Category: TECHNOLOGY NEWS

Sweeping Plan Would Overturn Equal Access to the Internet

lightbulbThe Federal Communications Commission announced on Tuesday that it planned to dismantle landmark regulations that ensure equal access to the internet, clearing the way for companies to charge more and block access to some websites. The proposal, put forward by the F.C.C. chairman, Ajit Pai, is a sweeping repeal of rules put in place by the Obama administration. The rules prohibited high-speed internet service providers from blocking or slowing down the delivery of websites, or charging extra fees for the best quality of streaming and other internet services for their subscribers. Those limits are central to the concept called net neutrality.

The action immediately reignited a loud and furious fight over free speech and the control of the internet, pitting telecom giants like AT&T against internet giants like Google and Amazon, who warn against powerful telecom gatekeepers. Both sides are expected to lobby hard in Washington to push their agendas, as they did when the existing rules were adopted. “Under my proposal, the federal government will stop micromanaging the internet,” Mr. Pai said in a statement. “Instead, the F.C.C. would simply require internet service providers to be transparent about their practices so that consumers can buy the service plan that’s best for them and entrepreneurs and other small businesses can have the technical information they need to innovate.”

The proposal from Mr. Pai, a Republican, is widely expected to be approved during a Dec. 14 meeting in a 3-to-2 party line vote from the agency’s five commissioners. But some companies will probably put up a legal fight, or actions by lawmakers, to prevent it from taking hold.

The clear winners from the move would be the giant companies that provide internet access to phones and computers, which have fought for years against broadband regulations. A repeal of the rules would allow the companies to exert more control over the online experiences of American consumers.

Big online companies like Amazon say that the telecom companies would be able to show favoritism to certain web services, by charging for accessing some sites but not others, or by slowing the connection speed to some sites. Small online companies say the proposal would hurt innovation. Only the largest companies, they say, would be able to afford the expense of making sure their sites received preferred treatment.

And consumers, the online companies say, may see their costs go up to get quality access to popular websites like Netflix. The action “represents the end of net neutrality as we know it and defies the will of millions of Americans,” said Michael Beckerman, chief executive of the Internet Association, a lobbying group that represent Google, Facebook, Amazon and other tech firms.

But Mr. Pai said the internet rules were adopted to stop only theoretical harms. He said the old rules limited consumer choice and stifled investment in network expansion and upgrades. He has also argued that the existing internet rules stop internet service companies from experimenting with new business models that could help them compete with online businesses like Netflix, Google and Facebook.

The plan to repeal the existing rules, passed in 2015, also reverses a hallmark decision by the agency to declare broadband as a service as essential as phones and electricity. That move created the legal foundation for the current rules and underscored the importance of high-speed internet service to the nation. It was put in place by Tom Wheeler, an F.C.C. chairman under President Obama. Mr. Pai signaled his intention to dismantle the existing rules in April. The action on Tuesday by Mr. Pai, who was appointed chairman by President Trump, is the centerpiece of a deregulatory agenda that has also stripped television broadcasters, newspapers and telecom companies of a broad range of regulations meant to protect the public interest.

The telecom companies on Tuesday cheered Mr. Pai’s proposal. “The removal of antiquated, restrictive regulations will pave the way for broadband network investment, expansion and upgrades,” said Jonathan Spalter, the chief executive of USTelecom, an industry lobbying group. But consumer advocacy groups and Democratic lawmakers said the move would harm consumers and internet businesses that have relied on the rules to ensure all content is equally available, and to make sure that speech is not stifled by broadband companies putting up barriers to certain internet sites.

Consumer groups say broadband companies have been incredibly profitable under the net neutrality rules and have expanded their networks into new communities and with faster speeds, despite complaints the rules hamper their businesses. “Your internet service provider will be free to make online fast lanes and favor the content of its choice,” said Gigi Sohn, a former senior adviser to Mr. Wheeler at the F.C.C. “That it will take away your control of your internet experience and give it to Comcast, AT&T and Verizon.”

‘Dear Equifax: You’re Fired.’ If Only It Were That Easy.

The emails have landed in my inbox, one every other day or so since Equifax revealed that cyberthieves had helped themselves to the Social Security numbers and dates of birth of more than 140 million Americans in the company’s files. And though the words differ (and some are unprintable in this space), the messages all end with the same demand: I want out. I want out of Equifax’s system. That company no longer has permission to make money off my personal data. I want them to delete my file and never start a new one.

It’s hard to blame people for wanting to quit in a fit of pique. This is an industry that uses our personal and financial data as its product, and the real customers are the banks and others who want to check up on us. And this breach isn’t like those at other companies that have let their data loose, like Yahoo or Target, where you can simply find another company to patronize. So, can you dump Equifax? And if not, shouldn’t you be able to?

First, some practicalities. When you sign up for a credit card or a mobile phone or any number of other loans or services, you agree — whether you know it or not — for the provider to send a report card on you to credit reporting agencies like Equifax, Experian and TransUnion. So let’s say you no longer trust Equifax to store your data in the wake of its breach. Sure, you could approach all of those providers and try to persuade them not to send data about you to Equifax each month. But it would be far easier to simply ask Equifax to erase your file and not make a new one.

But what happens if you need to borrow money in the future and you have credit files only at Experian and TransUnion? This poses an enormous problem when it comes time to make the biggest of all purchases — a home. Fannie Mae, whose rules govern the standards for many mortgages, wants information from all three credit “repositories,” as the company puts it.

There is already a potential out in the rules that allows for data from just two agencies if that is “the extent of the data available.” While this rule may exist to help people with a limited credit history, there’s no reason Fannie couldn’t also apply it to people with an extensive history that happens to reside only at Experian and TransUnion, and not at Equifax.

This wouldn’t be ideal for the mortgage industry, though. Credit reports tend to be riddled with errors, so lenders prefer a wider range of data to survey. “Lenders will compare the three and make their best guess,” said Pam Dixon, the executive director of the World Privacy Forum, a research group. “They kind of triangulate the errors.”

While it’s a nifty trick when an industry’s rank incompetence seems to necessitate a permanent triumvirate, a better solution might be a duopoly that actually cares about getting the data right.

Lenders who deal in smaller amounts seem flexible enough, and would have to become more so if more people had only two major credit files. American Express already is. It simply looks to the other two big credit bureaus for underwriting guidance if an applicant does not have a file at the third, said Ashley Tufts, a company spokeswoman. (She declined to comment on why American Express planned to continue to send data to Equifax, given the bureau’s now proven inability to protect it.)

Some readers, many of whom will have no need for mortgages or much new credit in the future, have tried to delete their Equifax files since the breach. One person sent letters making his demand to Equifax’s former chief executive, Richard F. Smith, before he retired last week. (The request received no reply.) Others have called the company’s various call centers. Often, they couldn’t get through or waited for more than hour and then spoke to someone who insisted that it was not possible to have a file deleted.

But what happens if you need to borrow money in the future and you have credit files only at Experian and TransUnion? This poses an enormous problem when it comes time to make the biggest of all purchases — a home. Fannie Mae, whose rules govern the standards for many mortgages, wants information from all three credit “repositories,” as the company puts it.

There is already a potential out in the rules that allows for data from just two agencies if that is “the extent of the data available.” While this rule may exist to help people with a limited credit history, there’s no reason Fannie couldn’t also apply it to people with an extensive history that happens to reside only at Experian and TransUnion, and not at Equifax. This wouldn’t be ideal for the mortgage industry, though. Credit reports tend to be riddled with errors, so lenders prefer a wider range of data to survey. “Lenders will compare the three and make their best guess,” said Pam Dixon, the executive director of the World Privacy Forum, a research group. “They kind of triangulate the errors.”

While it’s a nifty trick when an industry’s rank incompetence seems to necessitate a permanent triumvirate, a better solution might be a duopoly that actually cares about getting the data right. 07MONEY-1-master768Lenders who deal in smaller amounts seem flexible enough, and would have to become more so if more people had only two major credit files. American Express already is. It simply looks to the other two big credit bureaus for underwriting guidance if an applicant does not have a file at the third, said Ashley Tufts, a company spokeswoman. (She declined to comment on why American Express planned to continue to send data to Equifax, given the bureau’s now proven inability to protect it.)

Some readers, many of whom will have no need for mortgages or much new credit in the future, have tried to delete their Equifax files since the breach. One person sent letters making his demand to Equifax’s former chief executive, Richard F. Smith, before he retired last week. (The request received no reply.) Others have called the company’s various call centers. Often, they couldn’t get through or waited for more than hour and then spoke to someone who insisted that it was not possible to have a file deleted.

Twitter Users Blocked by Trump Seek Reprieve, Citing First Amendment By CHARLIE SAVAGE JUNE 6, 2017

WASHINGTON — Lawyers for Twitter users blocked by President Trump after they criticized or mocked him are asking him to reverse the moves, arguing that the Constitution bars him from blocking people on the social media service.

The request raises novel legal issues stemming from Mr. Trump’s use of his Twitter account, @realDonaldTrump, to make statements about public policy. In a letter sent to Mr. Trump on Tuesday, lawyers for several users he has blocked argued that his account was a “public forum” from which the government may not constitutionally exclude people because it disagrees with views they have expressed.

“This Twitter account operates as a ‘designated public forum’ for First Amendment purposes, and accordingly the viewpoint-based blocking of our clients is unconstitutional,” the letter said. “We ask that you unblock them and any others who have been blocked for similar reasons.” The letter implies that if the Trump administration does not comply, a lawsuit may follow. The blocked Twitter users are represented by the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, whose executive director, Jameel Jaffer, said in a statement that Mr. Trump did not have a right to exclude his critics from engaging with his posts. READ MORE: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/06/us/politics/trump-twitter-first-amendment.html?ribbon-ad-idx=5&rref=homepage&module=Ribbon&version=origin&region=Header&action=click&contentCollection=Home%20Page&pgtype=article

The 15 Most Important Tech Acquisitions of All Time

15 Most Important Tech Acquistions

It seems like every year we witness a host of tech companies initiate million- and billion-dollar bids to snatch up their biggest competitors or the next major start-up. Predicting the aftermath of any corporate buyout is impossible. Some might have the potential to become success stories such as Apple’s acquisition of NeXT. Others are doomed to crash and burn like the AOL and Time Warner merger. Whatever the outcome, only a number of mergers and acquisitions have gone on to be remembered for changing to landscape of the tech industry. From the evolution of Microsoft to Facebook’s unprecedented mobile move, these are the 15 Most Important Tech Acquisitions of All Time. CHECK OUT THE ACQUISITIONS