I've Been Mugged Blog

14 Things No Internet User Ever Said

1. I don't like net neutrality. Get rid of it so I can use the "slow-lane" Internet connection with websites my Internet service provider (ISP) chooses.
2. It's okay for retail stores to use point-of-sale cash registers infected with malware that share my sensitive financial payment information with criminals.
3. I like it when mobile apps developers build apps that steal all of my address book contents. It's even better when they don't warn me.
4. I want the monthly bill from my ISP to be as complicated as my monthly cable TV bill.
5. I love websites with video ads that play automatically and don't provide a mechanism to stop or pause the video.
6. Facebook and Instagram: please take all of my photos and videos. You can have them. They are yours
7. It's fine for websites to waste screen space by displaying the exact same page contents and navigation to laptop/desktop users that they show to smart phone users with smaller screens.
8. I like it when the NSA ignores the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Even better, lie to me about what you're doing.
9. It's okay for the FCC to allow ISPs and phone companies to merge back into a single, giant company. The loss of freedoms and loss of of competition is a good thing.
10. I like that Google scans all e-mails of Google Mail users, including the messages non-Gmail users send to Gmail users. Even better: don't warn me nor provide a way to avoid the scanning.
11. I like it when advertisers track all of my online habits and movements without providing a way to avoid the tracking
12. It's fine for corporations and governments to take and store all of my personal information. It's valuable property I'm not interested in controlling.
13. I like it when the NSA tracks and stores everyone's e-mails and phone calls, even people who don't know terrorists, don't communicate with terroris, and don't break any laws. Even better, lie to me about doing this.
14. It's okay for the FCC to allow ISPs to provide broadband speeds  to USA subscribers that are slower and more costly than other countries. Less value and higher prices are good. That's American exceptionalism!

Several Organizations Ask The FCC To Investigate Telephone Company Complaints In Many States

Last week, Public Knoledge and eleven other consumer advocacy organizations sent a joint letter to the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) asking it to investigate consumer complaints in several states about wired telephone services. The letter was addressed to Julie A Vesch, Chief of the Wireline Competition Bureau at the FCC.

The organizations includes state agencies and consumer advocacy groups. The organizations sent their joint letter:

"...to express concern about reports that have surfaced across the country indicating carriers are forcing customers off of traditional copper-based phone service. Complaints often state that customers are being involuntarily moved to fiber or IP-based service (or some combination thereof), even if those new technologies fail to serve all of the user’s needs or will be more expensive. Denying basic phone service to people who have relied on the network for decades violates the network compact that has successfully guided our communications policy for one hundred years. A Commission investigation of these complaints is necessary to ensure the continued vitality of the fundamental values that underlie our network, including universal service."

The FCC oversees the transition of the country from older, copper, wired telephone lines to newer technologies (e.g., fiber, Internet phone a/k/a "IP-based") that offer telephone services, television services, and faster Internet access. The FCC defined "universal service" as:

"... the principle that all Americans should have access to communications services. Universal service is also the name of a fund and the category of FCC programs and policies to implement this principle. Universal service is a cornerstone of the law that established the FCC, the Communications Act of 1934. Since that time, universal service policies have helped make telephone service ubiquitous, even in remote rural areas. Today, the FCC recognizes high-speed Internet as the 21^st Century’s essential communications technology, and is working to make broadband as ubiquitous as voice, while continuing to support voice service... "

This principle is important because it ensure that everyone gets phone service; especially residents in rural areas. Providing phone service to rural residents is often more expensive due to the larger distances between residences and decreased density of residents. Many of the wired telephone service complaints have come from rural residents. Telephone companies are still legally bound to maintain cooper, wired phone services.

Some consumers may wonder what the fuss is about, or believe believe that everyone should just switch to the newer and wireless technologies. Reality is more complicated. Many consumers use wired phone lines with a variety of services (e.g., elders alerts, disabilities/TTY, home security systems) not necessarily supported by alternatives. Despite the lack of mobility, landlines have benefits: a) no dropped calls or no lost signals; b) no batteries to re-charge; and d) don't require electricity to make and receive phone calls -- a convenience during electric power outages.

Public Knowledge and the following organizations signed the joint letter to the FCC:

• Utility Reform Network (Facebook, Youtube, Google+, Los Angeles Times)
• National Association of State Utility Consumer Advocates (NASUCA)
• Office of the People’s Counsel, District of Columbia
• Maryland Office of People’s Counsel
• State of New Jersey, Division of the Rate Counsel
• Appalshop, Inc.
• Benton Foundation
• Center for Media Justice
• Center for Rural Strategies
• Kentucky Resources Council, Inc.
• National Consumer Law Center (on behalf of its low-income clients)
• Rural Broadband Policy Group

In their letter, the organizations emphasized the need for action soon by the FCC:

"The Commission must begin investigating this issue quickly, lest inaction send carriers the message that abandoning customers in violation of their legal obligations is acceptable. Delay will only lead to carriers hanging up on more customers at a time when basic communications service is more important than ever... Reports of carriers pushing customers off of the traditional phone network have sprung up across the country... The nationwide pattern of complaints that has arisen makes it incumbent on the Commission to investigate these allegations and ensure no customer is being wrongfully denied basic phone service. The Commission must act to protect network users nationwide, in states both with and without relevant state regulatory authority."

Legal action has already begun in some states (bold added):

"The Utility Reform Network (TURN) has filed a motion before the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) asking the CPUC to prevent Verizon from letting the quality of its copper network deteriorate and from pushing customers from copper -based service to FiOS or Voice Link. TURN’s motion also sets out evidence that Verizon’s actions in California are part of a national strategy affecting customers, including in New York, New Jersey, and the District of Columbia. Previously, a CPUC Communications Division report in 2011 found that in California AT&T, Verizon, and Frontier, among other carriers, did not meet the Out-of-Service repair standard during any month in 2010. Based on this report and other complaints from consumer advocates, the CPUC issued an Order Instituting Rulemaking to ensure California residents have access to service that meets at least a basic level of service quality.

In Maryland, the Communications Workers of America, AFL-CIO filed a letter with the Maryland Public Service Commission alleging, upon information and belief, that Verizon was planning to deploy Voice Link as a replacement for copper-based service in parts of Maryland. The Maryland Office of People’s Counsel (Maryland OPC) has also previously testified that Verizon routinely migrates customers from the copper network to unregulated services with inadequate procedures for customer notice and consent... In New York, the State Attorney General has asked the New York Public Service Commission (NYPSC) to stop Verizon from moving customers in the Catskills to the fixed wireless service Voice Link instead of repairing its copper lines...

The Illinois Attorney General’s Office has also told the Commission that complaints received by their office indicate some customers “are being moved off TDM service when the quality of service deteriorates, and some are being told that TDM, or traditional telephone service, is no longer available to them... The Illinois Attorney General’s Office also reported complaints over service quality issues like noise, static, lack of dial tone, phantom outbound calls, inaccurate or inoperable special features, and multiple people on the same line. Complaints in Illinois also indicated customers have been told they could not purchase standalone basic phone service..."

To learn more about the fight about wired telephone services in New York State, read this New York Times article about Verizon.

Unfortunately, it seems that legal action is required in several states to make telephone companies do what they are obligated to do. After reading this letter, it seems that the large telephone companies want to transition sooner from copper, and rid themselves of the requirement -- and costs -- to provide universal service. Forcing customers to unwanted services without consent is unacceptable and needs to stop.

ARS Technica reported:

"The FCC is expected to give permission to the phone companies to stop maintaining the old networks somewhere around 2020, potentially bringing an end to the century-old regulations that guaranteed universal service and other consumer protections. AT&T and Verizon are arguing for extensive deregulation as landlines are fully replaced by Internet-based voice service, but the FCC hasn’t yet decided what rules should apply to the new phone network."

Read the organizations' entire letter to the FCC (Adobe PDF).

Were you forced off wired phone service? If so, share your experiences below. Please describe any fees or surcharges you were billed, and if your monthly bills for replacement phone services were higher.

It's Not Too Late. Contact The FCC Today About Net Neutrality

Today, the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is meeting met to discuss rulemaking about the future of the Internet and the agency's policy about net neutrality. Many experts believe the FCC is trying to kill net neutrality. 100 technology companies sent a letter on May 7 to the FCC asking it to keep net neutrality.

Today, the FCC released this Fact Sheet. It starts a four-month period of seeking comments from the public:

"Since February, tens of thousands of Americans have offered their views to the Commission on how to protect an Open Internet. The proposal reflects the substantial public input we have received. The Commission wants to continue to hear from Americans across the country throughout this process. An extended four-month public comment period on the Commission’s proposal will be opened on May 15 – 60 days (until July 15) to submit initial comments and another 57 days (until September 10) for reply comments."

The Fact Sheet also stated:

"This Notice seeks public comment on the benefits of applying Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and Title II of the Communications Act, including the benefits of one approach over the other, to ensure the Internet remains an open platform for innovation and expression. While the Notice reflects a tentative conclusion that Section 706 presents the quickest and most resilient path forward..."

Let's decode this legalese. Section 706 refers to the current classification of broadband as an "information service," meaning slow and fast lanes are allowed, as said by the courts. Title II refers re-classifying broadband as a telecommunications service (e.g., utility), which allows the FCC to enforce strict net neutrality as we've all known the Internet to be until now.

The phrase "quickest and most resilient path forward" probably refers to FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler's preference not to re-classify broadband as a telecommunications service, and avoid a long political battle as the corporate Internet service providers and their lobbyists have threatened. Reclassification would allow the FCC to enforce strict net neutrality and prohibit the ISPs from charging both fees to certain website operators (e.g., Netflix and others) and higher fees to consumers for "fast lane" Internet access, while relegating website operators that don't pay the fees to the "slow lane."

If you want to learn more, read this analysis by the Center For Internet and Society at Stanford Law School. What the FCC Fact Sheet omits is the fact the FCC first classified broadband as an "information service" in 2002, after President George W. Bush had appointed Michael Powell as FCC Chairman in 2001. Before President Obama appointed Wheeler as FCC Chairman, Wheeler served as an industry lobbyist.

So, it is not too late for consumers to do their part and contact the FCC. You have several options:

1. The offical FCC Electronic Comment Filing system for comments between now and July 15
2. The official FCC e-mail address for comments. It's probably best to include either Proceeding Number 14-28 or 09-191 with your e-mail comments and the subject line (although the FCC should have clarified these instructions)
3. Write via postal mail: Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street SW, Washington, DC 20554
4. Call the FCC at: 1-888-225-5322 (TTY: 1-888-835-5322)
5. The form at Dear FCC.org created by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF)
6. The form at U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders' website (I-Vermont)
7. Petitions: U.S. Senator Markey (D-Massachusetts), MoveOn, Credo Action, Daily Kos, Bold Progressives, and the White House

Of course, you should also contact your elected officials. There are demonstrations today in several cities near FCC offices. What to tell the FCC? That's your choice. A good first step is to read the FCC's May 15 Fact Sheet, so you submit comments that are brief, relevant and specific to each Proceeding Number, when using method #1 above.

Also, I suggest:

• To keep Net Neutrality; real Net Neutrality not the fake Net Neutrality in the latest policy proposed by FCC Chairman Wheeler.
• The healthiest democracy possible, with everyone having access to information.
• To keep the freedom to choose the websites you visit, and not lose that freedom when ISPs choose (like they do currently with cable TV).
• The FCC to reclassify broadband as a utility (e.g., telecommunications).
• Real broadband competition everywhere, not the fake competition where the corporate ISPs have gentleman's agreements that divided up the country so cable never competes against fiber. That also includes stopping the proposed merger of Comcast and Time Warner Cable
• Local prohibitions removed so local governments and their residents can develop broadband utilities, if they choose. Local governments should have the same freedoms as corporate ISPs. This increases competition and will (hopefully) lower broadband prices.
• Everyone to have broadband at the lowest prices possible: for education and schools, to create jobs, and to encourage entrepreneurs to start new businesses.

If you attended one of today's demonstrations, please share your experiences  and observations below.

Considering Bitcoin or Another Virtual Currency? What You Need To Know

Late last month, Maryland Attorney General (AG) Douglas F. Gansler issued a warning for consumers interested in using virtual currencies such as Bitcoin. Many consumers like virtual currencies because of lower transaction fees compared to banks and traditional payment options.

AG Gansler said in a press release:

"Virtual currency, which includes digital and crypto-currency, is gaining in popularity and controversy. Growing numbers of merchants, businesses and other organizations now accept Bitcoin, one example of crypto-currency, in lieu of traditional currency.

Virtual currencies exist with little to no regulation and there is no safety net, such as federally-backed insurance, if you lose your hard-earned money," said Attorney General Gansler. "It pays to know what's in your e-Wallet and the many ways your money can disappear if you're not careful. Unlike the dollar, these highly volatile alternatives are not issued by a government authority and are typically not backed by tangible assets."

Mark Kaufman, the Maryland Commissioner of Financial Regulation said:

"Bitcoin and all virtual currencies have inherent risks that Marylanders should consider prior to transacting with or investing in these currencies... The entities that accept and transmit, or exchange virtual currencies for U.S. dollars are subject to federal law, and may be subject to state law, including the requirement to be licensed as a money transmitter. It is important to note however, that Maryland does not currently regulate virtual currencies. I encourage any Maryland resident interested in virtual currencies, to do their homework first."

Accounts with virtual currencies are not insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), which insures bank accounts up to $250,000.The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has issued some guidance on the tax status of virtual currencies.

Residents of Connecticut can download the "What's In Your E-Wallet?" alert by the Department of Banking (Adobe PDF). The State Of Washington's Department of Financial Institutions issued a similar warning for consumers:

"One of the major risks of holding virtual currencies is their volatility. Their value can rise or fall substantially over a short period of time... Bitcoins, and others like it, are basically lines of computer code that are valued by the marketplace with no governmental support or oversight. Anyone holding virtual currencies should understand that they could lose a significant part of their investment as the market changes... There are no deposit guarantees like FDIC insurance to protect customer funds held by virtual currency exchanges. Once the funds are gone, there is no way to retrieve them... Some exchange companies that offer to store the consumer’s virtual currencies in virtual wallets have been unable to protect them... Because virtual currencies provide some anonymity, criminal elements have found them useful for money laundering and other crimes. When exchanges are shut down as a result of either knowingly or unknowingly facilitating a crime, customers may have difficulty accessing their funds."

Earlier this month, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Issued an alert about Bitcoin and other virtual currencies.

So, the old saying apples: do your homework first. Wise consumers should first check the financial laws in their state to see what regulations and protections exist, if any.

Why The FCC Is Trying To Kill "Net Neutrality"

If you haven't read it, there is an excellent analysis at the Mother Jones website that explains why the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC), under Chairman Tom Wheeler's leadership, is trying to kill net neutrality. Josh Harkinson's excellent analysis is also available at BillMoyers.com.

Harkinson explained all of the details: the FCC history, Wheeler's history, and the trail of cash. Basically, lobbyists have shown Congressional politicians and the FCC the money... huge amounts of money. So, rather than listen to citizens and voters, the agency seems ready to cave into corporate lobbyists' interests:

"Could a handful of powerful companies really matter more to the commission than pretty much everybody else who uses the internet?... Late last month, the Federal Communications Commission announced that it would propose new rules allowing companies like Netflix or Google to pay internet service providers (ISPs) like Verizon or Comcast for faster data lanes to deliver video and other content to their customers. In other words, the FCC was proposing to replace net neutrality—the egalitarian internet that we all know—with a pay-to-play platform designed to favor the biggest and richest players."

A handful of corporations, Internet service providers (ISP), are trying to change the open Internet rules for their sole benefit and higher profits with a fast lane for the Internet:

"... an onslaught of lobbying by ISPs. By then their main trade group, the National Cable and Telecommunications Association (NCTA), was spending about 95 times more money lobbying the FCC than the Internet Association, which represents the tech companies that favor net neutrality."

This situation highlights that money, not your votes, matters. I like how Harkinson's analysis explains Internet speed. For the past 16 years, I've built many websites in a variety of industries: telecommunications, banking, consumer packaged goods, health care, pharmaceuticals, travel, and higher education. Harkinson's chart is consistent with usability principles I used to guide website development. Speed matters. Anyone who says otherwise is either lying or doesn't understand. Slow access will kill a website usage: new users and returning users. (This is one reason why spammers and hackers use DDoS attacks, which make targeted sites slow or unavailable.) When pages load slowly, website visitors go elsewhere.

Last week, more than 100 tech companies sent a letter to the FCC demanding it keep open Internet rules. While Google signed that letter, Harkinson explained that it is no saint:

"Proponents of net neutrality, also known as the open internet, fear that allowing a fast lane on the web would hurt startups, nonprofits, activists, and anyone else who couldn't afford to pay the toll. Bigger tech companies such as Google also tend to favor net neutrality, though sometimes more for the sake of public relations than principle."

Consumers: your opinion matters! You can make a difference. If you haven't done so already, contact your elected officials today. Write directly to the FCC. Consumers can also submit comments to the FCC through Senator Bernie Sanders' (I-Vermont) website.

After contacting your elected officials, then sign a few petitions: Senator Markey, MoveOn, Credo Action, Daily Kos, Bold Progressives, and the White House. During the coming days or weeks, participate in local protests in your city or town. Tell them you want:

• To keep Net Neutrality; real Net Neutrality not the fake Net Neutrality in the latest policy proposed by FCC Chairman Wheeler.
• The healthiest democracy possible, with everyone having access to information.
• To keep the freedom to choose the websites you visit, and not lose that freedom when ISPs choose (like they do currently with cable TV).
• The FCC to reclassify broadband as a utility (e.g., telecommunications).
• Real broadband competition everywhere, not the fake competition where the corporate ISPs have gentlemen's agreements that divided up the country so cable never competes against fiber. That also includes stopping the proposed merger of Comcast and Time Warner Cable
• Local prohibitions removed so local governments and their residents can develop broadband utilities, if they choose. Local governments should have the same freedoms as corporate ISPs. This increases competition and will (hopefully) lower broadband prices.
• Everyone to have broadband at the lowest prices possible: for education and schools, to create jobs, and to encourage entrepreneurs to start new businesses.

What Kind Of Society Allows This?

Robert Reich, former U.S. Labor Secretary and Professor of Public Policy at UC-Berkely, posted on Wednesday May 7 the message below on Facebook (link added):

"According to annual rankings published yesterday by Institutional Investor’s Alpha Magazine, hedge-fund manager David Tepper took home $3.5 billion last year. Assuming he worked 40 hours a week and went on a two-week vacation, that came to $1,750,000 an hour. $1,750,000 an hour is enough money to hire 241,380 workers at the nation’s current minimum wage of $7.25 an hour. It’s enough to lift the wages of 538,461 minimum-wage workers (roughly one out of every seven of today's minimum-wage workers) to $10.40, which the President and Democrats are seeking as the new minimum wage. It’s enough to hire 103,734 workers at the nation’s median hourly wage of $16.87."

Pause for a moment and let that statistic sink in: $1.75 million per hour. That was not per month or per week. It was per hour. Using an average annual salary of $36,587 for workers in the USA,  it would take an average-paid worker almost 48 years -- your entire working career -- to make what Tepper made in one hour. Something is very wrong.

Reich also wrote in his Facebook post:

"I’m not suggesting Tepper do any of these things, but I can’t help wondering how he possibly can spend $1,750,000 an hour. I also wonder what kind of society is it that won’t raise the minimum wage from $7.25 to $10.10 an hour but gives hedge-fund managers earning well over a million dollars an hour a special tax break allowing them to treat their income as capital gains subject to the lower capital-gains rate instead of ordinary income?"

Good question: what kind of society allows this type of senior executive pay while at the same time refuses to raise the Federal minimum wage for the lowest paid workers? Remember, the minimum wage doesn't affect all workers; just the lowest paid workers.

The Federal minimu wage rate has been stuck at $7.25 since 2009. Meanwhile, elected officials in Congress get automatic cost-of-living increases (COLA) to their pay. (Their COLAs are in addition to what appears to be legalized "insider trading" for member of Congress.) Is that fair? If COLAs are good for a few, they are good for everyone.

Are these your values? These are not my values, and I doubt that they are your values either. These don't seem like Christian values either. Yet, we've elected government officials that have crafted and voted for laws that allow this to continue.

And, it's not only income inequality. It's wealth inequality, too. Some of the problems with wealth inequality (link added):

"Wealth gathering at the top creates all sorts of problems. Some of these elites will hoard their wealth and fail to do anything productive with it. Others channel it into harmful activities like speculation, which can throw the economy out of whack. Some increase their wealth by preying on the less well-off. As inequality grows, regular people lose their purchasing power. They go into debt. The economy gets destabilized... By the time you get to 2010, US inequality, according to Piketty’s data, is quantitatively as extreme as in old Europe in the first decade of the 20th century..."

This is a mugging of the middle class. This is a mugging of the American Dream. This is a war on both the middle class and the poor. Can you imagine making $1.75 million an hour? I can't imagine anyone being worth that much. Can you?

What type of society allows this? What type of person denies others the benefits they enjoy? One possible explanation: academic studies have found that right-wing conservatives, and the rich CEOs they support, are often sociopaths.

Learn more about income inequality, the six principles of the new populism, the film Inequality For All, and take action. Consumers worldwide are slowly waking up to the issues. For higher wages and more rights in the workplace, fast food workers will protext on May 15 in 150 cities and 30 countries.

More Than 100 Tech Companies Sent a Letter To FCC To Keep "Net Neutrality"

Things seem to be happening regarding open Internet rules or "Net Neutrality." On Wednesday May 7, 2014, 150 technology companies sent a letter to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) urging it to keep open Internet rules. The letter was sent to FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler (Adobe PDF) several FCC commissioners. It read in part:

"We write to express our support for a free and open internet. Over the past twenty years, American innovators have created countless Internet-based applications, content offerings, and services that are used around the world. These innovations have created enormous value for Internet users, fueled economic growth, and made our Internet companies global leaders. The innovation we have seen to date happened in a world without discrimination. An open Internet has also been a platform for free speech and opportunity for billions of users... According to recent news reports, the Commission intends to propose rules that would enable phone and cable Internet service providers to discriminate both technically and financially against Internet companies and to impose new tolls on them. If these reports are correct, this represents a grave threat to the Internet. Instead of permitting individualized bargaining and discrimination, the Commission’s rules should protect users and Internet companies on both fixed and mobile platforms against blocking, discrimination, and paid prioritization, and should make the market for Internet services more transparent. The rules should provide certainty to all market participants and keep the costs of regulation low."

Several notable companies signed the letter including Amazon, Dropbox, Ebay, Facebook, Gawker, Google, Microsoft, Mozilla, Netflix, Twitter, Vonage, and Yahoo. I did not see Apple Computer on the list of companies that signed the letter.

Several venture capitalists have said that the FCC's fast/slow-lanes broadband proposal is already having a negative impact upon business. Start-up executives are forced to raise more money than otherwise because ISPs are already charging fees. This will cause some new ventures to not receive funding (e.g., fewer jobs), and/or venture capitalists shift their funding to other businesses away from Internet/tech. Both impacts are not good for a country serious about maintaing leadership in tech and Internet industries.

Meanwhile, the New York Times reported:

"A Democratic member of the Federal Communications Commission called Wednesday on the agency's chairman to delay a proposal for new net neutrality rules, throwing into doubt whether the chairman will be able to muster enough votes at an F.C.C. meeting next week to issue proposed rules. Jessica Rosenworcel, one of three Democrats on the five-member commission, said in a speech Wednesday that a delay was warranted because of a "torrent of public response" to the idea that the commission's rules might create a fast lane on the Internet for companies willing to pay for it."

And, FCC Commissioner Mignon Clyburn posted a message on the FCC blog that more than 100,000 consumers have already submitted comments. On May 8, Venture Beat reported:

"FCC chairman Tom Wheeler’s proposal to allow paid Internet ‘fast lanes’ is quickly losing support as more than 100 technology companies sign on to save the current net neutrality law. “The cracks are beginning to show in Chairman Wheeler’s plan that would undermine net neutrality,” said president of public policy group, Free Press, Craig Aaron, in a statement."

So, your opinion matters! You can make a difference. If you haven't done so already, contact your elected officials today. Write directly to the FCC. Consumers can also submit comments to the FCC through Senator Bernie Sanders' (I-Vermont) website.

After contacting your elected officials, then sign a few petitions: Senator Markey, MoveOn, Credo Action, Daily Kos, Bold Progressives, and the White House. During the coming days or weeks, participate in local protests in your city or town. Tell them you want:

• To keep Net Neutrality; real Net Neutrality not the fake Net Neutrality in the latest policy proposed by FCC Chairman Wheeler.
• The healthiest democracy possible, with everyone having access to information.
• To keep the freedom to choose the websites you visit, and not lose that freedom when ISPs choose (like they do currently with cable TV).
• The FCC to reclassify broadband as a utility (e.g., telecommunications).
• Real broadband competition everywhere, not the fake competition where the corporate ISPs have gentlemen's agreements that divided up the country so cable never competes against fiber.
• Local prohibitions removed so local governments and their residents can develop broadband utilities, if they choose. Local governments should have the same freedoms as corporate ISPs. This increases competition and will (hopefully) lower broadband prices.
• Everyone to have broadband at the lowest prices possible: for education and schools, to create jobs, and to encourage entrepreneurs to start new businesses.

Airline Travel Voucher From Compair And Union One Travel

Last week, my wife received a letter from Compair offering a travel voucher for two free airline tickets. Perhaps, you have received the letter too. The offer:

"Enclosed is your Travel Check Voucher. This Travel Check Voucher can be redeemed for a certificate for 2 round trip airline tickets to anywhere in the continental US from any major international US airport. Certain restrictions may apply. Vacation Getaways and Cruises are available for a limited time.

We have attempted contacting you on several occasions. This will be your last chance to respond.

Note that this check voucher must be redeemed by May 13, 2014. If you do not claim your award, it will be transferred to the alternate. This is a limited time offer and may be withdrawn at any time. Flights fill quickly.

Please reference your check voucher number XXX-XXX-XXX. This travel check must be certified to be valid. Call 1-844-334-4965

This is not a timeshare or land sales offer."

The letter tried to look very official. It mentioned Union One Travel of Scottsdale, Arizona 84251. It did not include a street address for Union One Travel. Here is an image of the travel voucher we received:

My wife asked me to mask her name. I also masked the voucher numbers. She asked if I'd seen this offer before. Neither of us had seen this offer before, even though the letter claimed that they'd contacted us previously.

I was sure that we were not the first consumers to receive this offer. An online search found the following Philly.com news article:

"... an official-looking mailing marked "Travel Check Voucher Enclosed" and "Personal and Confidential." Inside, it bore the name "US Airlines" alongside a logo. Just for a moment, both seemed oddly familiar. Why? Probably because "US Airlines" evokes the name of an actual carrier, US Airways, and because the logo, reminiscent of an airplane tail, is similar to that used by many airlines. The mailing was also reminiscent of a spate of similar letters readers have passed along."

The letter we received looked very similar, except it used "Compair" instead of "US Airlines." The news report was instructive because it also explained what happens when consumers call the toll-free number in the offer:

"What company was I calling? "We've been hired by a wholesale travel dealer, Access Travel Deals," the representative told me, inviting me to make an appointment in a Philadelphia suburb to learn about the company's discount travel packages. "All they ask is that you stop by their travel agency and exchange your voucher, and then preview their services while you're there. They hope you'll keep them in mind for future travel planning." "

Another online search found an Arizona BBB alert about a company named "American Travel Deals" based in Scottsdale:

"Consumers allege this company sends a direct mail award notification with a voucher good for two round trip tickets anywhere in the Continental US. The mailer is usually postmarked "Phoenix, Arizona" or "Scottsdale, Arizona" and does not provide a return address. BBB complainants allege the mailer says "This is our last attempt", causing consumers to have a sense of urgency about responding to the offer. Some complaints allege the "voucher" looks like an official check and is usually in the the amount of about $1,200 to $1,400. BBB has confirmed that "US Airlines" or "American Airways" are companies that do not exist. BBB has also confirmed with principals of US Airways and American Airlines (legitimate airlines that have similar names), are not affiliated with this offer or the company sending the offer in any way. As of April 1, 2013, BBB has been unable to confirm a physical address for this company after numerous attempts to locate them..."

Our voucher had a check for a similar amount of $1,450.00. The Arizona BBB alert also included a long list of alternate company names used by American Travel Deals:

"Alternate Business Names
American Airways
Bridgewater Marketing, LLC
Continental US
Desert Sky Travel
Featured Travel
National Association of Travelers
Selected Vacations
Travel and Deals
Travel Awards
Travel Awards Division
Travel Premium Awards Agency
Travel Union
TravelAndDeals.com
Union One Travel
United Airways
United Rewards
Universal Travel Deals
US Airlines
Vacation Deals
Vacation Tours"

That list included Union One Travel. That was enough for me. Thanks to the Arizona BBB. No thanks to Compair, Union One Travel, or whoever the company really is.

Have you received this offer from Compair or Union One Travel? What did you do with it? If you called the toll-free number, please share your experiences below.

Democracy And Consumers Lose If "Net Neutrality" Is Killed

Last week, Bill Moyers discussed the FCC's policy shift on Net Neutrality with David Carr and Susan Crawford. Carr writes about the Internet for the New York Times, and Crawford is a visiting professor at Harvard law School. The interview is essential to understanding the situation, the likely impacts upon consumers' wallets, and the current predicament for a democracy. Moyers summarized well the predicament:

"Our Internet. The electronic public square that ostensibly allows everyone an equal chance to be heard. This democratic highway to cyberspace has thrived on the idea of "Net neutrality” -- that the Internet should be available to all without preferential treatment... But Net neutrality is now at risk... FCC chairman Tom Wheeler is circulating potential new rules that reportedly would allow Internet service providers to charge higher fees for faster access, so the big companies like Verizon and Comcast could hustle more money from those who can afford to buy a place in the fast lane. Everyone else -- nonprofit groups, startups, the smaller, independent content creators, and everyday users – move to the rear."

Crawford described the lack of competition:

"... most Americans, they have no choice for all the information, data, entertainment coming through their house, other than their local cable monopoly. And here, we have a situation where that monopoly potentially can pick and choose winners and losers, decide what you see... This industry, AT&T, Verizon, Comcast and Time Warner made $l.5 trillion over the last five years. They have no interest in seeing competition emerge in these cities. And David is right. In 19 states it’s either difficult or impossible for cities to do this for themselves. And mayors know that they need these networks in order to attract businesses, keep social life coherent in their cities, and build up their fabric of their civic life."

Yes, you read that correctly. The corporate telecommunication giants have lobbied and won new laws in 19 states that prohibit local government officials from building their own broadband Internet (e.g., fiber). That is a clear action by large corporations to reduce competition; the same corporations Wheeler is happy to allow to charge more and higher fees.

Crawford also explained the coming losses of freedom... loss of choices consumers will have if Net Neutrality is killed:

"So you’ve got one wire coming from one company coming into everybody’s house. There’s a box at the end of that wire. We call it today a set-top box. But it’s also going to become a Web browser. There is a software platform on that box. Comcast controls that browser. That browser that you’re using to access everything can pick stream picks, Comcast service over Netflix, can pick Comcast telemedicine service over whatever you might want to sign up for. Can pick Comcast educational software over what you might want to have."

Carr added:

"To me to say to people, I’m in favor of Net neutrality, but if you got enough dough, you can bolt it in a special way, I would say that sounds like two Internets, a good Internet and a bad Internet. And I don’t like the idea that somebody can control traffic. To control traffic is to control information and also to control a kind of message."

Two Internets. One (fast) for the wealthy and one (slow) for everyone else. Is that the change you want? Not me! I doubt you want that type of change, too. You want the fastest access to the sites you choose, not the sites your Internet service provider (ISP) chooses. It's a loss of freedom when your ISP chooses.

The discussion highlighted the politics FCC Chairman Wheeler has already caved in to. Crawford explained:

"[Wheeler] doesn't want to spark a war with the industry. He believes that he won't be able to get anything else done if he leans towards calling these guys a utility. What I think he's missing is that he's sparked a war with an entire American populous. We love Internet access. We want it. It is very personal. And to give up on any constraint of these monopolists seems very odd to people. So they're waking up."

So, rather than treat broadband Internet like electricity -- reclassify broadband as a telecommunications service -- and keep prices reasonably low for consumers, Chairman Wheeler instead has chosen to keep broadband classified as an Information Service and allow Internet service providers to charge both website publishers and consumers with more and higher fees. Chairman Wheeler prefers to allow a few large, corporate Internet service providers to raise prices and reap massive new revenues, rather than keep broadband Internet prices lower to fuel job creation, new businesses, and startups nationwide.

Is this the change you want with your Internet? I don't want this type of change and I doubt that you do either.

Prior to leading the FCC, Wheeler was a venture capitalist and lobbyist for the wireless and cable industries. What's behind Chairman Wheeler's decisions about broadband? Crawford explained:

"... my first question to Tom Wheeler would be, "Why are you giving up? We seem to have no oversight of this market at all. And yet, because of your short term political expediency needs, you're saying you're not even going to try to have firm legal ground on which to constrain the appetites of these companies to control information."

Crawford explained the politics of broadband:

"The head of the Cable Association, Michael Powell, used to be the chairman of the FCC. He said it would be World War III if the FCC even leaned towards calling these guys a utility. That's what Mr. Wheeler is facing. And the risk is that then those actors march on Capitol Hill, gut his budget, and don't allow him to do the other things he wants to accomplish with the commission."

For those that are unaware, Michael Powell served as FCC Chairman from 2001 to 2005. He is also General Colin Powell's son. The bottom line: Wheeler has caved to corporate interests at the expense of consumers... specifically your wallet (or purse). Expect higher broadband prices if the FCC's new policy sticks. Expect many of your favorite sites and blogs to be relgated to the slow lane (which will be a price increase since you'll likely pay the same but for slower access).

Reported, the FCC will vote on May 15 about Wheeler's policy shift. Crawford explained that complaints from consumers is the only way the FCC's new policy will be stopped:

"The uproar in the country is already causing the FCC to walk back from Wheeler's initial statement that he was never going to move towards treating these guys like a utility. That's already happening. Keeping that pressure up is only going to help because then they have to keep all these options on the table and act like a regulator. So writing into the FCC, writing to your congressman, keeping in touch with your senator. That really is making a difference. The White House is responding."

Yes, you read that correctly. You can make a difference. You say you don't want a price increase for your broadband Internet? Then, get active: contact your elected officials today. Write to the FCC. Consumers can also submit comments to the FCC through Senator Bernie Sanders' (I-Vermont) website. After contacting your elected officials, then sign a few petitions: Senator Markey, MoveOn, Credo Action, Daily Kos, and the White House. During the coming weeks, participate in local protests in your city or town. Tell them you want:

• To keep Net Neutrality; real Net Neutrality not the fake Net Neutrality in the latest policy proposed by FCC Chairman Wheeler.
• The healthiest democracy possible, with everyone having access to information.
• To keep the freedom to choose the websites you visit, and not lose that freedom when ISPs choose (like they do currently with cable TV).
• The reclassification of broadband as a utility (e.g., telecommunications).
• Real broadband competition everywhere, not the fake competition where the corporate ISPs have gentlemen's agreements that divided up the country so cable never competes against fiber.
• Local prohibitions removed so local governments and their residents can develop broadband utilities, if they choose. Local governments should have the same freedoms as corporate ISPs. This increases competition and will (hopefully) lower broadband prices.
• Everyone to have broadband at the lowest prices possible: for education and schools, to create jobs, and to encourage entrepreneurs to start new businesses.

Avoiding "Big Data" And Tracking. A Consumer Shares Her Experience

Anyone familiar with the Internet knows that their online activity is tracked by both corporations and governments. Is it possible to avoid all of this tracking? If so, how hard might it be? And, what would you have to do? What would your new life be like?

Author Janet Vertesi attempted to not disclose her pregnancy by opting out of all tracking; both online and in the physical world. We've all heard experts and pundits claim that if you don't like something, simply opt out. Do you think that opting out is possible? If possible, do you think that it would be easy? Would you have to give up your smartphone?

Vertesi's experience is instructive to all of us about the lack of choice consumers really have.

A wide variety of corporations (e.g., advertisers, retailers, banks, online measurement, data brokers, social networking sites, etc.) collect and track consumers' activity, and then resell that data to other companies to generate revenues - a practice called "big data" or data mining. So, Vertesi changed her purchase and online habits in both brick-and-mortar stores and on the Internet. She opted out of all the things that "bid data" use to track consumers.

Could Vertesi go nine months without revealing her pregancy status? Could you? She correctly assumed that avoiding all tracking and data collection would be a challenge:

"... given how hungry marketing companies are to identify pregnant women. Prospective mothers are busy making big purchases and new choices (which diapers? which bottles?) that will become their patterns for the next several years. In the big data era of targeted advertising, detection algorithms sniff out potentially pregnant clients based on their shopping and browsing patterns. It’s a lucrative business..."

Certain purchases (e.g., clothing, foods, medications, etc.) would quickly reveal her pregnancy status. Purchases with payments cards (e.g., credit, debit, and prepaid) would quickly reveal her pregnancy status. She used cash. This meant rejecting loyalty cards, coupon offers, and other incentives. But what about online?

Then, she made her online activity anonymous, since she planned to continue using the Internet:

"Many websites and companies follow you around the Internet, especially baby-related ones. So I downloaded Tor, a private browser that routes your traffic through foreign servers. While it has a reputation for facilitating elicit activities, I used it to visit babycenter.com and to look up possible names... No matter how good the deal, I turned down loyalty card swipes. I even set up an Amazon.com account tied to an email address hosted on a personal server, delivering to a locker, and paid with gift cards purchased with cash."

Next, Vertesi alerted family members and friends not to "out" her pregnancy status on social networking sites, like Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram. All it takes is one "friend" to post a photo online of her baby bump, or post a status message sending, "Congratulations. When are you due?" and her pregnancy is revealed. When a few blabbermouth "friends" outed her anyway, she quickly un-friended them.

Vertesi observed from her experience:

"Internet companies hope that users will not only accept the trade-off between “free” services and private information, but will forget that there is a trade-off in the first place. Once those companies have that personal data, users don’t have any control over where it goes or who might have access to it in the future."

Vertesi learned from her experience:

"Attempting to opt out forced me into increasingly awkward interactions with my family and friends. But, as I discovered when I tried to buy a stroller, opting out is not only antisocial, it can appear criminal... taken together, the things I had to do to evade marketing detection looked suspiciously like illicit activities. All I was trying to do was to fight for the right for a transaction to be just a transaction..."

Vertesi concluded that the control consumers think that they have is really an illusion:

"The myth that users will “vote with their feet” is simply wrong if opting out comes at such a high price. With social, financial and even potentially legal repercussions involved, the barriers for exit are high. This leaves users and consumers with no real choice nor voice to express our concerns."

In the Star Trek: The Next Generation television series and films, the USS Enterprise-D ship and its crew, led by Captain Jean Luc Picard, encountered an advanced alien race known as the Borg, who operated with a hive mind, and assimilated both other aliens and their technology into the Borg Collective. While Captain Picard and his plucky crew fought off assimilation, during one encounter the Borg claimed:

"Resistance is futile... You will be assimilated."

In today's world, Big Data might as well be the Borg. Is resistance futile? Of course, Big Data proponents want you to believe that resistance is futile. Resistance will be futile, if all programs continue to automatically include consumers whether they want to be or not; and require consumers to opt out. Opt-out resources have been around for many years. The U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) urged companies to design behavioral advertising programs for consumers to opt-in, but didn't require that. So, companies developed contract terms that allow them to automatically collect consumers data with the burden on consumers to continually opt-out (since consumers can be automatically re-included when a retailer changes its terms, services, and/or product features). Hence, we have the Internet you see today... a playing field heavily tilted towards corporations and away from consumers.

Is this a real choice for consumers? Is this real control for consumers? I think not, and I'll bet that you think not, too.

If this bothers you (and I truly hope that it does bother you), contact your elected officials and demand stronger privacy laws and trade laws. Demand that laws require companies to get consumers' permission first before any data collection. Make opt-in the standard.

What's your opinion?