>>58655079
>90$ for everything
so I'll even save money? sign me up
yeah idk whatever
>>58655120
No, its not everything. It doesnt include sites that just started and dont have deals yet.
Thats the whole point. The big boys only provide excellent services and value if they continue to compete. If someone better comes along, those big boys should feel pressure to compete on the quality and value of their service. Now instead of competing they can just make deals with ISPs to slow down their competitors (making themselves faster is the same thing as making their competitors slower). They can use their current size, rather than the quality and value of their service, to defeat their competition.
This is classic economics. The death of net neutrality is an overall loss to the consumer.
If they don't modularize cable like that, what makes you think they'll do it for internet?
>>58655364
they own all the cable content, and they do modularize cable like that, you have to pay extra for "premium channel packages"
>>58655364
>If they don't modularize cable like that
Are you retarded? They absolutely do.
>>58655523
>>58655565
Having three or four levels of channels != modular. If it was actually modular, you would have something along the lines of local, bare minimum (ABC/NBC/FOX, maybe a couple more), sports, "cable" (TBS/TNT/FX/etc), kids, HD, etc.
Premium channels like HBO have always been extra, plus you don't need cable to get them anymore, so they don't count.
>>58655079
Pajeets ruin everything.
>>58655364
I guess you havent had channels on your cable suddenly disappear because of a contract negotiation between the channel and the cable company. Cable companies arent required to carry programming so they can do that. When it happens its super annoying and fucking sucks, trust me.
Well now we can have that bullshit with websites too. ISPs wont be required to carry all traffic equally so now they can bilk the websites. Fucking asinine
>>58655654
there are packages to add on for other languages, there are premium channels like hbo, and there's fucking pay per view. you most definitely do not pay a flat rate that changes based upon a speed metric such as resolution, you pay for the content.
the problem with this being applied to the internet is it's not internet anymore.
the government gave ISPs (INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDERS) lots of money to expand infastructure so that we have lots of internet and at high speeds, because it's good for commerce and thus the economy.
the companies can't just decide they want to change those networks into content provisioning services and still be called ISPs.
internet = unrestricted access to level 1 network, there is no content provisioning like a resturant or walmart, it's more like an interstate highway. you can drive whatever the fuck you want on it as long as it isn't illegal.
as soon as they stop treating all content a subscriber requests equally, they cease being ISPs and their network is now content provisioning.
Well I already share all my online subscription accounts with friends/family, so I imagine I'll do the same if such nonsense like that happened.
>>58655120
Yes, at 10Mbps. For just $40 more, you can get a speed boost to 12Mbps!
>Ajit Pai
>Pai, Ajit
>P. Ajit
>Pajit
is this what they call meme magic?
>>58655654
>Having three or four levels of channels != modular. If it was actually modular, you would have something along the lines of local, bare minimum (ABC/NBC/FOX, maybe a couple more), sports, "cable" (TBS/TNT/FX/etc), kids, HD, etc.
What the fuck are you 15? That's literally how it works in like 90% of the cable tv markets. Basic fucking cable is little more than just your local channels over cable.
>>58655364
>>58655654
huhh....
>>58658662
That's exactly what I was thinking, anon.
>>58658662
>>58658839
>anons summon Kek with meme magic
>Kek turns around and fucks them over for their impudence
pottery