Policy

judge-orders-trump-admin.-to-restore-cdc-and-fda-webpages-by-midnight

Judge orders Trump admin. to restore CDC and FDA webpages by midnight

“Irrational removal”

In his opinion, Bates cited the declarations from Stephanie Liou, a physician who works with low-income immigrant families and an underserved high school in Chicago, and Reshma Ramachandran, a primary care provider who relies on CDC guidance on contraceptives and sexually transmitted diseases in her practice. Both are board members of Doctors for America.

Liou testified that the removal of resources from the CDC’s website hindered her response to a chlamydia outbreak at the high school where she worked. Ramachandran, meanwhile, testified that she was left scrambling to find alternative resources for patients during time-limited appointments. Doctors for America also provided declarations from other doctors (who were not members of Doctors for America) who spoke of being “severely impacted” by the sudden loss of CDC and FDA public resources.

With those examples, Bates agreed that the removal of the information caused the doctors “irreparable harm,” in legal terms.

“As these groups attest, the lost materials are more than ‘academic references’—they are vital for real-time clinical decision-making in hospitals, clinics and emergency departments across the country,” Bates wrote. “Without them, health care providers and researchers are left ‘without up-to-date recommendations on managing infectious diseases, public health threats, essential preventive care and chronic conditions.’ … Finally, it bears emphasizing who ultimately bears the harm of defendants’ actions: everyday Americans, and most acutely, underprivileged Americans, seeking healthcare.”

Bates further noted that it would be of “minimal burden” for the Trump administration to restore the data and information, much of which has been publicly available for many years.

In a press statement after the ruling, Doctors for America and Public Citizen celebrated the restoration.

“The judge’s order today is an important victory for doctors, patients, and the public health of the whole country,” Zach Shelley, a Public Citizen Litigation Group attorney and lead counsel on the case, said in the release. “This order puts a stop, at least temporarily, to the irrational removal of vital health information from public access.”

Judge orders Trump admin. to restore CDC and FDA webpages by midnight Read More »

verizon-beats-lawsuit-from-utility-worker-who-said-lead-cables-made-him-sick

Verizon beats lawsuit from utility worker who said lead cables made him sick

However, Ranjan found that Tiger lacked standing to bring the lawsuit. It is not clear that Tiger’s symptoms were caused by working with lead-covered cables, and everyone is exposed to lead to some degree, the ruling said.

“Given the naturally occurring lead levels in the environment and in our bodies, and the fact that individuals exposed to lead may not develop any lead-related conditions or symptoms at all, mere exposure to lead—and the mere presence of lead in one’s body—isn’t a concrete injury,” Ranjan wrote.

Verizon said in September 2023 that at sites described in the Wall Street Journal article, soil lead levels near Verizon cables were similar to lead levels in the surrounding area and did not pose a public health risk.

Verizon is also seeking dismissal of a similar lawsuit filed in US District Court for the District of New Jersey. Verizon yesterday submitted a filing to the New Jersey federal court that cited the Pennsylvania ruling. Verizon said the plaintiffs in the two cases are represented by the same legal team and that the allegations are “virtually identical.”

Health claims not specific enough

Ranjan’s ruling said that “Tiger hasn’t alleged the presence of elevated levels of lead in his body,” and “has not taken any blood or bone testing to measure the amount of lead that is presently in his body. This is problematic because, as indicated by the articles cited to in the amended complaint, everyone is exposed to lead, due to its prevalence in the environment.” Ranjan continued:

Mr. Tiger might have a better argument if he had asserted conditions or non-common symptoms that are unique to or at least more consistent with elevated levels of lead in his body. But, despite his allegations that lead exposure can cause certain “catastrophic” health issues, such as reduced kidney function, neurological problems, cardiovascular problems, and cancer, he has not alleged that he suffers from these ailments or that they are even imminent.

And, from the complaint, the Court cannot tell the amount or extent of Mr. Tiger’s exposure to lead, e.g., whether, and the extent to which, the alleged exposure to Verizon’s lead cables increased his risk of contracting an illness or condition, such that it posed an unacceptable risk to his health, and whether there is a dangerous amount of lead in his body. Simply put, the Court requires more concrete confirmation that Mr. Tiger has suffered an injury—or is at imminent and substantial risk of suffering an illness—likely caused by exposure to lead.

In summary, the judge decided that the “complaint fails to plead any cognizable injury-in-fact” and that the “theories of injury in the context of this specific case are too conjectural and speculative.” Ranjan dismissed the complaint without prejudice and said in a footnote that “nothing in this opinion should be construed as a finding that Mr. Tiger lacks standing to bring any of his claims in state court.”

Verizon beats lawsuit from utility worker who said lead cables made him sick Read More »

22-states-sue-to-block-new-nih-funding-policy—court-puts-it-on-hold

22 states sue to block new NIH funding policy—court puts it on hold

Regardless of what else they might be doing, the indirect costs pay for various critical campus services, including at research hospitals. Suddenly having that amount slashed would create a major budgetary shortfall that will be hard to cover without shutting programs down.

The resulting damage to research campuses in their states was one of the harms cited by the states that joined the suit as part of their effort to establish standing. The other was the harm caused by the general slowdown in biomedical research that the policy will trigger, which the states argue will delay the availability of treatments for their citizens.

The states taking part include most of those that were won by Kamala Harris in 2024, as well as states that voted for Trump but currently have Democratic governors and attorneys general: Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, and Wisconsin. Notably, the suit only seeks relief from the altered NIH policy for institutions located in those states; they’re essentially leaving states controlled by Republicans to suffer the damages caused by the new policy.

Allegations and backup allegations

The states allege that the new NIH policy, by applying to all grants in progress, is equivalent to rewriting a contract. It cites an earlier legal decision that determined that “Once the [Notice of Award] is signed or money is drawn, the [Notice of Award] and the grant terms are binding on the grantee and the government.” Beyond that, the states argue the policy violates two separate pieces of legislation.

The first is the Administrative Procedures Act, which describes the processes that agencies need to follow when they formulate formal rules to translate legislation into implementations. Among other things, this prevents agencies from formulating rules that are “arbitrary and capricious.” It argues that, by including audits and negotiations in the process of setting them, the current individualized indirect rates are anything but.

By contrast, the states argue, there’s no significant foundation for the 15 percent indirect rate. “The Rate Change Notice is arbitrary and capricious in, among other ways, its failure to articulate the bases for the categorical rate cap of 15 percent,” the suit alleges, “its failure to consider the grant recipients’ reliance on their negotiated rates, and its disregard for the factual findings that formed the bases for the currently operative negotiated indirect cost rates.”

22 states sue to block new NIH funding policy—court puts it on hold Read More »

after-trump-killed-a-report-on-nature,-researchers-push-ahead-with-release

After Trump killed a report on nature, researchers push ahead with release

But one word in the federal register notice describing key principles of the nature report—”inclusive”—may have triggered Trump’s decision to end it. Christopher Schell, a lead author of a chapter called “Nature and Equity in the US,” told The Times that his chapter’s focus on environmental justice may have made the project an easy target for Trump.

On day one of his administration, Trump issued executive orders rescinding Biden-era priorities and ending several environmental justice and equity initiatives in government. According to an analysis from two experts at Harvard’s energy and environmental law program, Carrie Jenks and Sara Dewey, Trump claimed, “without explanation,” that the Biden initiatives violate “longstanding Federal civil-rights laws” and “threaten the safety of American men, women, and children.”

Now “federal agencies no longer have a mandate, unless required under separate rules, to consider how their actions will disproportionately harm low-income communities, communities of color, and other vulnerable populations,” the Harvard researchers warned.

Trump contradictions in environmental orders

Grist reported on the scramble to salvage a wide range of Trump-purged climate data like the National Nature Assessment that could help protect vulnerable communities by remaining in the public sphere. That report noted that climate data access was similarly lost during Trump’s prior administration, when “as much as 20 percent of the EPA’s website became inaccessible to the public” and the government’s “use of the term ‘climate change’ decreased by more than a third.”

But even if some members of the public remain jaded from Trump’s prior administration, researchers working on the nature report told The Times that their biggest concern in moving forward with the report is that the general public views government studies as more authoritative than independent studies. The fear is that even if the report is eventually published, its impact could be watered down without the government’s involvement or endorsement.

After Trump killed a report on nature, researchers push ahead with release Read More »

what-you-need-to-know-about-the-t-mobile-starlink-mobile-service

What you need to know about the T-Mobile Starlink mobile service


Starlink for your smartphone

Details on beta registration, prices, compatible phones, and technical limits.

T-Mobile marketing image for its Starlink texting service. Credit: T-Mobile

T-Mobile yesterday announced more details of its new service powered by Starlink and said Verizon and AT&T customers can use the satellite offering, too. The standard price will be $15 a month as an add-on for T-Mobile customers, and $20 a month for people who don’t have T-Mobile as their primary carrier.

While we’ve written numerous articles about the Starlink/T-Mobile collaboration over the past two and a half years, the service’s beta test and a Super Bowl commercial are raising awareness that it exists. In this article we’ll answer some questions you might have about T-Mobile Starlink (yes, T-Mobile Starlink is the official name of the service).

What is this thing anyway?

Over the past 13 months, SpaceX’s Starlink division has launched about 450 Direct to Cell satellites that can provide service to mobile phones in areas where there are no cell towers. Starlink is partnering with cellular carriers in multiple countries, and T-Mobile is its primary commercial partner in the US.

T-Mobile says the goal is to provide telecom service in dead zones, the 500,000 square miles of the US that aren’t reached by any terrestrial cell tower. When a user crosses into a dead zone, their phone is supposed to automatically connect to Starlink satellites. T-Mobile Starlink only supports texting for now, but T-Mobile says voice calls and data service will be available eventually.

Who can use it

T-Mobile Starlink is obviously available to T-Mobile customers, but the carrier said that Verizon and AT&T customers can also use it on their existing phones without switching entirely to T-Mobile. Verizon and AT&T customers will need an unlocked phone with eSIM technology, which lets users activate a cellular plan without a physical SIM card.

A Verizon or AT&T customer can use T-Mobile Starlink by activating a second eSIM on their device. “They will technically be assigned a T-Mobile number, but that’s just to provision the device to access the constellation. And then the second eSIM can connect whenever the user loses coverage,” a T-Mobile spokesperson told Mobile World Live.

T-Mobile suggested that international roaming will be available with other carriers that also partner with Starlink. T-Mobile said a “growing alliance” of telcos “aims to provide reciprocal roaming for all participating carriers.” Participating carriers so far include ones in Japan, Australia, New Zealand, Switzerland, Chile, Peru, Canada, and Ukraine.

How to sign up

To use T-Mobile Starlink now, you need to register for a beta trial and hope you get in quickly. “The beta test is free and open to anyone—on any carrier—until July,” T-Mobile said.

There is a short registration form in which you’ll provide your name, email address, and mobile phone number, and agree that T-Mobile can contact you with marketing offers by email or phone. “We’ll admit people on a rolling first-come, first-served basis, so we encourage everyone to sign up as soon as possible,” T-Mobile said.

T-Mobile said it is enrolling users “on an ongoing basis to help test the system and provide feedback before launching in July.” Beta registration began in December. Early reports from beta testers suggest the service usually does what T-Mobile claims—enabling texting in areas with no cellular access—but that users still can’t get connections in some areas.

What it costs

When the free beta trial ends, T-Mobile customers will be able to add Starlink service to their plan for an extra charge of $15 per month for each line. If you sign up for the beta during February or if you signed up before then, T-Mobile says you’ll get a $5 discount for early adopters once the service transitions from a free beta to a paid add-on. T-Mobile users with the early adopter discount will pay $10 a month starting in July 2025, the company said.

Go5G Next, T-Mobile’s priciest plan at $100 a month for a single line, will include Starlink access at no extra cost. “The beta is free until July at which point T-Mobile Starlink will be included at no extra cost on Go5G Next (including variations like Go5G Next 55+), T-Mobile’s best plan,” the company said. “Business customers will also get T-Mobile Starlink at no extra cost on Go5G Business Next, first responder agencies on T-Priority plans and other select premium rate plans. T-Mobile customers on any other plan can add the service for $15/month per line.”

After the beta trial ends, Verizon and AT&T customers can purchase T-Mobile Starlink for $20 per month for each line. There was no mention of an early adopter discount for customers who don’t use T-Mobile as their primary carrier.

Users who aren’t subscribers of any of the big three carriers can also take advantage of the $20 offer. We asked T-Mobile if it would be available to people on other carriers, such as regional wireless providers or resellers. “Yes, any wireless user with an unlocked eSIM phone can sign up for service, regardless of provider,” T-Mobile told us.

Which phones it works on

T-Mobile Starlink works on recent iPhones and certain phones made by Google, Motorola, Samsung, and a T-Mobile brand called REVVL. T-Mobile said more phones will be added over time, and the current list of supported devices is as follows:

    • Apple iPhone 14 and later (including Plus, Pro & Pro Max)
    • Google Pixel 9 (including Pro, Pro Fold, & Pro XL)
    • Motorola 2024 and later (including razr, razr+, edge and g series)
    • Samsung Galaxy A14, A15, A16, A35, A53, A54
    • Samsung Galaxy S21 and later (including Plus, Ultra and Fan Edition)
    • Samsung Galaxy X Cover6 Pro
    • Samsung Galaxy Z Flip3 and later
    • Samsung Galaxy Z Fold3 and later
    • REVVL 7 (including Pro)

Going beyond text

Moving from text messages to voice and data requires more bandwidth, and SpaceX needs another government approval to use the full capabilities of its satellites. To that end, SpaceX is seeking a waiver of Federal Communications Commission rules regarding out-of-band emission limits.

Verizon and AT&T urged the FCC to deny the waiver request, alleging that Starlink’s plan would interfere with services provided over networks using adjacent spectrum bands. SpaceX has described the waiver as being crucial to its future plans, telling the FCC that the “out-of-band emission restriction will be most detrimental for real-time communications such as voice and video, rendering such communications unreliable both in critical and in common circumstances, increasing risk in emergency situations.”

The FCC approved Starlink’s plan for cellular phone service in November but deferred making a decision on the waiver request.

Verizon and AT&T plan similar service

AT&T and Verizon both intend to offer similar service through deals with satellite operator AST SpaceMobile. But AST SpaceMobile isn’t as far along as SpaceX’s Starlink, which is why AT&T was rebuked by an advertising industry self-regulatory board in August for claiming that it already offered cellular coverage from space.

AST SpaceMobile launched its first five commercial satellites in September 2024. In late January, AST SpaceMobile said it obtained FCC approval to test the service “with unmodified smartphones in AT&T and Verizon premium low-band wireless spectrum supporting voice, full data, and video applications.” The company also announced plans to launch up to 60 more satellites in 2025 and 2026.

Photo of Jon Brodkin

Jon is a Senior IT Reporter for Ars Technica. He covers the telecom industry, Federal Communications Commission rulemakings, broadband consumer affairs, court cases, and government regulation of the tech industry.

What you need to know about the T-Mobile Starlink mobile service Read More »

centurylink-nightmares:-users-keep-asking-ars-for-help-with-multi-month-outages

CenturyLink nightmares: Users keep asking Ars for help with multi-month outages


More CenturyLink horror stories

Three more tales of CenturyLink failing to fix outages until hearing from Ars.

Horror poster take on the classic White Zombie about Century Link rendering the internet powerless

Credit: Aurich Lawson | White Zombie (Public Domain)

Credit: Aurich Lawson | White Zombie (Public Domain)

CenturyLink hasn’t broken its annoying habit of leaving customers without service for weeks or months and repeatedly failing to show up for repair appointments.

We’ve written about CenturyLink’s failure to fix long outages several times in the past year and a half. In each case, desperate customers contacted Ars because the telecom provider didn’t reconnect their service. And each time, CenturyLink finally sprang into action and fixed the problems shortly after hearing from an Ars reporter.

Unfortunately, it keeps happening, and CenturyLink (also known as Lumen) can’t seem to explain why. In only the last two months, we heard from CenturyLink customers in three states who were without service for periods of between three weeks and over four months.

In early December, we heard from John in Boulder, Colorado, who preferred that we not publish his last name. John said he and his wife had been without CenturyLink phone and DSL Internet service for over three weeks.

“There’s no cell service where we live, so we have to drive to find service… We’ve scheduled repairs [with CenturyLink] three different times, but each time nobody showed up, emailed, or called,” he told us. They pay $113 a month for phone and DSL service, he said.

John also told us his elderly neighbors were without service. He read our February 2024 article about a 39-day outage in Oregon and wondered if we could help. We also published an August 2023 article about CenturyLink leaving an 86-year-old woman in Minnesota with no Internet service for a month and a May 2024 article about CenturyLink leaving a couple in Oregon with no service for two months, then billing them for $239.

We contacted CenturyLink about the outages affecting John and his neighbor, providing both addresses to the company. Service for both was fixed several hours later. Suddenly, a CenturyLink “repair person showed up today, replaced both the modem and the phone card in the nearest pedestal, and we are reconnected to the rest of the world,” John told us.

John said he also messaged a CenturyLink technician whose contact information he saved from a previous visit for a different matter. It turned out this technician had been promoted to area supervisor, so John’s outreach to him may also have contributed to the belated fix. However it happened, CenturyLink confirmed to Ars that service was restored for both John and his neighbor on the same day,

“Good news, we were able to restore service to both customers today,” a company spokesperson told us. “One had a modem issue, which needed to be replaced, and the other had a problem with their line.”

What were you waiting for?

After getting confirmation that the outages were fixed, we asked the CenturyLink spokesperson whether the company has “a plan to make sure that customer outages are always fixed when a customer contacts the company instead of waiting for a reporter to contact the company on the customer’s behalf weeks later.”

Here is the answer we got from CenturyLink: “Restoring customer service is a priority, and we apologized for the delay. We’re looking at why there was a repair delay.”

It appears that nothing has changed. Even as John’s problem was fixed, CenturyLink users in other states suffered even longer outages, and no one showed up for scheduled repair appointments. These outages weren’t fixed until late January—and only after the customers contacted us to ask for help.

Karen Kurt, a resident of Sheridan, Oregon, emailed us on January 23 to report that she had no CenturyLink DSL Internet service since November 4, 2024. One of her neighbors was also suffering through the months-long outage.

“We have set up repair tickets only to have them voided and/or canceled,” Kurt told us. “We have sat at home on the designated repair day from 8–5 pm, and no one shows up.” Kurt’s CenturyLink phone and Internet service costs $172.04 a month, according to a recent bill she provided us. Kurt said she also has frequent CenturyLink phone outages, including some stretches that occurred during the three-month Internet outage.

Separately, a CenturyLink customer named David Stromberg in Bellevue, Washington, told us that his phone service had been out since September 16. He repeatedly scheduled repair appointments, but the scheduled days went by with no repairs. “Every couple weeks, they do this and the tech doesn’t show up,” he said.

“Quick” fixes

As far as we can tell, there weren’t any complex technical problems preventing CenturyLink from ending these outages. Once the public relations department heard from Ars, CenturyLink sent technicians to each area, and the customers had their services restored.

On the afternoon of January 24, we contacted CenturyLink about the outage affecting Kurt and her neighbor. CenturyLink restored service for both houses less than three hours later, finally ending outages that lasted over 11 weeks.

On Sunday, January 26, we informed CenturyLink’s public relations team about the outage affecting Stromberg in Washington. Service was restored about 48 hours later, ending the phone outage that lasted well over four months.

As we’ve done in previous cases, we asked CenturyLink why the outages lasted so long and why the company repeatedly failed to show up for repair appointments. We did not receive any substantive answer. “Services have been restored, and appropriate credits will be provided,” the CenturyLink spokesperson replied.

Stromberg said getting the credit wasn’t so simple. “We contacted them after service was restored. They credited the full amount, but it took a few phone calls. They also gave us a verbal apology,” he told us. He said they pay $80.67 a month for CenturyLink phone service and that they get Internet access from Comcast.

Kurt said she had to call CenturyLink each month the outage dragged on to obtain a bill credit. Though the outage is over, she said her Internet access has been unreliable since the fix, with webpages often taking painfully long times to load.

Kurt has only a 1.5Mbps DSL connection, so it’s not a modern Internet connection even on a good day. CenturyLink told us it found no further problems on its end, so it appears that Kurt is stuck with what she has for now.

Desperation

“We are just desperate,” Kurt told us when she first reached out. Kurt, a retired teacher, said she and her husband were driving to a library to access the Internet and help grandchildren with schoolwork. She said there’s no reliable cell service in the area and that they are on a waiting list for Starlink satellite service.

Kurt said her husband once suggested they switch to a different Internet provider, and she pointed out that there aren’t any better options. On the Starlink website, entering their address shows they are in an area labeled as sold out.

Although repair appointments came and went without a fix, Kurt said she received emails from CenturyLink falsely claiming that service had been restored. Kurt said she spoke with technicians doing work nearby and asked if CenturyLink is trying to force people to drop the service because it doesn’t want to serve the area anymore.

Kurt said a technician replied that there are some areas CenturyLink doesn’t want to serve anymore but that her address isn’t on that list. A technician explained that they have too much work, she said.

CenturyLink has touted its investments in modern fiber networks but hasn’t upgraded the old copper lines in Kurt’s area and many others.

“This is DSL. No fiber here!” Kurt told us. “Sometimes when things are congested, you can make a sandwich while things download. I have been told that is because this area is like a glass of water. At first, there were only a few of us drinking out of the glass. Now, CenturyLink has many more customers drinking out of that same glass, and so things are slower/congested at various times of the day.”

Kurt said the service tends to work better in mid-morning, early afternoon, after 9 pm on weeknights, and on weekends. “Sometimes pages take a bit of time to load. That is especially frustrating while doing school work with my grandson and granddaughter,” she said.

CenturyLink Internet even slower than expected

After the nearly three-month outage ended, Kurt told us on January 27 that “many times, we will get Internet back for two or three days, only to lose it again.” This seemed to be what happened on Sunday, February 2, when Kurt told us her Internet stopped working again and that she couldn’t reach a human at CenturyLink. She restarted the router but could not open webpages.

We followed up with CenturyLink’s public relations department again, but this time, the company said its network was performing as expected. “We ran a check and called Karen regarding her service,” CenturyLink told us on February 3. “Everything looks good on our end, with no problems reported since the 24th. She mentioned that she could access some sites, but the speed seemed really slow. We reminded her that she has a 1.5Mbps service. Karen acknowledged this but felt it was slower than expected.”

Kurt told us that her Internet is currently slower than it was before the outage. “Before October, at least the webpages loaded,” she said. Now, “the pages either do not load, continue to attempt to load, or finally time out.”

While Kurt is suffering from a lack of broadband competition, municipalities sometimes build public broadband networks when private companies fail to adequately serve their residents. ISPs such as CenturyLink have lobbied against these efforts to expand broadband access.

In May 2024, we wrote about how public broadband advocates say they’ve seen a big increase in opposition from “dark money” groups that don’t have to reveal their donors. At the time, CenturyLink did not answer questions about specific donations but defended its opposition to government-operated networks.

“We know it will take everyone working together to close the digital divide,” CenturyLink told us then. “That’s why we partner with municipalities on their digital inclusion efforts by providing middle-mile infrastructure that supports last-mile networks. We have and will continue to raise legitimate concerns when government-owned networks create an anti-competitive environment. There needs to be a level playing field when it comes to permitting, right-of-way fees, and cross subsidization of costs.”

Stuck with CenturyLink

Kurt said that CenturyLink has set a “low bar” for its service, and it isn’t even meeting that low standard. “I do not use the Internet a lot. I do not use the Internet for gaming or streaming things. The Internet here would never be able to do that. But I do expect the pages to load properly and fully,” she said.

Kurt said she and her husband live in a house they built in 2007 and originally were led to believe that Verizon service would be available. “Prior to purchasing the property, we did our due diligence and sought out all utility providers… Verizon insisted it was their territory on at least two occasions,” she said.

But when it was time to install phone and Internet lines, it turned out Verizon didn’t serve the location, she said. This is another problem we’ve written about multiple times—ISPs incorrectly claiming to offer service in an area, only to admit they don’t after a resident moves in. (Verizon sold its Oregon wireline operations to Frontier in 2010.)

“We were stuck with CenturyLink,” and “CenturyLink did not offer Internet when we first built this home,” Kurt said. They subscribed to satellite Internet offered by WildBlue, which was acquired by ViaSat in 2009. They used satellite for several years until they could get CenturyLink’s DSL Internet.

Now they’re hoping to replace CenturyLink with Starlink, which uses low-Earth orbit satellites that offer faster service than older satellite services. They’re on the waiting list for Starlink and are interested in Amazon’s Kuiper satellite service, which isn’t available yet.

“We are hoping one of these two vendors will open up a spot for us and we can move our Internet over to satellite,” Kurt said. “We have also heard that Starlink and Amazon are going to be starting up phone service as well as Internet. That would truly be a gift to us. If we could move all of our services over to something reliable, our life would be made so much easier.”

Not enough technicians for copper network

John, the Colorado resident who had a three-week CenturyLink outage, said his default DSL speed is 10Mbps downstream and 2Mbps upstream. He doubled that by getting a second dedicated line to create a bonded connection, he said.

When John set up repair appointments during the outage, the “dates came and went without the typical ‘your tech’s on their way’ email, without anyone showing up,” he said. John said he repeatedly called CenturyLink and was told there was a bad cable that was being fixed.

“Every time I called, I’d get somebody who said that it was a bad cable and it was being fixed. Every single time, they’d say it would be fixed by 11 pm the following day,” he said. “It wasn’t, so I’d call again. I asked to talk with a supervisor, but that was always denied. Every time, they said they’d expedite the request. The people I talked with were all very nice and very apologetic about our outage, but they clearly stayed in their box.”

John still had the contact information for the CenturyLink technician who set up his bonded connection and messaged him around the same time he contacted Ars. When a CenturyLink employee finally showed up to fix the problem, he “found that our DSL was out because our modem was bad, and the phone was out because there was a bad dial-tone card in the closest pedestal. It took this guy less than an hour to get us back working—and it wasn’t a broken cable,” John said.

John praised CenturyLink’s local repair team but said his requests for repairs apparently weren’t routed to the right people. A CenturyLink manager told John that the local crew never got the repair ticket from the phone-based customer service team, he said.

The technician who fixed the service offered some insight into the local problems, John told us. “He said that in the mountains of western Boulder County, there are a total of five techs who know how to work with copper wire,” John told us. “All the other employees only work with fiber. CenturyLink is losing the people familiar with copper and not replacing them, even though copper is what the west half of the county depends on.”

Lumen says it has 1.08 million fiber broadband subscribers and 1.47 million “other broadband subscribers,” defined as “customers that primarily subscribe to lower speed copper-based broadband services marketed under the CenturyLink brand.”

John doesn’t know whether his copper line will ever be upgraded to fiber. His house is 1.25 miles from the nearest fiber box. “I wonder if they’ll eventually replace lines like the one to our house or if they’ll drop us as customers when the copper line eventually degrades to the point it’s not usable,” he said.

Photo of Jon Brodkin

Jon is a Senior IT Reporter for Ars Technica. He covers the telecom industry, Federal Communications Commission rulemakings, broadband consumer affairs, court cases, and government regulation of the tech industry.

CenturyLink nightmares: Users keep asking Ars for help with multi-month outages Read More »

doge-can’t-use-student-loan-data-to-dismantle-the-education-dept.,-lawsuit-says

DOGE can’t use student loan data to dismantle the Education Dept., lawsuit says

Microsoft declined to comment, but allegedly the DOGE employees are “using AI software accessed through Microsoft’s cloud computing service Azure to pore over every dollar of money the department disburses, from contracts to grants to work trip expenses,” one source told the Post.

The lawsuit noted that several DOE employees have tried to block DOGE’s access by raising red flags up the command chain, but DOE leadership directly instructed lower-level employees to grant DOGE access, the same source alleged.

A big concern is that DOGE funneling education data into AI systems will cause sensitive data to be stored in a way that makes it more vulnerable to cyberattacks or data breaches. Another issue could be the AI system being error-prone or potentially hallucinating data that is driving decisions on major DOE cuts.

On Thursday, a DOE deputy assistant secretary for communications, Madi Biedermann, issued a statement insisting that DOGE employees are federal employees who have undergone background checks to be granted requisite security clearances.

“There is nothing inappropriate or nefarious going on,” Biedermann said.

Trump has similarly waved away concerns over DOGE’s work at DOE and other departments that officials worry are experiencing a “blitz” of seemingly unlawful power grabs, the Post reported. On Monday, Trump told reporters that “if there’s a conflict” with DOGE accessing Americans’ data, “then we won’t let him get near it.” But seemingly until Trump agrees there’s a conflict, Musk’s work with DOGE must go on, Trump said.

“We’re trying to shrink government, and he can probably shrink it as well as anybody else, if not better,” Trump suggested.

While thousands of Americans are suing, confused over whether they need to urgently protect their private financial data, one DOE staffer told the Post that DOGE “is working with almost unbelievable speed.” The staffer ominously suggested that it may already be too late to protect Americans from invasive probes or defend departments against cuts.

“They have a playbook, which is to get access to the data,” the staffer told the Post. “And once they’re in, it’s already over.”

DOGE can’t use student loan data to dismantle the Education Dept., lawsuit says Read More »

uk-demands-apple-break-encryption-to-allow-gov’t-spying-worldwide,-reports-say

UK demands Apple break encryption to allow gov’t spying worldwide, reports say

The United Kingdom issued a secret order requiring Apple to create a backdoor for government security officials to access encrypted data, The Washington Post reported today, citing people familiar with the matter.

UK security officials “demanded that Apple create a backdoor allowing them to retrieve all the content any Apple user worldwide has uploaded to the cloud,” the report said. “The British government’s undisclosed order, issued last month, requires blanket capability to view fully encrypted material, not merely assistance in cracking a specific account, and has no known precedent in major democracies.”

Apple and many privacy advocates have repeatedly criticized government demands for backdoors to encrypted systems, saying they would harm security and privacy for all users. Backdoors developed for government use would inevitably be exploited by criminal hackers and other governments, security experts have said.

The UK is reportedly seeking access to data secured by end-to-end encryption with Apple’s Advanced Data Protection, which prevents even Apple from seeing user data. Advanced Data Protection is an optional setting that users can enable for iCloud backups, photos, notes, and other data.

“Rather than break the security promises it made to its users everywhere, Apple is likely to stop offering encrypted storage in the UK,” The Washington Post paraphrased its sources as saying. “Yet that concession would not fulfill the UK demand for backdoor access to the service in other countries, including the United States.”

Apple opposes UK snooping powers

The Technical Capability Notice was reportedly issued by the UK Home Office under the Investigatory Powers Act (IPA). The 2016 law is nicknamed the Snoopers’ Charter and forbids unauthorized disclosure of the existence or contents of a warrant issued under the act.

“Apple can appeal the UK capability notice to a secret technical panel, which would consider arguments about the expense of the requirement, and to a judge who would weigh whether the request was in proportion to the government’s needs. But the law does not permit Apple to delay complying during an appeal,” the Post wrote.

UK demands Apple break encryption to allow gov’t spying worldwide, reports say Read More »

”torrenting-from-a-corporate-laptop-doesn’t-feel-right”:-meta-emails-unsealed

”Torrenting from a corporate laptop doesn’t feel right”: Meta emails unsealed

Emails discussing torrenting prove that Meta knew it was “illegal,” authors alleged. And Bashlykov’s warnings seemingly landed on deaf ears, with authors alleging that evidence showed Meta chose to instead hide its torrenting as best it could while downloading and seeding terabytes of data from multiple shadow libraries as recently as April 2024.

Meta allegedly concealed seeding

Supposedly, Meta tried to conceal the seeding by not using Facebook servers while downloading the dataset to “avoid” the “risk” of anyone “tracing back the seeder/downloader” from Facebook servers, an internal message from Meta researcher Frank Zhang said, while describing the work as in “stealth mode.” Meta also allegedly modified settings “so that the smallest amount of seeding possible could occur,” a Meta executive in charge of project management, Michael Clark, said in a deposition.

Now that new information has come to light, authors claim that Meta staff involved in the decision to torrent LibGen must be deposed again, because allegedly the new facts “contradict prior deposition testimony.”

Mark Zuckerberg, for example, claimed to have no involvement in decisions to use LibGen to train AI models. But unredacted messages show the “decision to use LibGen occurred” after “a prior escalation to MZ,” authors alleged.

Meta did not immediately respond to Ars’ request for comment and has maintained throughout the litigation that AI training on LibGen was “fair use.”

However, Meta has previously addressed its torrenting in a motion to dismiss filed last month, telling the court that “plaintiffs do not plead a single instance in which any part of any book was, in fact, downloaded by a third party from Meta via torrent, much less that Plaintiffs’ books were somehow distributed by Meta.”

While Meta may be confident in its legal strategy despite the new torrenting wrinkle, the social media company has seemingly complicated its case by allowing authors to expand the distribution theory that’s key to winning a direct copyright infringement claim beyond just claiming that Meta’s AI outputs unlawfully distributed their works.

As limited discovery on Meta’s seeding now proceeds, Meta is not fighting the seeding aspect of the direct copyright infringement claim at this time, telling the court that it plans to “set… the record straight and debunk… this meritless allegation on summary judgment.”

”Torrenting from a corporate laptop doesn’t feel right”: Meta emails unsealed Read More »

deepseek-is-“tiktok-on-steroids,”-senator-warns-amid-push-for-government-wide-ban

DeepSeek is “TikTok on steroids,” senator warns amid push for government-wide ban

But while the national security concerns require a solution, Curtis said his priority is maintaining “a really productive relationship with China.” He pushed Lutnick to address how he plans to hold DeepSeek—and the CCP in general—accountable for national security concerns amid ongoing tensions with China.

Lutnick suggested that if he is confirmed (which appears likely), he will pursue a policy of “reciprocity,” where China can “expect to be treated by” the US exactly how China treats the US. Currently, China is treating the US “horribly,” Lutnick said, and his “first step” as Commerce Secretary will be to “repeat endlessly” that more “reciprocity” is expected from China.

But while Lutnick answered Curtis’ questions about DeepSeek somewhat head-on, he did not have time to respond to Curtis’ inquiry about Lutnick’s intentions for the US AI Safety Institute (AISI)—which Lutnick’s department would oversee and which could be essential to the US staying ahead of China in AI development.

Viewing AISI as key to US global leadership in AI, Curtis offered “tools” to help Lutnick give the AISI “new legs” or a “new life” to ensure that the US remains responsibly ahead of China in the AI race. But Curtis ran out of time to press Lutnick for a response.

It remains unclear how AISI’s work might change under Trump, who revoked Joe Biden’s AI safety rules establishing the AISI.

What is clear is that lawmakers are being pressed to preserve and even evolve the AISI.

Yesterday, the chief economist for a nonprofit called the Foundation for the American Innovation, Samuel Hammond, provided written testimony to the US House Science, Space, and Technology Committee, recommending that AISI be “retooled to perform voluntary audits of AI models—both open and closed—to certify their security and reliability” and to keep America at the forefront of AI development.

“With so little separating China and America’s frontier AI capabilities on a technical level, America’s lead in AI is only as strong as our lead in computing infrastructure,” Hammond said. And “as the founding member of a consortium of 280 similar AI institutes internationally, the AISI seal of approval would thus support the export and diffusion of American AI models worldwide.”

DeepSeek is “TikTok on steroids,” senator warns amid push for government-wide ban Read More »

doj-agrees-to-temporarily-block-doge-from-treasury-records

DOJ agrees to temporarily block DOGE from Treasury records

Elez reports to Tom Krause, another Treasury Department special government employee, but Krause doesn’t have direct access to the payment system, Humphreys told the judge. Krause is the CEO of Cloud Software Group and is also viewed as a Musk ally.

But when the judge pressed Humphreys on Musk’s alleged access, the DOJ lawyer only said that as far as the defense team was aware, Musk did not have access.

Further, Humphreys explained that DOGE—which functions as part of the executive office—does not have access, to the DOJ’s knowledge. As he explained it, DOGE sets the high-level priorities that these special government employees carry out, seemingly trusting the employees to identify waste and protect taxpayer dollars without ever providing any detailed reporting on the records that supposedly are evidence of mismanagement.

To Kollar-Kotelly, the facts on the record seem to suggest that no one outside the Treasury is currently accessing sensitive data. But when she pressed Humphreys on whether DOGE had future plans to access the data, Humphreys declined to comment, calling it irrelevant to the complaint.

Humphreys suggested that the government’s defense in this case would focus on the complaint that outsiders are currently accessing Treasury data, seemingly dismissing any need to discuss DOGE’s future plans. But the judge pushed back, telling Humphreys she was not trying to “nail” him “to the wall,” but there’s too little information on the relationship between DOGE and the Treasury Department as it stands. How these entities work together makes a difference, the judge suggested, in terms of safeguarding sensitive Treasury data.

According to Kollar-Kotelly, granting a temporary restraining order in part would allow DOGE to “preserve the status quo” of its current work in the Treasury Department while ensuring no new outsiders get access to Americans’ sensitive information. Such an order would give both sides time to better understand the current government workflows to best argue their cases, the judge suggested.

If the order is approved, it would remain in effect until the judge rules on plantiffs’ request for a preliminary injunction. At the hearing today, Kollar-Kotelly suggested that matter would likely be settled at a hearing on February 24.

DOJ agrees to temporarily block DOGE from Treasury records Read More »

robocallers-posing-as-fcc-staff-blocked-after-robocalling-real-fcc-staff

Robocallers posing as FCC staff blocked after robocalling real FCC staff


A not-very-successful robocall scheme

You can ignore robocalls from FCC “Fraud Prevention Team,” which doesn’t exist.

Credit: Getty Images | PhonlamaiPhoto

Robocallers posing as employees of the Federal Communications Commission made the mistake of trying to scam real employees of the FCC, the FCC announced yesterday. “On the night of February 6, 2024, and continuing into the morning of February 7, 2024, over a dozen FCC staff and some of their family members reported receiving calls on their personal and work telephone numbers,” the FCC said.

The calls used an artificial voice that said, “Hello [first name of recipient] you are receiving an automated call from the Federal Communications Commission notifying you the Fraud Prevention Team would like to speak with you. If you are available to speak now please press one. If you prefer to schedule a call back please press two.”

You may not be surprised to learn that the FCC does not have any “Fraud Prevention Team” like the one mentioned in the robocalls, and especially not one that demands Google gift cards in lieu of jail time.

“The FCC’s Enforcement Bureau believes the purpose of the calls was to threaten, intimidate, and defraud,” the agency said. “One recipient of an imposter call reported that they were ultimately connected to someone who ‘demand[ed] that [they] pay the FCC $1,000 in Google gift cards to avoid jail time for [their] crimes against the state.'”

The FCC said it does not “publish or otherwise share staff personal phone numbers” and that it “remains unclear how these individuals were targeted.” Obviously, robocallers posing as FCC employees probably wouldn’t intentionally place scam calls to real FCC employees. But FCC employees are just as likely to get robocalls as anyone else. This set of schemers apparently only made about 1,800 calls before their calling accounts were terminated.

The FCC described the scheme yesterday when it announced a proposed fine of $4,492,500 against Telnyx, the voice service provider accused of carrying the robocalls. The FCC alleges that Telnyx violated “Know Your Customer (KYC)” rules by providing access to calling services without verifying the customers’ identities. When contacted by Ars today, Telnyx denied the FCC’s allegations and said it will contest the proposed fine.

The “MarioCop” accounts

The robocalling scheme lasted two days. On February 6, 2024, Telnyx accepted two new customers calling themselves Christian Mitchell and Henry Walker, who provided street addresses in Toronto and email addresses with the domain name “mariocop123.com.” The robocallers apparently used fake identities and paid for Telnyx service in Bitcoin.

The Telnyx customers who placed the robocalls are referred to as “MarioCop accounts” in the FCC’s Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture (NAL) issued against Telnyx. Telnyx flagged one of the accounts in the course of its “routine examination of new users” and terminated the account on February 7 after determining the calls violated its terms and conditions and acceptable use policy. Telnyx also reported the account to the FCC.

Telnyx is based in Chicago. It offers a service that lets callers “build a custom AI voice bot” and a voice API that “makes it simple to make, receive and control voice calls with code.” Telnyx is also a VoIP provider that says it “holds carrier status in 30+ countries around the world” and offers “local calling in over 80 countries and PSTN [Public Switched Telephone Network] replacement in 45+ markets.”

The FCC subpoenaed Telnyx for information about the calls, and the resulting records showed that one MarioCop account placed 1,029 calls between February 6 and February 7. The other account placed 768 calls on February 6.

The FCC also subpoenaed Telnyx for information that might identify the callers and “determined that the very limited identifying information Telnyx collected from its customers was false.” They used physical addresses in Canada, including one that turned out to be a Sheraton hotel, and IP addresses from Scotland and England.

“The @mariocop123.com domain is not associated with any known business; a website using the same domain was created in February 2024 and remains undeveloped,” the FCC said. The FCC notes that both MarioCop accounts may have been operated by the same person.

FCC: Telcos must know their customers

Telnyx “accepted the names and physical addresses at face value, without any further requests for corroboration or independent verification,” the FCC forfeiture order said. Neither applicant provided a telephone number.

The FCC alleged that Telnyx didn’t do enough “to discern whether the limited amount of identifying information its customer provided was legitimate and it overlooked obvious discrepancies in the information it collected… Becoming Telynyx’s customer and gaining access to outbound calling services that allowed origination of hundreds of calls (more than 1,000 calls from the First MarioCop Account) was as simple as making up a fake name and address and acquiring a non-free email address.”

The FCC notice continued:

Our rules require Telnyx to know its customers. Yet it did not know who the MarioCop Account holders were. We therefore conclude that Telnyx apparently violated section 64.1200(n)(4) of our rules by allowing the First MarioCop Account and the Second MarioCop Account access to outbound calling services without actually knowing the true identities of the account holders. By extension, we believe we could likely find that Telnyx apparently violated our rules with regards to every customer it onboarded using the same process as it did for the MarioCop Accounts. We decline to do so here absent further investigation.

Telnyx will have an opportunity to respond to the allegations and argue that it shouldn’t be fined. In some cases, the FCC and the telecom reach a settlement for a lower amount.

Telnyx CEO David Casem told Ars today that “Telnyx is surprised by the FCC’s mistaken decision to issue a Notice of Apparent Liability stating an intent to impose monetary penalties. The Notice of Apparent Liability is factually mistaken, and Telnyx denies its allegations. Telnyx has done everything and more than the FCC has required for Know-Your-Customer (‘KYC’) and customer due diligence procedures.”

We also sent a message to the email addresses used by the MarioCop accounts and will update this article in the unlikely event that we receive a response.

Telnyx defends response, citing quick shutdown

Casem said the FCC hasn’t previously demanded “perfection” in stopping illegal traffic. “Since bad actors continuously find ways to avoid detection, the FCC has historically expected providers to take reasonable steps to detect and block them,” he told Ars. “Yet the FCC now seeks to impose substantial monetary penalties on Telnyx for limited unlawful calling activity that Telnyx not only did not originate but swiftly blocked within a matter of hours.”

Casem said that “there has been no allegation of subsequent recurring activity” and urged the FCC to “reconsider what can only be viewed as an improper effort to impose an unprecedented zero-tolerance requirement on providers through enforcement action, in the absence of any defined rules informing providers what is expected of them.”

FCC Chairman Brendan Carr said in yesterday’s announcement that he is pleased with the “bipartisan vote in favor of this nearly $4.5 million proposed fine” and that it “continues the FCC’s longstanding work to stop bad actors.”

Anna Gomez, a Democratic member of the FCC, said that Carr’s office accepted her request for a change designed to encourage telecoms to report potential violations to the FCC. “It is important that service providers work quickly and closely with the FCC to identify and stop illegal traffic before it makes its way to consumers. I value self-reporting from industry actors on potential violations of our rules, and I am grateful the Office of Chairman Carr accepted our edits to this NAL to encourage self-reporting,” Gomez said.

There was a dissenting vote from Republican Commissioner Nathan Simington, but not because of the facts specific to this case. Because of a recent Supreme Court ruling limiting the power of federal agencies, Simington has vowed to vote against any fine imposed by the commission until its legal powers are clear.

“While the conduct described in this NAL is particularly egregious and certainly worth enforcement action, I continue to believe that the Supreme Court’s decision in Jarkesy prevents me from voting, at this time, to approve this or any item purporting to impose a fine,” Simington said.

Photo of Jon Brodkin

Jon is a Senior IT Reporter for Ars Technica. He covers the telecom industry, Federal Communications Commission rulemakings, broadband consumer affairs, court cases, and government regulation of the tech industry.

Robocallers posing as FCC staff blocked after robocalling real FCC staff Read More »