I'm certain the commissioners will each read every one of the million plus comments submitted before deciding what to do... If not, why ask for the comments in the first place?
They could have just organized a poll.
State PUCs regulate local internet fees, if the FCC does go after Net Neutrality they still won't regulate local prices for Internet access... Or connection speed... Or anything else you rant about.
They donâ(TM)t have to disclose their donors, unlike almost any other type of organization that advocates for or against candidates.
They are advocating against a gov't policy, not a candidate - in fact you could say they are 'educating' people about a given policy, much like any number of tax-exempt advocacy groups do...
Typo:
No one is sledging the comments were not submitted falsely - each comment represents a valid comment.
Should have been:
No one is aledging the comments were submitted falsely - each comment represents a valid comment.
After a comprehensive analysis of the comments provided to the FCC regarding net neutrality, it was found that a great percentage were form letters based on one of some 30 templates one organization made available... So what?
No one is sledging the comments were not submitted falsely - each comment represents a valid comment.
The organizer of the form letter campaign gave people some thirty choices to find a message that resonates with them - each template represented different reasons to oppose net neutrality.
If abortion or the environment were the topic of the open comment period, would you discount form letter submissions from say the Sierra Club or Planned Parenthood because the wording was suggested by an advocacy group? Of course not.
It isn't impossible to defend, why, just imagine how much more stable & reliable Windows would be if they blocked other software companies from accessing the Registry in Windows.
It is a perfectly defensible position, supported by every product manufacturer that puts either of the following warnings on their product:
"No user-serviceable parts inside"
"warranty void if seal broken"
"Windows ain't done till Lotus won't run"?
PC sales could start to resemble cellphone sales...
It will be no more inconvenient than paying a monthly Netflix fee, antivirus renewal, magazine or newspaper subscription...
People don't seem to find these subscriptions inconvenient, why should an OS subscription fee be a problem?
The vast majority of users of Office use leased copies already - it's called Software Assurance (or Educational Assistance for school students)... Retail Sales represents a significant revenue stream, but I suspect more dollars come in from the various license agreements.
Subscription for updates after first year? Seems a pretty simple model to me.
If you like your three year-old OS that hasn't been patched you can keep it, if you want to keep it current, send us $29/year per system.
Just like countless Anti-virus software vendors do...
OEMs will drop the pre-installs if the software doesn't add value...
They paid frys and best buy to destroy copies of win 7 and office 2010 to force users to run an OS for tablets.
You have no idea what you are talking about.
Rather than have big box retailers physically ship back retail copies of older OS/software, they paid them to destroy them, giving them credit for each destroyed copy. This is how newstands process out-dated magazines and newspapers, they rip off the cover/front page and return that for credit, destroying the magazine for the publisher.
Because consumers are clueless about the subscription model, except, of course, for magazines, newspapers, Netflix, etc., right?
Consumers can handle the subscription model.
In less than a century, computers will be making substantial progress on ... the overriding problem of war and peace. -- James Slagle
