Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
The Internet Government It's funny. Laugh. Transportation United States

Bicyclist Protests Net Neutrality By Slowing Traffic Outside the FCC Building (thehill.com) 181

Posted by BeauHD from the priority-access dept.
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Hill: A protester opposed to the Federal Communication Commission's (FCC) net neutrality repeal slowed traffic to a crawl outside the FCC Monday as a demonstration against the repeal. A video released Monday shows Rob Bliss, video director for the website Seriously.TV, setting up traffic cones to block all but one lane for cars, then riding a bike slowly in the lane. Bliss wore a sign encouraging drivers to upgrade to "priority access membership" for $5 a month, which would allow them to drive at normal speeds. The protest was meant to mimic what critics say will be the effect of the net neutrality repeal, which will allow internet service providers to favor certain content or require content providers to pay for faster speeds.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Bicyclist Protests Net Neutrality By Slowing Traffic Outside the FCC Building More

Bicyclist Protests Net Neutrality By Slowing Traffic Outside the FCC Building

Comments Filter:

  • Where do I sign up? (Score:4, Funny)

    by MountainLogic ( 92466 ) on Friday February 02, 2018 @07:38PM (#56059187) Homepage
    I want 10 memberships from this guy

  • I'd like to see more protests this relevant. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Futurepower(R) ( 558542 ) on Friday February 02, 2018 @07:39PM (#56059197) Homepage
    Wow! Excellent protest!
    • I'm sorry. I've been a bit ambivalent (yeah it sounds good in theory, but it seems every time the govt sticks its regulatory finger into something it makes things worse. Regardless, where I'm at it's a none issue either way. So really don't care.). But when protestors do stupid stunts like this my gut reaction is to take the side OPPOSITE the protestors.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by stooo ( 2202012 )

      One cyclist ?
      It should be thousands !!

  • One problem. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by cirby ( 2599 ) on Friday February 02, 2018 @07:40PM (#56059203)

    He inadvertently supported the other side.

    By impeding everyone else's "bandwidth" on his bicycle, he made the point that someone should have the power to move him out of the higher-speed lanes and into a lower-priority one.

    Oops.

    • Agree... the Memberships should not be $5, but $1million.

      Still, creative protest.

    • Just the opposite... I suspect if you paid the protester sufficiently he would have gotten out of the way.

    • Wouldn't it be more appropriate for him to slow down other bicyclists?

      • It would have been more appropriate for him to use a car to slow down other cars. Using a van would have been better and would have given him a much larger surface to put a much larger sign which would have been readable from the car behind him. Just slow down in front of the FCC building block, then loop around and repeat all day.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Ichijo ( 607641 )

      Which the drivers should pay for because they are the ones who benefit from getting bicycles out of their way!

      • Which the drivers should pay for

        Drivers already pay to get bikes out of the way. We pay gas taxes so there can be bike lanes and bike paths.

        I hope he got ticketed, at least, for obstruction of traffic. He had no authority to cone off lanes of traffic, and he created a hazard for everyone around him.

    • He inadvertently supported the other side.

      No he only inadvertently supported 1% of the other side. The problem with saying that this supports the argument that people should be able to pay for access ignores the sheer number who will feel ripped off for doing so.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by murdocj ( 543661 )

      No. Think. He's pointing out that allowing the carrier to artificially slow down traffic is a really bad idea.

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward

        No, because HE is not the carrier. He's the bandwidth hog that's interfering with everyone else. He's the one with the shit connection that's messing up the wireless for everyone else.

    • Agreed -- he's not "giving them a taste of their own medicine". Their own medicine is "it's okay to treat some packets differently". His bicycle is throttling everyone *the same*, with no discrimination, which is 100% consistent with net neutrality!

      (Not all malicious ISP practices violate NN. For example, throttling everyone to 1 KB/sec doesn't.)

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by nmb3000 ( 741169 )

      By impeding everyone else's "bandwidth" on his bicycle, he made the point that someone should have the power to move him out of the higher-speed lanes and into a lower-priority one.

      Net Neutrality has absolutely nothing to do with quality of service type traffic prioritization. The only people who conflate the two issues are either ignorant or intentionally misleading people.

      In this scenario, the cyclist was in the position of the ISP. The road is the Internet connection the consumers and content providers (drivers) have already paid to access. He was artificially slowing them down unless they paid to go faster, just like Comcast has already done to BitTorrent users and Netflix.

      His

      • The only people who conflate the two issues are either ignorant or intentionally misleading people.

        Or more likely they're listening to the net neutrality zealots who make statements about NN that would exclude the ability to use QoS in any way. Yes, true NN does not exclude QoS shaping. It also does not exclude Netflix "throttling" due to congestion at the border gateway. But people who make statements like "all packets must be treated the same" are saying that QoS is not allowed.

  • I do not approve of or condone his actions (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Rick Schumann ( 4662797 ) on Friday February 02, 2018 @07:41PM (#56059207) Journal
    As an avid cyclist myself, I neither approve of, nor condone the actions of Rob Bliss in this instance. It further damages the already bad reputation of cyclists everywhere, and we cyclists don't need any more bad press.

    That having been said: I'm a firm supporter of Net Neutrality, and while there is humor in this stunt, breaking the law and creating a hazardous situation for both himself and the drivers he inconvenienced is not cool at all and just as likely convinced some people who don't even know what Net Neutrality is, that advocates of it are just lunatics. So I say "no thanks!" to this Rob Bliss, he's probably just made matters worse for both cyclists and for the case for Net Neutrality.

    I encourage cyclists at every level to obey the same traffic laws that motor vehicles are bound to, and to ride safely in all circumstances. Lead by example.

    I also encourage all advocates of Net Neutrality to make themselves heard whenever possible, and to educate those around them who do not understand what's at stake -- but to do it in a reasonable, rational, and lawful manner.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Yep, this probably just ticked people off. I get and agree with his overall message, and yes, there's a problem when politicians care more about kissing corporate ass for future kickbacks than what we the people want and should have, but still, illegally blocking the road isn't the best way to convince anyone.

      • Thank you for injecting some intelligence into what's otherwise more-or-less a bunch of knee-jerk reactions from people regarding my post.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      So...only block Ajit Pai's vehicle.

    • Re:I do not approve of or condone his actions (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 02, 2018 @07:56PM (#56059289)

      its a protest... nobody asked for your condemnation or acceptance.
      if anything this makes me relate to a bicyclist in a positive way.

    • Re:I do not approve of or condone his actions (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Moof123 ( 1292134 ) on Friday February 02, 2018 @08:00PM (#56059317)

      So protest, but don't make any noise or inconvenience anyone. Definitely never protest on a bicycle Got it.

      People politely filed millions of protests through proper channels and got nowhere. So at what point in the breakdown of institutions will it become OK to inconvenience people to get some of our rights back?

      • Re: I do not approve of or condone his actions (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Even if you are quiet and inconvenience no one people will still find a reason to criticize your form of protest. Even after you meet with veterans to find a respectful compromise people will still criticize you.

        Just ask NFL players.

        • Exaclty, precisely THIS. Next time use your login instead of being an AC because you're right and should be proud to say what you said, and THANK YOU for you support.
      • Oh for fuck's sake don't put words in my mouth and don't be such a fucking jackass.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by PPH ( 736903 )

        You damned well better not throw my tea into the Boston harbor!

      • There's a difference between inconveniencing the people causing the problem and inconveniencing people who have nothing to do with the problem. One is an expected reaction to a bad situation, the other makes you look like a complete asshole to anyone who wasn't already on your side. And even some of them will probably think you're an asshole.

    • Re:I do not approve of or condone his actions (Score:5, Informative)

      by blind biker ( 1066130 ) on Friday February 02, 2018 @08:57PM (#56059625) Journal

      It further damages the already bad reputation of cyclists everywhere

      Hold on a fucking second: "everywhere"? And "further"? That may be the case in the US where car reigns supreme, but here in Finland (and other nordic countries, Germany, Austria etc.) cyclists have a fine reputation.

      • Sure, and I'd almost wish I lived there. :-)
      • Listen, Euro-friend, now that I have more time to write:
        I'm more concerned with people here in the U.S., not Europe. I know damned well that pretty much anywhere in Europe, I'd be treated with orders of magnitude more respect, as a cyclist, than I am here in the U.S.. So I'm really speaking to U.S. readers, not EU readers, okay? By the way anti-cyclist types here in the U.S. don't care if it's EU cyclists or U.S. cyclists, they're haters one way or another.

      • Re:I do not approve of or condone his actions (Score:5, Insightful)

        by dfm3 ( 830843 ) on Friday February 02, 2018 @11:48PM (#56060341) Journal
        I'll provide a little context, as someone from the US who used to ride a bike to work every day. The "bad reputation" that cyclists get in this country is due in large part to three factors:

        1) Our car culture means that outside of urban areas and college campuses, riding a bike for your daily commute is generally looked down upon. A common attitude is... why ride for 30 minutes when you can drive less than 10 and arrive to work without breaking a sweat? Clearly if you had enough money and prestige, you'd buy a car.

        2) When it comes to infrastructure planning in suburbs and rural areas, bikes are generally left out of the picture, so it's uncommon to see things like dedicated bike lanes or even a place to lock up your bike at your destination. Our state senator even went on the record as saying that he strongly opposes spending any money to build greenways or bike lanes, because he feels that funds would be better spent on roads that carry vehicles full of goods which, apparently, boost commerce. This means that more bikes are forced onto lanes shared by cars.

        3) Quite a few recreational cyclists have taken the mantra "share the road" to such an extreme that they feel their right to ride on the roadways means that they're entitled to act like complete assholes to car drivers. This means doing things like intentionally impeding traffic by riding in the center of the lane in the name of "safety" (that car might hit you as it passes, so be sure it doesn't get a chance to), blowing through stop signs and traffic lights (you can't let that red light slow down your cadence), and refusing to use pullout lanes where they are available (because god forbid you have to stop and unclip while you wait for all that piled up traffic to go by). Now, I'm into road cycling myself, and I can say that it's only a very small percentage of cyclists who act this way, but the actions of a few give a reputation to the whole bunch.

        • 2) When it comes to infrastructure planning in suburbs and rural areas, bikes are generally left out of the picture, so it's uncommon to see things like dedicated bike lanes or even a place to lock up your bike at your destination.

          When such infrastructure planning does happen, bikers often paint themselves in a negative light by demanding outrageous concessions. For example, our county was working on a bike path to connect us to the next city over. I agree that one is probably necessary, but I could not support the bikers demands that their bike path be taken out of the middle of actively farmed acreage, cutting farms in half and putting bike riders very close to active farm machinery. The vocal minority of selfish bikers cost them a

        • This means doing things like intentionally impeding traffic by riding in the center of the lane in the name of "safety" (that car might hit you as it passes, so be sure it doesn't get a chance to)

          That's an interesting one that I do myself when I approach a roundabout. Or at least I used to. Now I live in a country where drivers don't have a little penis problem and generally even when I don't block the lane in the name of safety I don't feel unsafe.

          Incidentally I'm not sure what the law is like where you are but in the state in Australia where I used to live (and where people have a similar attitude to cyclists and cars as Americans) the law was definitely on my side, and I'll never forget the douch

          • The problem is a lot of car drivers think because they drive the bigger thing that some of the laws don't apply to them.

            I've see a lot more bike riders who believe that because they "drive" the smaller thing that the laws don't apply to them. For example, "it's too inconvenient to have to stop for pedestrians in a marked crosswalk because we lose our momentum and they can move out of the way more easily than we can." And don't even think about stop signs.

      • That may be the case in the US where car reigns supreme, but here in Finland

        Is Finland's FCC also putting the onus for net neutrality regulation on Finland's congress or FTC? Wow, an amazing coincidence.

        I think it's probably clear he was talking about the US.

        The US has a wondeful history with bike riders staging stunts that make everyone hate them. (Not everyone, but "most people", and by "people" I mean "people in the US metropolitan areas".) There are examples of such nonsense where bike riders deliberately block bridges and keep emergency vehicles like ambulances from being

      • I would disagree with you inclusion of Germany. In fact, we hate you smug cycling mother fuckers. There are perfectly serviceable cycling lanes, but no... you fucking assholes need to ride your bike right, smack dab in the middle of the car lane. Not even off the side, but right in the middle. Forcing traffic into oncoming cars and putting everyone in danger because of these selfish m-f'ers who think they have the same rights as a car.

        In most places, roads are mainly paid for from petrol taxes. If you are n

  • we would just ride over the idiot on the bike and at the minimum his cones. we already broke a lot of the bike lane dividers the city put up cause they are in our way

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by ph0rk ( 118461 )
      Which is why he should have used spike strips instead of cones and a tank instead of a bicycle.

      Suck it, non tank-drivers.

  • Remember, the most productive and efficient US states are passing laws to require Net Neutrality for all ISPs operating in their states, so even if the Feds don't take action, your state can force those doing business in their state to have full Net Neutrality if they want to have customers where you live.

    • Because the states ain't dumb. They know exactly that there are no borders on the internet, and companies will go to whatever state offers them the best conditions for their business.

      Killing net neutrality will only accomplish one thing: Places that don't take action themselves and implement it on a state level become noncompetitive.

      • And yet we see the exact opposite. The states which are legally requiring Net Neutrality have most of the US GDP and their economy grows faster than the rest of the USA. Objective fact tells us that.

  • Protest at the ISPs (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    One good way to protest is to speak very slowly to the CSRs on the phone. They get evaluated on their call times.

    Offer to speak faster for a discount equal to their "fast lane" fee.

  • A protest would be many bikers going slow all through town with picket signs. This is just one guy diverting traffic without a permit to grab attention for um, it looks like himself?

    Without a working paid fast lane, all he's proving is that one dick hogging all the bandwidth for himself slows down the whole neighborhood.

    He's not even on topic - going to a starbucks and slowing down their WiFi would have made a better point.

  • Slowing down the economy and getting themselves killed one idiotic stunt at a time.

  • Back to pre-2015 (Score:3)

    by LynnwoodRooster ( 966895 ) on Friday February 02, 2018 @08:25PM (#56059459) Journal
    So, to protest the repeal of the executive actions in 2015 that created Net neutrality, he's blocking fast traffic to show how bad it was prior to 2015, when there was no Net neutrality. Right? You mean we didn't pay for faster access to some sites, just for overall speed of the tube connected to the home?
  • A bit too much publicity stunt in it for my taste as well. Someone should encourage the monopoly man protester [cnn.com] to come up with something.

  • Net Neutrality in a nutshell (Score:3)

    by Jarwulf ( 530523 ) on Friday February 02, 2018 @08:54PM (#56059609)
    ISps as gatekeepers==BAD Upstream monopolies like Google/Yahoo/Microsoft etc as gatekeeper==no big deal.
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • This algorithm enables the little guy, and is eventually fair to all. https://tools.ietf.org/html/rf... [ietf.org]
  • I don't think this is an effective way to protest. Sure it gets on the news, but we've seen that certain members of the FCC really don't pay attention to public opinion. All it really achieves is inconveniencing members of the general public, and most of them support net neutrality already.

    Ajit Pai's home address is already known to the public, so this deliberate slow down of traffic could have and, I'd argue, should have occurred outside his own home. Slow down his commute to work unless he agrees to pay

  • disclaimer: I've been on the provider side for 25 years.

    I really see all this hoopla about net neutrality as a non-argument.
    On the one hand, I can't see how legislation can effectively either impede it or enforce it, but on the other, I don't see why it should be prohibited either.
    Yes, as a quick knee-jerk argument for pro civil liberties evangelisation, claiming that all data should be treated equal and bla-bla-bla, sounds good...
    *HOWEVER* it's a waste of time/energy to somehow want to legislate it.

    Unless

  • Without the news coverage, I'd have to question the effectiveness of this kind of protest. If you're cutting the lanes down to just one, the guy immediately behind your bike is going to get the full impact of your protest too.

    Every other car behind the first is just going to think the car in front is being an ass and won't see anything in regards to your protest.

Slashdot Top Deals

The use of money is all the advantage there is to having money. -- B. Franklin

Close