News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Dead People Are Posting Anti-Net Neutrality Comments to FCC Website. Parent comment

Re:Dead People Are Posting Anti-Net Neutrality Comments to F... by ChuckMcM on Thursday May 25, 2017 @04:19PM (#14419834)
But it does matter, because it shows malice and intent. All three data points have to be taken together (FCC Opens up comments, Comments criminally spammed, FCC decides the issue X). Given the clear and convincing evidence of malfeasance in the comment stream, the FCC's actions can be judged as reasonable or unreasonable.

So what matters is that we shine light on their agenda so that it is not possible for them to credibly deny they are not following their own policies.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Dead People Are Posting Anti-Net Neutrality Comments to F... by notadoc on Thursday May 25, 2017 @05:04PM (#14420136)
> So what matters is that we shine light on their agenda so that it is not possible for them to credibly deny they are not following their own policies.

And who is going to shine a line or report on that? The "fake news" media?

Nobody will care, they don't want to hear it and they won't believe it, cognitive dissonance is amazingly powerful.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Dead People Are Posting Anti-Net Neutrality Comments to F... by ohazi on Thursday May 25, 2017 @05:49PM (#14420399)
It's a long game. This administration will (eventually) turn over, and we need the new guys to be very clear about where the old guys fucked up.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Dead People Are Posting Anti-Net Neutrality Comments to F... by Chris2048 on Friday May 26, 2017 @06:42AM (#14423108)
The fake news is also in favor of the "new guys".
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Dead People Are Posting Anti-Net Neutrality Comments to F... by ebbv on Thursday May 25, 2017 @06:18PM (#14420601)
Cognitive dissonance is when you hold two opposing viewpoints at once. Like if you think killing animals for food is wrong but you love eating steaks and plan to continue doing so.

It does not mean choosing to ignore reality or being willfully blind like you are using it here. I'm not sure how it has become popular to misuse it in that way over the last couple years, but it seems to be a thing.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Dead People Are Posting Anti-Net Neutrality Comments to F... by et-al on Thursday May 25, 2017 @07:05PM (#14420804)
I think notadoc meant to use the term "mental gymnastics".

(I agree "cognitive dissonance" seems to be misused lately. That's how language evolves, unfortunately. And to add to your definition, it's the stress from with holding two opposing thoughts, hence the dissonance.)

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Dead People Are Posting Anti-Net Neutrality Comments to F... by RRWagner on Thursday May 25, 2017 @11:41PM (#14421835)
How about "cognitive disconnect" as the better descriptive phrase?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Dead People Are Posting Anti-Net Neutrality Comments to F... by episteam on Friday May 26, 2017 @01:43AM (#14422215)
It's just plain old confirmation bias, though I like the more recent[1] semantic extension of the phrase "epistemic closure" to describe belief systems impervious to outside information.

[1] - http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/28/books/28conserv.html

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Dead People Are Posting Anti-Net Neutrality Comments to F... by TheCoelacanth on Friday May 26, 2017 @11:08AM (#14424569)
If the FCC ruling is challenged in court, then hopefully the court would do that. The FCC doesn't have to follow what the comments tell them to do, but they do have to take their arguments into consideration.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Dead People Are Posting Anti-Net Neutrality Comments to F... by fjdlwlv on Friday May 26, 2017 @01:08AM (#14422113)
What does spam have to do with the FCC's decision making?

Nothing.

Comments are for submitting ideas. It was never supposed to be a popular vote.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Dead People Are Posting Anti-Net Neutrality Comments to F... by evanlivingston on Thursday May 25, 2017 @04:25PM (#14419891)
Shine a light for who to see?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Dead People Are Posting Anti-Net Neutrality Comments to F... by PerryCox on Thursday May 25, 2017 @04:46PM (#14420039)
Hopefully the EFF can challenge this in court and this provides good evidence that the FCC is ignoring what Americans want.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Dead People Are Posting Anti-Net Neutrality Comments to F... by fjdlwlv on Friday May 26, 2017 @01:12AM (#14422123)
FCC's job is to make and enforce policy that conforms to the law set by Congress, not to hold and obey public votes.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Dead People Are Posting Anti-Net Neutrality Comments to F... by TheCoelacanth on Friday May 26, 2017 @11:11AM (#14424586)
Yet, they are not allowed to ignore the public's comments. They must take them into consideration, even if they end up deciding to act against public opinion.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Dead People Are Posting Anti-Net Neutrality Comments to F... by rayiner on Thursday May 25, 2017 @05:22PM (#14420238)
Ignoring what Americans want is almost the entire point of regulatory agencies like the FCC. They're a bureaucratic/technocratic check on the democratic process. (Which is why, in my opinion they're unconstitutional, but that's an argument for another day.)
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Dead People Are Posting Anti-Net Neutrality Comments to F... by Declanomous on Thursday May 25, 2017 @05:28PM (#14420269)
That doesn't really explain the fact that a lot of agencies were created because of public outcry, such as the FDA. I think agencies exist because lawmakers don't really have the ability to move decisively when it is needed.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Dead People Are Posting Anti-Net Neutrality Comments to F... by beaconstudios on Thursday May 25, 2017 @07:10PM (#14420825)
isn't the constitution itself a check on the democratic process?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Dead People Are Posting Anti-Net Neutrality Comments to F... by rayiner on Thursday May 25, 2017 @08:39PM (#14421254)
Many mechanisms in the constitution serve as checks on the democratic process. Adding checks in addition to those is unconstitutional: http://www.law.nyu.edu/sites/default/files/ECM_PRO_060974.pd....
[ Parent | on HN ]