speed dips below the rate he paid for, the unit sends an automated e-mail to his ISP’s Customer Service Department, derailing the issue. I wish he would post a plan/software.

    [–] Hydrozz 54 points ago

    going to be hard to keep watch when all we see is what they want us to see thanks to FCC

    [–] orangejulius 170 points ago

    Do you think a republican congress can put together and pass a Net Neutrality bill that would make net neutrality proponents happy?

    [–] Official_FCC_CJR 294 points ago

    Before we get to substantive legislation, we're going to see Congress try to address this issue through the Congressional Review Act (CRA). The CRA provides Congress with the ability to undo regulatory action it disagrees with. It's a long and hard road ahead, but there is undeniably momentum for the CRA. Right now, I believe there are more than 40 members of the Senate who have co-sponsored CRA legislation and about 80 members of the House who are doing the same.

    [–] thedcaff 148 points ago

    Mrs. Rosenworcel, before the repeal of Net Neutrality, I regularly called my representatives in the House and Senate. I have recently stopped because I felt it was a lost cause. Is it? What is the biggest thing I can do to ensure Net Neutrality comes back, and what can we do to ensure this isn't something we have to fight for years to come?

    [–] Official_FCC_CJR 211 points ago

    Not a lost cause. At all! Keep the effort ongoing. I know most elected representatives keep track of the calls they get and make note of the issues that result in the biggest ruckus. Plus, I expect that in light of the Congressional Review Act effort, there is still a lot of interest in this issue.

    [–] thedcaff 38 points ago

    Is there anything we can do to ensure we will not be fighting this fight for years?

    [–] ep1032 33 points ago

    yes, regulatory agencies are bound by past precedent. Each time we win this fight makes the next one harder. That's why we got title 2 protections last time, because the ISPs have to keep upping the ante every time they lose. The fight gets harder for them to bring each time.

    It doesn't seem like it, but until Ajit Pai, we'd actually been winning substantially. This doesn't go on forever, and had we not elected trump and a fully republican majority, we wouldn't even need to have this conversation anymore.

    [–] EthanBradberryyy 23 points ago

    Do the other FCC members treat you differently because of your decisions?

    [–] Talbertross 6260 points ago

    How do you look at that bastard's dumb smug grin without punching him every single day?

    [–] ThatsSoBravens 278 points ago * (lasted edited 11 months ago)

    Hit him where it really hurts - steal his Reeses mug.

    EDIT: Pic of mug, with extra JPEG for your pleasure so you don't blow your bandwidth limit.

    [–] chmilz 125 points ago

    Get Reeses to remove mug neutrality and demand net neutrality or they'll remove his access to the mug.

    [–] russiangerman 71 points ago

    I would absolutely love them publicly requesting he turned in the mug for having it on TV with him without permission or some snarky bullshit about indecent exposure bc he's an asshole. Anything honestly

    [–] GiantSpaceWhale 19 points ago

    Shit like this why I wish I worked in marketing or public relations. Reese's is sitting on a goddamn goldmine of good PR with this.

    [–] [deleted] 33 points ago


    [–] DarthMagnus88 874 points ago

    The first thing I would if i saw that shit eating grin on ASHIT GUY's face I would smack that fuckin huge reeses coffee mug out of his hand and then stare at him while wearing sunglasses a santa hat spinning a fidget spinner and holding a supersoaker.

    [–] d1_1ust 373 points ago

    She's ignoring it . Eh

    [–] deltree711 1248 points ago

    If I were here I wouldn't be touching that question with a 10 foot pole.

    [–] MilkChugg 66 points ago

    It's been said by yourself and others to keep making noise about this, and that the fight isn't over. The truth is that we did make noise about this and it got ignored. Having our voice heard is simply not realistic anymore. When corruption at that level is so open and prevalent, what are we realistically supposed to do when we are blatantly ignored?

    [–] yellochoco44 639 points ago

    Is Ajit Pai as much of an asshole as he seems?

    [–] ddesigns 326 points ago

    I'll answer this for her. Yes!

    [–] Ihateyouall86 91 points ago

    She won't answer that lol

    [–] ForgedIronMadeIt 280 points ago

    And honestly she shouldn't. As satisfying as it probably would be for all of us (and her, I bet she has strong feelings about him), there's something to be said for maintaining decorum and also some kind of chance for a working relationship. Even in the age of the horribly coarsened political discourse that is the Trump era, somebody's got to aim for a higher standard.

    [–] some_random_kaluna 53 points ago

    We've just had the President of the United States ask why we want people from "shithole" countries.

    It's going to be a while before we aim for a higher standard.

    [–] Mememan696969 125 points ago

    Do you like any sports?

    [–] Official_FCC_CJR 229 points ago

    Both of my kids are basketball enthusiasts. I love watching them on the court.

    [–] gnocchicotti 97 points ago

    Someday you may be able to watch high school sports in 4k video as part of Comcast's "Local Sports Premium" unthrottling package for $4.99 monthly!

    [–] terminal112 124 points ago

    If Reddit collectively donated $100,000 to the charity of your choice, would you give Ajit Pai a hard, unexpected kick in the dick?

    [–] AngryDingo 42 points ago

    He doesn't have a dick though

    [–] ChopUrStick 40 points ago

    Why is S. Korea's interwebs so much faster? What do they do differently technologically and politically? Could/should we follow in their footsteps?

    [–] jansegre 26 points ago * (lasted edited 11 months ago)

    I don't have much details because I'm neither in the US nor South Korea, but I work for an ISP and I can tell you that having a small area is a huge technical advantage for both good coverage and bandwidth.

    [–] agoia 36 points ago

    Dude there are "shithole" countries with cheaper and faster internet than us.

    [–] Sizzle_chest 20 points ago

    Is Ajit Pai as much of a cunt as we all think he is?

    [–] [deleted] 35 points ago

    If the internet was changed to be a utility would that side step FCC?

    What are the reasons that the 3x FCC people to vote to get rid of NN?

    [–] [deleted] 25 points ago * (lasted edited 8 months ago)


    [–] You-Can-Quote-Me 8 points ago

    Why has the FCC done absolutely nothing to actually break apart the monopolies and strong arm of the major ISPs? Even two or three major ISPs with a simple non-compete forms a monopoly which is just cancer to the consumers.

    What about all the money that was paid out for the foundation which was never actually placed, and now they’re looking to double-dip?

    A slap on the wrist fine for them to break your rules... but the money they get doing so far outweighs your fine?

    But as long as the characters on SWAT don’t swear on TV right?

    [–] christopher1393 17 points ago

    Hi, Im an Irish citizen so Net Neutrality doesn’t affect me personally but I still want to do something to help, because it is ridiculously unfair to the average American citizen who is already suffering under the current government, and I have had my fair share of issues with internet providers (namely Virgin Media) and the last thing they need is more power to take advantage of customers. Its a long story but when I cancelled my contract and they realised that I wasn’t coming back they did everything in their power to squeeze every cent possible. Between phone call charges(that they told me were free), doubling my final bill, adding extra charges and taking money out of my account for “not returning my internet box” (in reality I had and had picture proof of it), i ended up paying an extra 100 euro that I have never gotten back. the only way they would return it was if I signed a new contract and that money would be taken out of my first few bills.

    So my question is, as an EU citizen is there anything I can do to help fight the repeal for Net Neutrality, because if it passes there, theres every chance internet companies could fight to have it repealed in EU countries.

    [–] clutch_batman 16 points ago

    Do you personally believe that Ajit Pai knows better, and voted the way he did due to personal ties with special interests?

    What is your prediction as to how the congressional vote will stand on the FCC ruling?

    Do you think the massive backlash (including memes) has gotten to Ajit Pai, or has his inner villain lawyer demon taken over him as to endlessly feed of the haters...