An anonymous reader shares a report: The FCC adopted a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to rescind and revise certain rules attached to consumer broadband labels. The measure passed on a two-to-one vote, with Commissioner Anna Gomez, the lone Democrat on the FCC, voting no and calling the notice "one of the most anti-consumer items I have seen."

The vote was held at the Commission's open meeting for the month of October. As per a draft notice circulated earlier this month, the FCC is looking to roll back several rules, including requirements that service providers read the label to consumers via phone, itemize state and local pass-through fees, and display labels in consumer account portals, among others. Advocates at Public Knowledge urged the Commission to reconsider, saying in a recent filing that "the Commission could create a permission structure for ISPs to continue to act without accountability."

In her remarks during Tuesday's open meeting, Commissioner Gomez appeared to concur, depicting the move as "anti-consumer" and counter to the goals of Congress. The FCC was mandated via the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) to create rules for implementing consumer broadband labels. After a lengthy rulemaking process and discussions with industry and consumer groups, ISPs were required to start displaying labels in 2024.

"I typically vote in favor of notices of proposed rulemaking because I believe in asking balanced questions, even on proposals that I dislike, so that we can encourage fruitful and helpful public comment. Answers to tough questions help us strike the right balance so that our rules can both encourage competition and serve consumers. However, the questions posed in this NPRM are so anti-consumer that I could not bring myself to even agree to them," said Gomez.

Gomez stressed that the notice will harm consumers by enabling ISPs to hide add-on fees and stripping people of their ability to access information in their own language. Moreover, added Gomez, it's unclear why the FCC is doing this. "What adds insult to injury is that the FCC does not even explain why this proposal is necessary. Make it make sense," she added.

FCC Chairman Brendan Carr says Internet service providers shouldn't have to list every fee they charge. From a report: Responding to a request from cable and telecom lobby groups, he is proposing to eliminate a rule that requires ISPs to itemize various fees in broadband price labels that must be made available to consumers.

The rule took effect in April 2024 after the FCC rejected ISPs' complaints that listing every fee they created would be too difficult. The rule applies specifically to recurring monthly fees "that providers impose at their discretion, i.e., charges not mandated by a government."

ISPs could comply with the rule either by listing the fees or by dropping the fees altogether and, if they choose, raising their overall prices by a corresponding amount. But the latter option wouldn't fit with the strategy of enticing customers with a low advertised price and hitting them with the real price on their monthly bills. The broadband price label rules were created to stop ISPs from advertising misleadingly low prices.

This week, Carr scheduled an October 28 vote on a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) that proposes eliminating several of the broadband-label requirements. One of the rules in line for removal requires ISPs to "itemize state and local passthrough fees that vary by location." The FCC would seek public comment on the plan before finalizing it.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from PBS: An IRS plan to test drive a new electronic free-file tax return system next year has got supporters and critics of the idea mobilizing to sway the public and Congress over whether the government should set up a permanent program to help people file their taxes without needing to pay somebody else to figure out what they owe. On one side, civil society groups this week launched a coalition to promote the move toward a government-run free-file program. On the other, tax preparation firms like Intuit -- the parent company of TurboTax -- and H&R Block have been pouring millions into trying to stop the idea cold. The advocacy groups are exponentially out-monied.

An April AP analysis found that overall, Intuit, H&R Block, and other private companies and advocacy groups for large tax preparation businesses, as well as proponents in favor of electronic free file, have reported spending $39.3 million since 2006 to lobby on "free-file" and other matters. Federal law doesn't require domestic lobbyists to itemize expenses by specific issue, so the sums are not limited to free-file. Intuit spent at least $25.6 million since 2006 on lobbying, H&R Block about $9.6 million and the conservative Americans for Tax Reform roughly $3 million. In contrast, the NAACP has spent $140,000 lobbying on "free-file" since 2006 and Public Citizen has spent $110,000 in the same time frame. "What we have on our side is public opinion," said Igor Volsky, executive director of the liberal Groundwork Action advocacy group. Volsky's organization and leaders from Public Citizen, the Center for the Study of Social Policy, Code for America, the Economic Security Project and others launched the "Coalition for Free and Fair Filing" on Wednesday. The group's mission is to "ensure all U.S. taxpayers can easily file tax returns and get the tax credits they deserve by safeguarding and expanding" the new IRS program. "The overwhelming majority of people demand a free-file option," Volsky said. "Now the question for us is how do you channel that into effective political pressure."

The IRS in May released a report that said most taxpayers are interested in filing their taxes directly to the IRS for free, and concurrently announced plans to launch the pilot program for the 2024 filing season. The goal is to test a direct file system that will help the IRS decide whether to move forward with a more permanent program. That idea has faced the immediate threat of budget cuts from congressional Republicans. Republicans on the House Appropriations Committee in June proposed a budget rider that would prohibit funds to be used for the IRS to create a government-run tax preparation software, unless approved by a group of House and Senate committees. The move "safeguards the IRS from an obvious conflict of interest where the tax collector becomes the tax preparer," the bill's summary states.

Microsoft-owned GitHub has finally moved its snapshot of all active public repositories on the site to a vault in Norway. ZDNet reports: GiHub announced the archiving plan last November and on February 20 followed through with the 21 terabyte snapshot written to 186 reels of film. GitHub cancelled plans for a team to "personally escort the world's open-source code to the Arctic" due to the coronavirus pandemic, leaving the job to local partners who received the boxed films and deposited them in an old coal mine on July 8. The archive is being stored in Svalbard, Norway, a group of islands that's also home to the global seed bank.

"The code landed in Longyearbyen, a town of a few thousand people on Svalbard, where our boxes were met by a local logistics company and taken into intermediate secure storage overnight," said Julia Metcalf, director of strategic programs at GitHub. "The next morning, it traveled to the decommissioned coal mine set in the mountain, and then to a chamber deep inside hundreds of meters of permafrost, where the code now resides fulfilling their mission of preserving the world's open-source code for over 1,000 years." The repository includes public code repositories and significant dormant repos. The snapshot consists of the HEAD of the default branch of each repository, minus any binaries larger than 100kB in size. Each repository is then packaged as a single TAR file, and for efficiency's sake, most of the data will be stored as QR codes. A human-readable index and guide will itemize the location of each repository and explain how to recover the data.

Last April, we discussed news that video game rental service GameFly had complained to the USPS that a large quantity of their game discs were broken in transit, accusing the postal service of giving preferential treatment to more traditional DVD rental companies like Netflix. Now, just over a year later, an anonymous reader sends word that the USPS has responded with a detailed inquiry into GameFly's situation (PDF). The inquiry's 46 questions (many of which are multi-part) cover just about everything you could imagine concerning GameFly's distribution methods. Most of them are simple, yet painstaking, in a way only government agencies can manage. Here are a few of them: "What threshold does GameFly consider to be an acceptable loss/theft rate? Please provide the research that determined this rate. ... What is the transportation cost incurred by GameFly to transport its mail from each GameFly distribution center to the postal facility used by that distribution center? ... Please describe the total cost that GameFly would incur if it expanded its distribution network to sixty or one hundred twenty locations. In your answer, please itemize costs separately. ... Does the age of a gaming DVD or the number of times played have more effect on the average life cycle of a gaming DVD?"

jsuda writes "The authors of Inescapable Data share their excitement about what they see as a rapidly-developing convergence of digital technologies having enormous significance for business and culture. This convergence, in their view, is inescapable, life-altering for both good and bad, and presents a frame-shattering paradigm-shift which is mostly unrecognized, and much less examined critically. Inescapable Data is a thought-provoking book meant to describe the new technologies and to examine the special values which arguably will emerge from the convergence." Read the rest of John's review.