http://techdirt.com/articles/201701 04/10021436408/ad-indust

>>58595679
MAGAts will defend this

>>58595679
>>58595827
>>>/pol/
Friendly reminder that politics != technology.

>>58595827
cuck

>>58595679
lol

File: lolpng.png (149KB, 1120x977px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 1120x977px

>mfw not amerifat

>>58595679
Give me a tl;dr how this affects me.

>>58595679
Good. Trump can do no wrong and if he says something is good, I'll agree with it.

>>58595851
>Huahuahue, look ma, I used that word again!

Ya done guud, Cleetus. Dat darn damned puter sho nuf dun makin ya mo n mo smahter!

>>58596028
Moron.

>>58595679
>the discovery that Verizon and its ad partners were covertly modifying user packets to track users around the internet.
Isn't this problem solved by TLS? (Or a VPN or any other form of encrypted connection)

>>58595679
Let's be honest here. The FCC is shit anyways. They're tardos who regulate swear words on the radio. Bunch of cucks if you ask me.

>>58596262
That stuff is retarded but:
>enforcing net neutrality
>broadband privacy rules
>regulating modification of packets
are all things that need to be looked at. Unfortunately the free market ideal falls apart when dealing with this sort of complex stuff.

>>58596327
>Unfortunately the free market ideal falls apart when dealing with this sort of complex stuff.
So does regulation, though. You can pass a thousand-page law that details the 100 things you aren't allowed to do, and before the day is out someone will have invented things 101 through 110.

>>58596024
your ISP can make you pay extra to shitpost on /g/

Trump just killed the TPP right the fuck now. Google it if you don't believe it.

>>58596421
GOODBYE ANIME

>>58596434
>6" 720p screen
>SD800
you'd be better off with a Nexus 5 for $180, even if the battery is underwhelming. Personally I'd go for the OnePlus X unless i needed exotic lte bands. What carrier are you on?

>>58596434
More like, anime is finally saved. with the TPP, all fansubbing disappears and you're stuck with unfunimation's contrast turned up to 11 with extra brightening so you literally can't see shit plus garbage audio, all at the high definition of 480p. And did I mention the garbage subs, or worse, dubs yet?

>>58596464
>sub faggot getting triggered again
kys

>>58596464
before they took out the anti-Net Neutrality rider from the omnibus bill due to worrying phone calls, they literally slipped in CISA, along with other two non-gov't abusive cybersecurity bills, in the government spending bill.

yes, this is the same fucking bill we took down few years ago (CISPA, but frankensteined, now completely anti-4th amendment)

we got under a day until CISA gets voted again and until Obama signs the fucking bill into law.

>>58596464
>anime is finally saved
Anime is kept afloat by gaijin. Left in the hands of the Japanese it's going to just be shonen.
>>58596448
...

>>58596487
>we got under a day until CISA gets voted again and until Obama signs the fucking bill into law

what

>>58596534
Ok, that makes sense, but to clarify; the end user paying extra to their ISP for higher bandwidth from specific IP ranges or services is what the net neutrality argument is about, not this shilling about peering agreements between ISPs and a government controlled internet?

I wonder if adblockers will be banned?

>>58596620
Of course.
MIGA

>>58596434
This is why we tell /a/ to keep the shit they download.

>>58596620

without a doubt

>>58596620
Prepare your anus for jamal when adblocking becomes a federal crime.

>>58596651
What anti-democratic actions is Google guilty of?

* Provide numerous services, including search, email, and video hosting for no monetary cost to billions of people.
* Supported Net Neutrality
* Trying to bring actual first world internet speeds to the US
* Bringing internet access to remote third world locations with their balloon thing
* Told China to fuck off instead of censoring their search results.

Not saying they're perfect, but as far as "muh evil corporashuns" go, you could do far worse.

>>58596665
Google did nothing wrong. They're the saviors we don't deserve.

>>58596675
Net neutrality is going out the window here in the us.

expect higher bills in your internet and new tiered paid structure.

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-broadband-fees-20150409-story.html#page=1

"FCC's net neutrality rules open door to new fee on Internet service"

>>58596691
Can't you just make your own ISP?

>>58596665
>>What anti-democratic actions is Google guilty of?
building a comprehensive database of everything people do online, tied to their real identities.

You can't build a police state's wet dream and then claim you're not guilty of anti-democratic actions. There's no safe way for Google's massive troves of information on people to exist. No matter what they do or don't do with it, since governments can either compel them to grant access with NSLs and the like, or break in. It's bad civic hygiene to create ubiquitous tracking capabilities.

>>58596729
Alright /g/ this has got to stop. Fellow Canadian here getting the shittiest internet available having to resort to a 110$ per month cell phone plan capped at 5GB for all my internet needs.

What can we do collectively to show these fuckers that we hate having data caps?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality_in_Canada
>A spokeswoman for Bell Canada, Jacqueline Michelis said "Our position on network diversity/neutrality is that it should be determined by market forces, not regulation"[28] in an e-mail to The Canadian Press.

The ones against net neutrality say that market forces should determine the outcome of how internet traffic is managed and treated. They then make deals with each other so they all have similar caps and plan costs and as a result there is no real competition while they get to sit on mountains of profit every quarter for all the data they didn't have to give to customers due to caps(if they buy wholesale network data at flat rates).

Everyone accepts these caps as being the norm, how can we change our mentality and cease getting swindled by the megacorps?

>>58596665
lolwut
No one is forcing Google not to provide ads. I shouldn't be forced to see them.

>>58596762
AMD:
never supported SOPA
never lobbied against net neutrality
contributes to GCC, has never contributed any performance optimizations that would cripple code on other X86 chips
never bribed OEMs to create what is effectively a monopoly
never paid off reviewers to publish phony benches to make their CPUs look better than they really were
never got censured by the US government as well as the EU for unethical business practices
never worked hand in hand with the MPAA to create new forms of DRM
created Mantle to push both OpenGL and D3D forward in performance and low level optimization
created the HSA foundation to push forward compute languages and codify a system for programmability across all logic in a system with data coherency at its core
created AMD64, the 64bit extension to X86 used by every modern X86 processor
has created countless other standards and freely contributed them to the computing world


They're the only CPU vendor worthy of my business, despite being crippled by a decade of poor management.

>>58596770
Is this botpasta?

>>58596789
In Europe net neutrality was passed to protect the free market, so small businesses wouldnt be pushed away by big businesses with lucrative deals and preferential treatment.

That is in the interest of the consumer.

>>58596761
Well when Comcast capped me at 1TB I filed a complaint with the FCC, about how I thought they were doing that to push us into subscribing to cable, since the household uses netflix, and how I would switch providers to avoid this, but can't because there is no other provider. Some cocksucker at Comcast had to write a response to my concerns and file it with them. I imagine only large amounts of persistent complaints, to both government and the public at large (think the SOPA fiasco) will generate movement on this.

t. burger

>>58596810
Okay, Elliott. So next time when Net Neutrality gets demolished I hope you enjoy paying an extra 50 dollars for the YouTube internet package.

>>58596024
>not staying informed on the issues

you don't deserve a synopsis you dumb turd

Will the ISPs ever get broken up again and be auited?

>>58596875
>>58596875>webinar
>gooey (GUI)
>wirelessly
>podcast
>ebooks
>scalable
>flexible
>github
>node
>hacker
>app store
>net neutrality
>botnet
>smartphone

There's nothing wrong with any of these words, if they're used in the correct context.

Why couldn't an ISP target scumbags for extortion instead of the consumer?

>Hey, Google, we'll block all connections to google-analytics.com and all doubleclick servers unless you pay us a billion dollars

>>58596835
Why would ISPs only charge an extra $50 for access to YouTube when they could just add an extra $50 for everyone?

>>58596895
With no Net Neutrality, your Internet service provider gets to decide which sites or apps, Netflix for example, get "premium" service and also which ones get slowed down. If they want to weasel money out of Netflix/you, all they have to do is throttle their service.

With Net Neutrality, your ISP provides your internet with no discrimination between apps, sites, and other internet services. No amount of money could slow down or speed up undesired or preferred systems respectively.

And, again, you wouldn't choose which services are preffered or undesirable; your ISP would. I can guarantee they would sell that privilege to the highest bidder and make everything cost an arm and a leg because they reap a huge markup for the exact same or slightly better service from before.

>>58596904
So I just sent this email to Intel.

>It has recently come to my attention that Intel signed a letter to Congress and the FCC in the United States opposing freedom of the internet and net neutrality, as such I feel I can no longer in good conscience support a company that openly and unashamedly seeks to undermine consumer rights and the free flow of information based on it's own corporate interests.
>Despite living in the European Union where net neutrality is enshrined in law, hence Intel's actions not affecting me personally, Intel's actions show a blatant contempt for the freedoms that allow their customers to access and exchange information free from censorship or bias.
>Furthermore, Intel's co-signing of this letter demonstrates that they are complicit in the campaign of misinformation designed to mislead consumers about the facts of Title 2 currently being waged by the likes of Qualcomm and Cisco.

>I have returned the ASUS X99 board, the i7 5960X and the Intel 510 SSD I bought in October, and intend to replace them with competing brands such as AMD and Samsung.
Frankly the extra 20fps in Inquisition is not worth the hit to my conscience.

>I hope that Intel will reevaluate their stance on net neutrality and disallow corporate corruption and cronyism to come between them and their customers.

So my question is, what can I replace these parts with? Is there any AMD CPU truly equivalent to the 5960X? Can I keep my 970 or should I buy an R9 to go with the AMD CPU? Also can /g/ please stroke my ego and reassure me that I didn't just fuck up big time.

>>58596906
>which sites or apps, Netflix for example, get "premium" service and also which ones get slowed down
The connection of a site depends on a variety of factors, including location, time, the Tier 1 ISP middleman, among many others. Going HURR DURR EVERY PACKET SHOULD BE TREATED THE SAME does not make sense from a technical level. As expected from a redditor.

>>58596906
Ad companies have a lot more money than the consumer. And it'd avoid bad publicity around rate hikes for the ISP.

# M I G A
M
I
G
A

>>58596895
Why would it be in a companies interest to start fights with powerful companies or organs of the state?

It's very simple (and legal) to exploit "consumers".

>>58595679
>>58595679

YOU DON'T NEED THE FCC

you need the FTC, the federal trade commission. they work on a much more important scale, anti trust and consumer protection. if people can argue that net neutrality is in the consumer's best interest and is important for widespread business (big and small) then they will look into it.

don't listen to reddit, plead the case to the FTC

>>58596928
>>what can I replace these parts with?
>not knowing your needs before mailing a "protest" email to Zionists, Inc.

>>Is there any AMD CPU truly equivalent to the 5960X?

No.

>>Intel 510 SSD
[le]terally any M.2 from Korean Cults, Inc.

>>Can I keep my 970 or should I buy an R9 to go with the AMD CPU?
>NVidia = Intel

Do you have a serious mental disability? Do I need to call your carer? What's her number?

nice b8 post tho

>>58596951
banks do it all the time and they do pretty well out of it

>>58596939
>"Net Neutrality" is Obamacare for the Internet
This is what Americans actually believe.

>>58595850
>>>/retard/
Lrn2reed

>>58595679

This kind of shit is the reason that Tom Wheeler, the one-in-a-million-worked-in-the-industry-now-serves-the-public-good regulator, was so needed.

Every single Trump appointment is pretty much the definition of "we can profit more if government doesn't work, so we're going to make it not work as best as we can!". That goes for Wheeler's replacement, Ajit Pai, who doesn't think a regulatory agency should be regulating.

That said, the ONLY way to fight against this , as anon above, said, is frequent direct action. Call your reps, demonstrate, get things the fuck out there. The best way to fight back and the only viable future for broadband is PUBLIC MUNICIPAL FIBER INFRASTRUCTURE. Get your towns and cities to roll out and maintain the last mile themselves, public own and run. Then when the assholes at Comcast, ATT, Verizon etc...come crying about exclusivity agreements, you've got a town of people who can tell even Republican douchebags "well, our LOCAL SMALL GOVERNMENT DECIDED THINGS. Are you going to let it stand, or let a big company overturn it? " So either they tell the telecoms to STFU, or they reveal themselves to be in the pocket of the telecom lobby.

>>58596988
Way to miss the issue, fuckwad. Obstructing access to data for more money isn't competitive business, it's being a fucking kike who wants to completely get rid of competition and fuck everyone over.

>>58596421
Trump killed the TPP a month ago and he did it because it didn't did jack shit to stop China, it was a shitty treaty all around that could easily be circumvented to provide tariff free commerce to chink businessmen while the rest of the Pacific was regulated to American standards
Trump doesn't care about freedom, he's a corporate lapdog who's cucked by alphabet soup agencies, that's why he's keeping the Patriot Act and the antifreedom bullshit Obama pulled during his 8 years of destroying America

>>58597071
>Nyaa is kill (again)
>Sadpanda is kill
>Net neutrality is kill
>Quinnspiracy scandal
>Fappening scandal
>Now this
This has been a terrible year for the internet.

>>58596998

What the fuck are you on about? I don't disagree with the second half of your statement. In the current climate, simply asking ISPs to play nice isn't going to do it. We've been asking them to play nice for years, giving them tons of money in federal and state subsidy and yet allowing them to own the fucking lines we paid them to build, which lets them feel like they get to obstruct access to data, generally object to net neutrality. This is wrong for many reasons, but its a lot harder to justify and for that matter, implement, if we stop letting these assholes own and control the infrastructure. If the infrastructure is public owned and maintained, then you can have any number of ISPs lease access to it with no barrier to entry. These ISPs will not fuck arount with net neutrality because they know ther's notthing to keep people putting up with their shit anymore because they can no longer say "We're the only ones who own the lines to your house and have the only high speed access".

>>58597093
This has nothing to do with net neutrality. This is on par with Kindle 3Gs service that limits your unlimited usage to Amazon.com and Wikipedia.

This is just a provider abusing their power/restraining their network. You are free to not use them, in fact, you shouldn't

Net Neutrality refers to the idea that ALL THINGS BEING EQUAL (I.e., both users are on the same network, same provider, same machines) all traffic should be considered equal. The service you chose to use is a factor not accounted for in the definition of net neutrality. As long as you are being treated same as all other customers in the same pricing tier, they are neutral.

What you should really be pissed about is the coalition of these service providers.

>>58597087
>>>Nyaa is kill (again)
say what? Works on My Machine(tm)

>>58596928
>So my question is, what can I replace these parts with? Is there any AMD CPU truly equivalent to the 5960X? Can I keep my 970 or should I buy an R9 to go with the AMD CPU?
Keep the 970, wait for Ryzen
Ryzen is literally faster than anything Intel has for gaems

File: gaming 2017.jpg (422KB, 1400x1050px) Image search: [Google]

422KB, 1400x1050px

>its another episode of fake news
Source of Trump or the current white house on the subject or GTFO.

>>58596988
Tom Wheeler is literally a corporate lapdog, there's a reason he pushed to keep the NN bill secret
>>58597087
Nyaa always dies from time to time, it works on my machine right now
Sadpanda works on my machine as well
All the other things in your list date from 2014

>>58596118
The irony

>>58597147
I was born in '86. I used AOL 3.0 on a 386 running windows 95, and remember downloading the Harriet the Spy game, which was 2MB in size, and took well over 2 hours to download on a 2400 baud modem. The phone number we were using was not one in our area, so the download ended up costing a lot more than it was worth - and it was corrupted in the end.

I used netscape from 1997 till about 2002, then switched to Mozilla and used it until Phoenix/Firebird/Firefox came around.

The internet was a mess of un-organized shit up until about 1999 or so. At least AOL tried to make their walled-garden organized, and likely inspired later ISP's to do the same thing.

The idea of a walled-garden approach to the internet is not a new one, and will likely be what the internet becomes with net neutrality gone.

Dare I say it, AOL was ahead of its time - they didn't envision a completely free internet, and made sure not to let people know there was anything aside from the content they provided.

OP seems to think that the yester-years of the internet were best, but truth be told, we can only go forward from here on out - we just have to take charge of this network, and keep commercial and government influences out of it.

>>58596028
Until he targets something you like. Then you'll throw an autistic fit.

>>58597152
Fuck you man I'm the same age and AOL sucked then and it sucks now

File: new-internet.jpg (117KB, 449x1099px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 449x1099px

>>58596024

>>58597170
What does /g/ think of the new net neutrality laws in USA, and the so called internet fast lane.

>>58597156
Go back to Rebbit where everyone puts /s to satiate you retards.

>>58597152
Yes, AOL certainly did not encourage its users to browse anything outside of AOL, but their suite did have a web browser, with a url bar, and they did not prohibit you from accessing other websites with it. You were also free to use third party browsers and web services, and were not prohibited to do so, either. I would hardly compare that to what the internet will be like without Net Neutrality.

>>58597268
It's all working out just like the People In Control want it to.

1. Net Neutrality has fallen
2. Bandwidth caps have already appeared in most countries (in Canada everything is heavily capped)
3. Next content based billing will start to show up. "For $5.99 a month, you'll get unlimited access to Youtube!"
4. Youtube starts broadcasting live content regularly, like streams in addition to normal video hosting by buying streaming sites like Twitch.
5. Low quality options that preserve bandwidth are slowly removed.
6. People are all goaded into paying to watch the creative content they themselves create.
7. The People In Control get richer and richer :)

>>58597268
AOL was around before Net Neutrality was put in place.

>>58596487
>obama
Who?

File: 1460741334530.jpg (697KB, 1460x1791px) Image search: [Google]

697KB, 1460x1791px

>>58595679
We have this bullshit spam every day. Report and hide the thread. Let mods deal with this bullshit.

>>58597290
>at&t is going to buy directv, the last good actual television company
>comcast's data caps and the end of net neutrality are going to bring an end to the viability of netflix as a TV source

Watching television legally is dead. I seriously hope nobody here is watching anything other than anime.

>>58597277
Wrong. The internet has always been neutral.
Net neutrality was designed to keep it that way.

>>58597313
And what makes you think the internet will suddenly stop becoming neutral now?

File: 1446496107211.jpg (36KB, 500x352px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 500x352px

>>58597303
Yeah you dumbshits have been arguing with bots for the last week

>>58597317
Because Trump is making it great again.

>>58597317
Because there is no competition (and this is due to the law effectively preventing anyone from entering the market). Thus, the optimal move is to stop treating traffic neutrally.

>>58597338
When had there ever been competition?

>>58597303
he's been posting this shit all day today. fucking idiot is spamming the board and no one seems to be reporting it.

>>58597345
Either nothing happens when you report or you get a false report ban because the mod disagreed with you.

>>58597338
No, dipshit. Monopoly is what destroys competition. NN prevents this.

>>58597341
Before, there were laws. That's the point. If you don't have competition you can't rely on that to prevent the death of neutrality.

bot12 killing thread in 3 minutes

>>58597423
What laws were in place before? Post specific ones.

>>58597428
>AMD:
>never supported SOPA
>never lobbied against net neutrality
>contributes to GCC, has never contributed any performance optimizations that would cripple code on other X86 chips
>never bribed OEMs to create what is effectively a monopoly
>never paid off reviewers to publish phony benches to make their CPUs look better than they really were
>never got censured by the US government as well as the EU for unethical business practices
>never worked hand in hand with the MPAA to create new forms of DRM
>created Mantle to push both OpenGL and D3D forward in performance and low level optimization
>created the HSA foundation to push forward compute languages and codify a system for programmability across all logic in a system with data coherency at its core
>created AMD64, the 64bit extension to X86 used by every modern X86 processor
>has created countless other standards and freely contributed them to the computing world
>They're the only CPU vendor worthy of my business, despite being crippled by a decade of poor management.

>>58597428
google.com

>>58596375
Then you just write vague legislation and have judges slap the shit out of people whenever they step out of line.

>>58597515
Post specific ones.

The problem is what Brazil does only affects Brazil, if you live in a shitty country obviously that makes me feel bad, but what happens in Brazil doesn't affect me in Europe. If the Chinese ban all porn and erect (lol) a firewall, that's terrible and I feel bad for Chinese people but it doesn't affect me.
America is setting a precedent that European companies may attempt to emulate, as has happened frequently in the past. If European ISPs think they can get away with it, they'll try it too.
Everyone everywhere is greedy, the only difference between American and European countries is what their population will tolerate and what their lawmakers will allow, and I feel like all too often the US is a proving ground for corporations to test the waters and see just how far they can go before there's a backlash.
Britain is already fucked so I'm sure they'll do exactly the same thing and copy big daddy America word for word, but Germany and France have been pretty good about privacy, net neutrality, and general internet-related things.

>>58597539
Not him, but it comes down to minute local problems. Towns and cities frequently refuse to give upstart ISPs permits to install new infrastructure. He's incorrect when he says it's "the law" because they don't need to write new legislation to do this.

>>58596709
No, the larger ISPs worked with local legislators to make that illegal

>>58597569
The law says a permit is needed. Also aren't there non-compete laws for real? Or maybe that's in Canada. It's a law that says ISPs are not allowed to give better offers than their competition.

>>58597620
>The law says a permit is needed.
You're reaching pretty far here, bud. "The law" just about everywhere says you need a permit to build anything. You can't go around tearing up city streets and laying cable whenever you feel like it.

>>58597569
Ahh I sure remember all the competition for dial up during the AOL era.

>>58596854
So bitch after the fact and blame other people for not being informed, okay thanks. Hope to see you again when we're paying the extra $9.99/month for the shitposting websites

>>58597620
There are non-compete laws, but they are issued by local/state governments, and most are either issued by lobbying from the incumbent service providers, or by the local government giving service providers incentives to build infrastructure in the 70s-80s, and simply haven't been replaced because lobbying.