The FCC wants to know why data caps are still a thing in 2023

If Ajit Pai were still in charge, he'd say "Woof woof! The telcos can do anything they want!," and the Verizon CEO who owns him would pat him on the head and give him a Milk-Bone.

Until he personally lost service for a couple hours

What's going to stop the forms being filled out by industry-controlled bots this time?^1 Last time the FCC took public comment, anti-net-neutrality comments were being made under the names of dead people and people who would later claim they never participated in making comments to the FCC.

Otherwise, it's going to be the same dumb shitshow as last time.

The same dumb shitshow as last time is probably the goal.
- It did a great job of discrediting opening anything for public comment thenceforth. Which I really think was the long-term goal.
I used to work in utilities. Electric, not telecom so different set of regulators. What they would do is yank you into and office and tell you something to the effect of: "[Name of Regulatory Body] is considering [issue]. You should really consider going on the public comment section of their website and voicing your [support/opposition depending on corporate stance] for it. It's not mandatory but you should really consider doing that. It's very important to our company."
It wasn't "mandatory" but they would repeatedly hound you until you either did it or told them to fuck off, at which point you would be branded a "troublemaker" and they would find ways to punish you.
- True, but research showed up to 80% of the comments from the previous FCC public comment were made by bots.
  https://www.vice.com/en/article/43a5kg/80-percent-net-neutrality-comments-bots-astroturfing
  https://www.vice.com/en/article/4xjjeq/shady-conservative-group-is-flooding-the-fcc-with-anti-net-neutrality-comments
But they can claim it was done in an open and democratic way.
Damn, I forgot all about that. I think one was made under my name and some family, and it was all the same copy-paste letter.
Did anything ever come of that or did it just get swept under the rug?
- Swept under the rug, thus my concerns here.

Would be wonderful if the FCC did their fucking job for once and banned data caps. Companies like Mediacom abuse the fuck out of them

@Atemu. Money. Same reason they don't really wanna disclose all the little fees.

I mean, if you ask why a company is doing xyz the answer is pretty much universally money.

Because fuck you, pay me, that’s why.
— Comcast, probably.

It will always make me happy that no matter how hard they try to make Xfinity happen, everyone remembers their real, ugly face before the facelift, and that ugly face is Comcast.^1
"Stop trying to make ~~fetch~~ Xfinity happen! It's not going to happen!"
- Hey Comcast's service improved in my area once google Fiber got installed.
  Just goes to show you that companies are fine with you complaining as much as you want, just NEVER let there be an alternative.

Short answer? Because they can.

Why is the FCC asking this question instead of already correcting the issue?

Because they have no intention of correcting it. They’re either doing this to keep up the charade of consumer protection, or gearing up to enshrine the practice in regulation.
In short, the Administrative Procedure Act. It sets out the procedures that have to be followed before policy decisions get made. If the FCC doesn't follow the APA's procedures exactly, that gives the industry grounds to sue,. Even if the industry eventually looses, it would still mean a stay on the new policies during which they would continue to exploit consumers.
The APA isn't a bad thing, but since it forces federal agencies to be deliberate in making policy decisions that could have far reaching consequences. That said, it does make the government even slower to react to situations that often change quickly. But it has tripped up this administration and previous administrations when they have tried to make hasty decisions, including Trump with his "Muslim ban".
- Question, what the fuck was the "Muslim ban" I've never heard of this.
- Is this where the last Net Neutrality request for comments window failed miserably? Like, the FCC did the process, but they let it be provably sabotaged by the industry and went ahead anyways...
- I wish informative answers like yours would get the upvotes they deserve. You have my upvote.
  EDIT: Okay yeah, several hours later now it's heavily upvoted. Thanks Lemmings, for giving me faith in comments sections again.
They are asking ISPs to lay out their best justification so that they can decide whether it's valid or not. Judging by their wording, they want a good explanation. It's good to gain understanding of something before we gut it and who better to ask for the 'best argument for' than those who enforce it?

It's ridiculous I have to pay Xfinity $110/mo for my speed and unlimited bandwidth

Over here, I'm getting the Cox... last bill was $99 a month, now my "promo period" expired, and it is the full $170 a month thanks to "unlimited". It's pretty gross, but it is the only plan that gives the "amazing" 30 mbps up. :|
EDIT: This is for home internet, 1000 down/30 up, unlimited data
- That’s crazy! I’m paying 18 EUR a month for unlimited 1000 mbps download and 1000 mbps upload and I thought my bill was high. 😲
  Oh. You were talking about mobile data. That’s still extremely expensive.
God damn. In Austria I'm paying 35€ for 250/250, and am still looking over to the Romanians with longing eyes. Data caps are only on mobile - which is still questionable in my eyes.
- I pay $99 for 300/5 unlimited. I don't mind it, but would much rather have 100/100 for that price.
- Data caps on mobile makes more sense to me, simply because mobile data is so much more expensive.

€20 every 28 days on a PAYG sim for unlimited 5g in Ireland, it's just boggling to see what folks in the US and Canada pay
Nah, we see it too. Those of us whose eyes are open, anyway.

Oh fuck off FCC, you know exactly why and intentionally don't address it.

This is a rhetorical question right?

It’s the same reason my complex can force me to pay $100 for Xfinity while my neighbor pays $30 for the exact same service (because they’re in a house).

Xfinity only charging $30? Where is this?
I'm in a house and the cheapest tier internet I can get is $55

Get money out of as many facets of life as we can!! Free energy for the people! We are the energy!

I know the FCC thinks they’re helping, but don’t let them F’ this up too.

Because of corporate greed and a ridiculous lack of meaningful regulation.

The FCC still doesn’t have a leader. Biden nominated one but couldn’t get congress to approve one so they’ve sort of been stuck and unable to do anything.

The FCC is split evenly by Repubs and Dems, with the Commissioner being the tie breaker, nominated by the presiding president

Because MONEY and lack of choice in some markets.... easy.

GREED. That has always been the answer.

Money!

Me too

Because there is money to be made!

Because...

Interesting…me too 🤔

OH SAY CAN YOU SEE

SuperSurf, Smart Unli Data and GOMO Unli only have data caps.

The infrastructure over which that data travels isn't free. If you have a resource and it has any kind of scarcity, you want to tie consumption to the cost of producing more of it.

You can reduce the transaction cost -- reduce hassle for users using Internet service -- by not having a cap for them to worry about, but then you decouple the costs of consumption.

Soft caps, like throttling, are one way to help reduce transaction costs while still having some connection between consumption and price.

But point is, if one user is using a lot more of the infrastructure than any other is, you probably want to have that reflected in some way, else you're dumping Heavy User's costs on Light User.

I want to know where the storage tanks of gigabytes are hiding
- They're behind the series of tubes.
- Like, what kind of costs exist? Lines, network hardware, putting up the tunnels and poles that hold up lines, the network admins who deal with issues on them. Your ISP can't just push a button and instantly provide 1Tbit bandwidth capacity at no cost to themselves to every subscriber.