back to article So, FCC, how about that massive DDoS? Hello? Hello...? You still there?

America's broadband watchdog, the FCC, has declined to share any more details on the cyber-assault that apparently downed its website shortly after it announced its intent to kill net neutrality. Today, the regulator said in a formal response [PDF] to a Freedom of Information inquiry that it would not hand over more than 200 …

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Marching orders

    So, the meme is to be "All regular Americans want NN, but the Trump Administration refuses to listen."

    Got it.

    I'm guessing that the "new polling" is now carried out by provoking a million left wing activists to swamp a government website. The old-style (and laughably biased) media polling just ain't getting the job done any more.

    It's actually a pretty slick idea, given that the opposition doesn't get "polled." ;-/

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Can we slap him?

    Every single one of us that tried to file our resistance to his position & were thwarted because he claims a DDOS, can we be allowed to walk up & smack him in the head in rebuttal?

    Even a simple flick in the forehead would leave him bloodied & bruised beyond belief, proving once & for all that we Do Not Want his proposed actions.

    If we can upgrade to a kick in the balls, he'll be too busy recovering in the hospital to enact the idiotic changes... and we would feel much better for having "registered our opposition".

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Can we slap him?

      So many upvotes for a suggestion to visit violence on the political "target?" This is the oh-so-intelligent, oh-so-sophisticated IT community? Basically troglodytes?

      1. hplasm Silver badge
        Holmes

        Re: Can we slap him?

        Freeze Peach- not just for the GOPs, eh?

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Can we slap him?

          hplasm sez: "Freeze Peach..."

          The "peach" in question discusses physical violence against another human being for purely political reasons. Do you consider that sort of violence to be a protected right under the Constitution?

          If not, maybe you'd care to retract? And if you do think that way, I suggest that such an attitude (if acted on) might attract retaliatory violence towards YOU?

          Of course you'll then claim it was unprovoked...

      2. Comments are attributed to your handle
        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Can we slap him?

          Dude, that example is very weak. Pushing? I'd be happy to provide links to many many acts of violence perpetrated by the left on conservatives, just in the last few weeks. Examples that actually include hospitalization, unlike yours.

          And then there's the campus riots, the calls for Trump to be killed, the calls to jail conservatives, and on and on.

          Face it; The Left has gone to the Dark Side. If all you have is a disputed pushing match then you've already lost the argument.

          1. Comments are attributed to your handle

            Re: Can we slap him?

            "Dude, that example is very weak..."

            Fair enough, it was mostly tongue-in-cheek. Here's some better examples: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/trump-violent-rhetoric-history-226873. But pay no mind to the particularities of that article - unlike you, I'm not going to sit here and breathlessly defend any one party as being morally superior. Both sides have zealous lunatics that do and say violent things, and to a large extent, BOTH parties are responsible for cultivating the "us vs. them" attitude that provides such fertile soil for that violence. That was the point of my original reply.

            And I'm sure you do have a war-chest of "Sure, Trump/his supporters/Republicans did X, but Hillary/her supporters/Democrats [did/would have done] Y, and look at how much worse Y is than X!?!?"-style stories. That kind of arguing seems to be pretty much Trump supporters' only defense tactic when confronted with facts or inconvenient questions.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Can we slap him?

              Your link is about words, and a subjective slant on them as well, but it doesn't mention the actual violence, which is primarily a left wing thing these days. Recall how this thread began? With a call to commit violence on a Trump supporter in government, that's how.

              Sure, both sides have crazies, but I'm most concerned over actions taken by entire crowds. Antifa, BLM, and any old student gathering at one of the more liberal colleges these days, many guilty of real physical violence against conservatives over the last few months. Against that backdrop, I'm referred to a pushing match between screaming antagonists and an article that badmouths Trump for not policing everyone in his organization tightly enough when their tweets (and only their tweets) get violent.

              And if you're going to say that such chatter encourages the crazies, may I refer you to Congressman Scalise, gunned down a few weeks ago by a leftist crazy, who was clearly egged on by the shamelessly violent rhetoric coming out of the Democrats and Trump-hating media these days.

              Again, my side is absorbing physical violence semi-regularly (up to and including bullets), while you refer to expressed opinions only. If there were any significant number of violent acts being committed by Trump supporters, that is ALL we would ever hear from the likes of CNN. But all they actually talk about is their "Russian collusion" fraud. It's all they have, you see.

              1. Comments are attributed to your handle

                Re: Can we slap him?

                The original comment was just words as well, but that didn't stop you from pouncing on it. Regarding the rest: I think we can both agree that Antifa is disgusting. But there have absolutely been attacks against protestors at Trump rallies - just google it. And yes, the attack against Scalise was horrible.

      3. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Can we slap him?

        @Big John

        Where is the 'suggestion to visit violence on the political "target?"'

        All I see is light-hearted mockery of a deceitful buffoon, holding public office, whose first concern is transparently not the public interest.

        Can you (with a straight face) claim that anyone is being incited to actually use violence here?

  3. DNTP

    Dear US Government:

    As a US citizen I am filing a Freedom of Information request.

    My request is for a Federal court injunction that Pai go fuck himself. Certain legal authorities believe this is an entirely appropriate use of a FoI act request because it directly supports freedom of information.

  4. sanmigueelbeer Silver badge
    Trollface

    Bah!

    Fake news, I say. Fake news.

  5. Florida1920
    Holmes

    John Oliver

    Britain may yet win the American Revolution!

    1. CrazyOldCatMan Silver badge

      Re: John Oliver

      Britain may yet win the American Revolution!

      Ah - but would we want to? Far more satisfying to sit at a distance poking with a (very) long stick..

  6. Brian Miller

    Public comments are trade secrets?

    Wow, first time I read that one. Who knew? El Reg needs to be classified ASAP!

  7. MNGrrrl
    Facepalm

    Hi El Reg!

    I don't know that it's a conspiracy theory to call bullshit on a wall of silence, denials, and refusals, El Reg -- and I'd take you to task on the letter you attached. They're claiming they couldn't shut down the API. Why not? Just about any IT department you ask would tell you it shouldn't be hard to simply turn off the API for awhile. The API should be rate limited too. Most public-facing APIs are.. so how did the bots blow past all that? There's a lot of inconsistencies in the FCC's story -- I wouldn't call it a conspiracy to say they're bullshitting when the only evidence they're providing is soothing words that, indeed, they can be trusted. All indications are they well and truly can't. Also, Hi, El Reg. I linked your article to my, uhh, "conspiracy theory". :P

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Irony

    Protest against network packet discrimination by flooding the regulator with traffic that, logically, you'd ideally like to discriminate against.

  9. cmannett85

    "got two million comments in 10 days from a load of bots in "the cloud" shooting out 30,000 requests a second tops."

    2000000 / (10 * 24 * 60 * 60) = 2.31

    A little over two comments a second. They sound like half-arsed bots.

    1. Swarthy
      Terminator

      If they were running 24 hours, they would indeed be Half-Fast bots, but most of the "bots" were active between 5 and 10 PM(local), with an activity drop between 7 and 8PM. The peak traffic of around 30K/sec was probably around the 9PM time frame, after the "bots" had finished putting the kids to bed and cleaning up after dinner.

  10. something_or_another

    Ajit Pai and his DSLs

    He just can't wait to wrap his big ole DICK SUCKING LIPS around Drumpf's cock to curry favor. Like he has any other motivation. FUCK I HATE REPUBLICANT'S!!!!

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020