Press F to pay respects https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/

God dammit Pai Ajit!!!!

Fucking Pajeet!!!

>rollback of something that never existed

>>60082690
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-04-03/new-h-1b-guidelines-crack-down-on-computer-programmer-jobs

>The FCC’s net neutrality regulations, passed with only Democratic votes at the FCC in 2015, forbid broadband providers such as AT&T Inc. and Comcast Corp. from blocking or slowing certain web traffic, or from charging higher fees in return for quicker passage over their networks.

You won't see a democrat wanting to reverse this.

Why do Republicans hate Americans?

>>60082831
this is the jurisdiction of the FTC, not the FCC. But blame Trump, or whatever helps you sleep at night

(((PAI AJIT)))

Was there ever a problem before they passed the rules in 2015? I don't recall ever hearing of one.

>>60082831
why do you hate freedom?

>not believing in the free market and consumer choices after the countless examples

most recent samsung bomb phones

>>60085764
There was the majorly public one involving Netflix, which is why the discussion always dissolves into
>Hurrdurr you must want to give Netflix free Internet
Which is an intentional misunderstanding designed to shut down any conversation.

>>60085764
>There was never a problem before so that must mean there will never be a problem in the future
you are pretty retarded

>>60085852
There have been no reported cases of demons from hell appearing in the middle of crowds and eating children, but just in case the government is stockpiling holy water.

>>60085852
>I'm scared of spying/botnet and the president is LITERALLY HITLER
>let's give him control of the entire internet

>>60082690

Pajeet Pai hasn't won yet.

I've talked to some lawmakers on this - holy fucking shit.

I knew most of the Internet savants of the early days were literal autists but I didn't think they'd be the same ones to talk to Congress. They are functionally incapable of explaining Net Neutrality to lawmakers in a way they care about.

I had a lawmaker give me a confused look when I mentioned Net Neutrality and he hesitantly said "Net Neutrality is important because it's vital to the Internet's ecosystem".

On the fly I tried translating this to something lawmakers should care about and he seemed to have a much better understanding after I finished (though I'm bad at on-the-fly stuff so I'm sure I bastardized it):
Net Neutrality prevents telecoms from picking winners and losers among the businesses and communities whose existence depends on the Internet.

>>60086089

(Cont.)

If you aren't a literal fucking autist, get involved in the political process. Go to town halls and speak to your lawmakers. The bar to improving their understanding of Net Neutrality and other tech issues is *very* low and they're much more likely to support what they understand.

>>60086089
>worried about telecoms picking winners and losers
>meanwhile Google/Facebook/Twitter/YouTube/etc are actively engaging in censorship picking winners and losers

>>60086164

Hi there telecom shill. You may want to calm down on your inhalation of every telecom dick you come across.

You can choose to use services other than Google and Facebook and Twitter and YouTube. You can't choose to connect to the Internet without a telecom.

Different industries and different purposes.

>>60086206
>worried about collusion that hasn't happened
>willfully ignores ongoing well documented collusion that happens daily

wrong you stupid nigger, it's the same industry, which is why this all falls under the jurisdiction of the FTC

>>60082831
Because the "free market!"
If you hate your ISP then just switch, idiot !

All these damn regulations are putting unnecessary strain on many "mom and pop" ISPs, lets roll them all back and let the consumer decide the winners and losers of the market! MAGA

>>60086258

Woah there! You're getting ahead of yourself on that script you're reciting there, shill. I didn't mention collusion at all.

And no, I don't connect to the Internet though Facebook or Google or Amazon or Netflix. They only know what I tell them. Your script needs some updating and you need some more training. Shills like you are *boring*.

>>60086271
wireless technology will make this issue obsolete in the near future, and this has nothing to do with trump you neon haired virgin

>>60086318
Give me one example of why net neutrality is needed without posting those bullshit articles about Netflix getting throttled that never actually happened

>>60086325
It won't, and Trump put Pajeet in charge.

>>60086386
t. phone poster

>>60086425
t. NEET

I'm at work bozo

>>60086352

Netflix was indirectly throttled through refusal of upgrading the hardware only on the interconnects Netflix was using to connect to major telecoms. But sure, I can provide you another example you sad, lying shill.

http://www.theverge.com/2015/11/21/9776052/comcast-stream-tv-data-cap-exemption-net-neutrality is an example of Comcast exempting its own streaming service, Hulu, from the arbitrary wireline data cap that Comcast imposed on areas it monopolizes.

>>60086463
>The Verge

>>60086473

A broken clock is right twice a day. Prove that article is wrong.

>>60086271
>>>60082831
>Because the "free market!"
>If you hate your ISP then just switch, idiot !


This is not an option to many

>>60086352
In Canada Bell cell customers could have unlimited TV streaming (providing you were a bell TV customer) for free (not counting towards your data cap) meanwhile competitors were not free, if you streamed netflix you used your data.

Obviously the CRTC (the FTC here) put an end to that since they were unfairly favoring their own services over competitors.

>>60086494
Prove that the content is a bad thing. With the move to IP based video, this will only get more common and it will be needed with the proliferation of 4K video and beyond

>>60086507
That was his point. Sarcasm/satire dude

>>60086271
>If you hate your ISP then just switch, idiot !
Then first fix the fucking government sanctioned monopolies these ISPs have. They literally do deals with towns to lock any other ISPs out.

>>60086507
thats obviously because there is too much red tape ! If we eliminate the red tape competition will spring up and there will be more choice !

>>60086512
AT&T lets you stream DirecTV for free over their mobile network in a similar manner and I fail to see the downside. Giving the consumer more for their money is a good thing. I get the pushback against data caps on landline connection, but it is very valid for mobile

They will cut my internet if I dont shill

>>60086352
It's not NEEDED anon. It's just a way to preserve the best parts of the internet and let it be a boon to the users rather than the corporations. Yes, it's a non-capitalist policy. But sometimes it's for the greater good. When a piece of technology gets to a point of being a basic need, you need a way to ensure fair use for everyone. It's this same reason why your electricity "just werks" and you don't have to go hopping between providers.

File: TransitPriceDrops.jpg (28KB, 684x444px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 684x444px

>>60086518

Your seem confused, shill.

You're making an argument in support of arbitrary data caps that aren't backed by reality while ignoring the Net Neutrality issue that you are incapable of defending your stance on.

To answer your new shill topic: Because the marginal cost for ISPs to send data has dropped to almost nothing. They can readily support a dramatic uptick in 4K video if they wanted to.

http://broadbandnow.com/report/much-data-really-cost-isps/

>>60086271
(((free market)))

>>60086554
its only a temporary gain.

Just like lowering prices (temporarily) to shut a startup competitor is illegal as well.

> I get the pushback against data caps on landline connection, but it is very valid for mobile
If you get it for landlines, why is it hard to understand for mobile data ? it is the same thing but different mediums.

File: 1471189562790.jpg (177KB, 533x388px) Image search: [Google]

177KB, 533x388px

>yfw a Pajeet decides on how internet is regulated in Muricuh "land of the free"

>>60086590

Wtf are you talking about?

Net Neutrality is *very* business friendly. Not every business in the world is Comcast, Verizon, and AT&T.

>>60086718
it is only business unfriendly if you happen to own an ISP/telecom since it doesn't allow you to use your position of power as the gatekeeper to select the winners and losers
Everyone else is good with this

>>60086647
It's all part of "we're taking our countreh back" mantra.

Taking it back means selling it to the big corps.

>>60086718
> Not every business in the world is Comcast, Verizon, and AT&T.
They cover like 99% of users so they may as well be.

>>60086831

I didn't say not every business *uses* Comcast, Verizon, or AT&T. I said not every business *is* Comcast, Verizon, or AT&T.

What's good for the tiny handful of telecom companies at the top of their sector isn't necessarily good for the countless companies that have no choice but to use them or use an ISP that interconnects to them or an ISP that interconnects with an ISP that interconnects with them and so on.

>>60086990
Oh, yeah, internet start-ups and smaller companies in general. Of course net neutrality is important for them. I considered them part of the "users" that I referred to originally.

>>60086641
mobile bandwidth is very limited in comparison, and NN arguments do not translate well to that environment

>>60087166

Doesn't even have to be small startups. Could be medium sized or even massive businesses. Net Neutrality protects their best interests as well as that of small businesses.

>>60085795
the isp game is not a free market, try again.

>>60087166
Consider a world in which every website has to pay each major ISP to have their site viewable by that ISP's customers. Then the ISPs pass the cost on to the users in the form of tiered plans. Basic internet includes all Google services, Reddit and Facebook. For an extra $10 a month you can add the streaming services package and get Netflix, Hulu and Vimeo. And so forth.

Or, in short, do you want the internet to be like cable TV? Because Comcast, AT&T and Verizon certainly do and that's where they're going with this.

>>60087170

Some of them do. Arguments against zero-rating in particular. Exempting an ISPs favored services from data caps while their competitors are crippled by data caps is absolutely an important issue that strong Net Neutrality resolves.

>>60087193
so you're against business class data connections?

>>60087240

I am against crippling existing services for the sole purpose of selling back the service they used to have piecemeal.

>>60087193
I mean, net neutrality is "bad" for the massive businesses the same way competition is "bad" for them. Net neutrality prevents the internet being dominated by massive businesses.

File: 1488642640424.png (14KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 500x500px

>>60087271
>crippling existing services
pic related

>>60087231
it already is like cable you dumb fuck, everything goes through the big tech conglomerates. any worry about ISP intervention is easily circumvented by anyone with the slightest knowledge of how the internet works

>>60087311

>pic related

Do you really need me to re-post the link explicitly detailing how Comcast imposed arbitrary wireline datacaps on areas it has a monopoly in and exempted it's own streaming service, Hulu, from affecting the cap while forcing competitors to be capped?


>it already is like cable you dumb fuck, everything goes through the big tech conglomerates. any worry about ISP intervention is easily circumvented by anyone with the slightest knowledge of how the internet works


Hey shill - shaming people with lies isn't gonna work here. The big tech conglomerates don't own everything and consumers still decide which website and services they use.

Bypassing ISP blocks only works so well when they can simply throttle traffic heading to services they don't like or don't know the purpose of.

>>60087460
Internet access is never going to be a basic right no matter how much you cry and scream. If you're upset with your service, don't use it

>>60087541

*Again* you're arguing something I did not say! That's two strikes, shill. Are you really that incompetent that you can only copy and paste from your telecom-funded script?

>>60087170
>mobile bandwidth is very limited in comparison, and NN arguments do not translate well to that environment
Again, what you are gaining in the short term you lose out long term due to competitors being shut out of the market/fewer choices for the consumer long over all.
This just hasn't gone on for long enough to see the obvious downside to this.

Those kinds of practices will only concentrate more and more power into fewer and fewer companies.


I know you guys hate facebook, so there is an example of how india snubbed FB's free basics

>>60087541
No is arguing that point with respect to Net Neutrality.
The point is your ISP shouldn't be the gatekeeper to content or services you want to access.

>>60087571
data caps have nothing to do with net neutrality. All of your other "arguments" are just straw man bullshit. Surprised you haven't posted that tiered web service pick with Napster and MySpace on it

Why do Republicans side with big corporations over the average American every time?

>>60087575
>The point is your ISP shouldn't be the gatekeeper to content or services you want to access.
they're not

>>60087593
Why do liberal retards not realize king nigger could have handled this instead of worthless bullshit like tranny bathrooms?

>>60087636
>b-b-b-b-but Obama

Trump is in office now.

>>60080644
MAGA!

>>60086554
>AT&T lets you stream DirecTV for free over their mobile network in a similar manner and I fail to see the downside.

It's taking away bandwidth for other services, and makes all other data more expensive.

Basically, people who choose Netflix end up paying for those using "free" DirecTV.

This is unfair competition which, like all disruptions of free trade, leads to worse service and higher prices.

>>60087636
Obama did handle it.

Trump is simply reverting what he did.

>>60087593
because they keep thinking that what is good for business is good for them

>>60087666
I know that satan, glad you've finally come around. I'm not worried about any of this at all, I just like to watch you all squirm

>>60087592

>data caps have nothing to do with net neutrality. All of your other "arguments" are just straw man bullshit. Surprised you haven't posted that tiered web service pick with Napster and MySpace on it

Data caps were relevant to Net Neutrality due to the selective bypassing of the cap. Nice try shill. You are *really* bad at this. Who do you work for? They need to know they're being ripped off by a shit-tier employee that can't even derail a fucking *imageboard* thread.

>>60087614

They effectively would become gatekeepers that decide which businesses and communities thrive and which fail. That's the logical end result of their service-selective practices in an increasing number of jurisdictions.

>>60087593
>Why do Republicans side with big corporations over the average American every time?

In this case it's because next to none of them have any experience with the Internet and still think it as an optional luxury that people can live without.

>>60087614
>>The point is your ISP shouldn't be the gatekeeper to content or services you want to access.
>they're not

Not yet.

But they will.
Thanks to Trump.

>>60087614
yet

>>60087691
That's nice. Is your Dad coming to pick you up or what?

>>60087686
>>60087726
good, only retards will be affected

File: 1376497750582.jpg (7KB, 230x230px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 230x230px

>>60080644
>Make fun of Pajeets
>Pajeets destroys the internet

who's laughing now?

File: Jlaw-okay.gif (933KB, 245x285px) Image search: [Google]

933KB, 245x285px

>>60087614
>wireless companies already literally control what services you get for free (pro tip: its theirs) and which you need to pay for
>not gatekeepers

>>60087771
What, specifically, is your mobile provider not allowing you to access on their network?

>>60087754
Substantiate your claims.

>>60087839
nothing will happen

File: 9027b2530e889a6381b4110c84f3b25649898c62d0ef2d8eea19e7570a23af27.jpg (299KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

299KB, 900x900px

>>60087754
Good. The faster the cancer like pic related is off the net, the better

>>60087944
Have respect for your fellow posters and substantiate your claims or leave the thread.

>>60087919

Not like the Internet was upended by the MAFIAA a decade ago and destroyed countless creative and FOSS communities. Nope. Not like that was a catalyst for massive centralization of the Internet.

Same shit here will happen and kill off what the MAFIAA didn't and then some.

>>60087809
Sure, like I said with Bell.

Bell would let you stream video through their own app (providing you were a bell wireless customer and bell TV customer) for free no matter if you had data on your phone plan or not.

>>60087968
be more specific

>>60087986
and that is bad, how, exactly?

>>60088002
Who are the "retards" who will be affected by a lack of net neutrality?

>US let a Poo in the loo fuck them up real good

TOP KEK

>>60088012
people who pay for video services

>>60086271
i hope you are shitposting. only 2 options exist in cities and towns.

>>60088048
How are people not seeing the sarcasm?

>>60088048
Sarcasm/satire. C'mon man

>>60088056
>>60088060
i can't hear your tone or see your face so it's hard to detect sarcasm. ever wonder why really stupid ideas meant to be satire end up being taken seriously on the internet?

>>60088048
That is part of the problem, there is too many regulations and other bullshit stopping competition from taking root.
We need to eliminate all this red tape and free up businesses to bring cheaper goods and services to consumers

>>60088090
Inability to detect sarcasm is a symptom of various spectrum disorders. I suggest seeing a mental health professional.

>>60088012
4chan users. you think any ISP is gonna put this site on the low tier family tier? this site can barely make ends meet now, it will have to charge a subscription or go under if isp's make it pay up. /pol/ played itself.

>>60088141
>detecting sarcasm over the internet

>>60088090
im pretty sure this is what happened to what is now /pol/

>>60088164
It's extremely easy. How the fuck can you think a guy talking about mom and pop ISPs is anything but sarcastic?

>>60086271
>mom and pop ISPs
Surely you are memeing

>>60088141
>he can still tell when he himself is sarcastic in a post-ironic world
but how

>>60086529
Name one country where most people can choose between at least 3 FTTH providers.

>in b4 hurr all countries are regulated even Somalia we just haven't tried free market capitalism yet.

>>60082831
That's because Democrats are in the pockets of Google, who stands to lose from this.
>>60086164
This.

This is a balance of power between the FB/Google and telecoms.

>>60088257
My student flat actually had its own ISP with about 500 connections and our own private cable to the exchange.
Shit was pretty sweet.

I can highly recommend living just a few hundred meters from the worlds largest internet exchange.

File: mom and pop.jpg (256KB, 1161x1409px) Image search: [Google]

256KB, 1161x1409px

>>60088257
not memeing at all.
Its right here.

>>60088327

No it's not. It's everyone who isn't an employee for one of the few big telecom providers versus everyone else. Google hasn't been active in promoting Net Neutrality since 2009.

>>60088361
>small businesses with no more than a quarter million subscribers.

k

>>60085795
Yea wtf, why can't I own and use a radio jammer?
Does the FCC like violating my freedoms or something?

>>60088361
>Republicans aren't out of tou-

>>60087967
but i love to nuchanology bro

File: 1492566976703.png (130KB, 645x968px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 645x968px

>>60080644
>voting for tramp

>>60082831
>Why do Republicans hate Americans?

They definitely love the wealthy ones.

File: 1472695618456.png (740KB, 809x743px) Image search: [Google]

740KB, 809x743px

>>60090829

File: 1483432766792.png (150KB, 1906x334px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 1906x334px

>>60090855
Good goy, bring forth the meme defense team

File: 1493253582202.jpg (127KB, 945x696px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 945x696px

>>60090889

>>60082831
The worst part is that there's too many /pol/tard trumpcucks on /g/ for it to receive any criticism now.

File: scared plebbit.jpg (181KB, 1334x435px) Image search: [Google]

181KB, 1334x435px

>>60090929

>>60080644
(((Net neutrality))) is just more communist regulation. The internet is free without it.

File: 1480435946438.png (146KB, 645x968px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 645x968px

>>60090920
Wew, literal brainwashed republicuck. Have you said shalom to your z**nist rabbi today?

File: 1464632520526.jpg (16KB, 311x326px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 311x326px

>>60090920
Good goy!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfbqp14hhU0

File: Helicopter Time.jpg (41KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 600x600px

>>60090949
>implying

>>60090949
>>60090973
Die commie cucks

File: 1478664382471.png (139KB, 228x260px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 228x260px

>>60090985
>rothchild defense force mad
SHUT IT DOWN GOYIM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kDngXs0U960

File: 1469905912799.png (23KB, 333x485px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 333x485px

>>60090985
>Yes goyim, call him a commie it will work!

>>60091015
>>60091037
Die you fucking big government regulation loving commies.

>>60091015
>>60091037
>still same fagging

File: 1476462259222.jpg (298KB, 1516x810px) Image search: [Google]

298KB, 1516x810px

>>60091054
>Rothschild shill getting upset
Rabbi, your cover has been blown up already. Get back to oven you fucking leech of the humanity SHILL.

>>60082987
I agree the FTC should create and enforce net neutrality regulations.

>>60091081
Big government regulation will kill the internet.

>>60091015
WTF

>>60090929
hey you fucking retard I am a trump supporter for a few reasons but I have no fucking clue what this shithead is doing. The entire system where the government controls the internet or the ISPs try to be faggots. Which idiotic shit side am I on? None because the entire fucking thing is god damn shit it isn't just because of a republicans, democrats its all of them together. So fuck them both.

File: 1474613895176.png (1KB, 23x585px) Image search: [Google]

1KB, 23x585px

>>60090973
>(((their))) values are our values
>(((their))) fight is our fight
>>60091015
>POP THE CALLER DOWN

hmmmmm

>>60090929
Fuck off, /pol/ made this website.

>>60091201
Fuck off, this isn't /pol/.

>>60088028
I know you're 19 and edgy and think it's really cool to be contrary all the time, but eventually that's going to wear off and you're going to realize that arguing in favour of giving control of the single most significant tool humanity will ever create to a bunch of idiots with dollar signs for eyes was fucking retarded.

>>60091332
Yes this is /pol/. The death of (((Net neutrality))) is another victory for whites.

>>60091201
le_donald wants you back newfag

>>60091344
You are right but which one to like more the government or corporations?

>>60091378
Tumblr wants you back.

>>60091388
le_donald is tumblr
you have to go back

>>60091344
The government already has control over it or we wouldn't be having this discussion in the first place, would we? The government isn't continually evil and if you think everything the government does is bad, why don't you nut up and go pull some Unabomber shit? Otherwise, admit to yourself that without the government you'd probably have died as a child. The ability to tell what's good from what's bad without adopting ideological tenants requires some thought and I invite you to do so.

>>60091419
meant for >>60091380

>>60091411
T_D and /pol/ is saving whites from genocide. Soon, all lefties and degenerates will be killed. 4chan will no longer be full of degenerates killing it.

>>60091411
>>60091435

You're both idiots. Shut the fuck up.

>>60091419
You are are thinking that I am stuck to some ideological tenants idiot. I never said I was either left or right or third position. All I was saying is that either of those things are BAD. I don't want the government to touch the internet and I don't want corporations fucking US because once the government gets a hold of the internet its over. You already know what the NSA/CIA do behind closed doors and now you want more control to the government? Either way we are fucked if you want to admit it or not.

File: average pol poster.png (18KB, 916x312px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 916x312px

DAILY REMINDER THAT /pol/ KILLED 4CHAN

>>60091469
So you would rather have faggot commie cucks who crossdress? Fucking degenerate.

>>60091469
More like all plebbit shits from le_donald migrated en masse to /pol/ and leaked their cancer everywhere. /pol/ had more traffic than /a/ and /v/ combined during the elections.

>>60091201
kys

>>60091469
its the other way around you fucking idiots. leebit came in massive droves during the election washing out what old/pol/ was its currently old/pol/ vs nu/pol/ its fucked.

>>60091517
>>60091520
Not an argument, /pol/ elected the god emperor.

>>60091519
Cuck

The election had high energy with the dankest memes being posted. I already can't wait to elect trump again.

>>60091542
I can't even tell if someone is sarcastic or geniune newfag retard.

File: 1492385453936.jpg (71KB, 700x700px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 700x700px

>>60091469

>>60091469
False flag

>>60091467
>You are are thinking that I am stuck to some ideological tenants
>either of those things are BAD.

There's your ideological tenant. You believe the government always does bad things despite that without the government and many of its regulations, you'd probably be dead or never have been born. There's no reason to think that the FCC guidelines that were proposed would have done anything but protect businesses and consumers from the tyranny of ISPs that we KNOW already exists. It's not a secret that ISPs don't give a fuck about providing decent services so long as they know they can still make money. We have so many examples of corporations taking monopoly positions and fucking their customers. How can you possibly think that an external government agency that doesn't stand to benefit from the regulations proposed could be acting in anything but your interest, and even if you think they're incompetent, in what way could those regulations fail and cause woes for consumers/businesses?

Do you think it's bad that there are government regulations surrounding who is allowed to provide legal counsel? That the government regulates who is allowed to perform complex surgery on your living body? That the government regulates what ingredients are allowed to be used by food producers? I honestly have to say that whenever people flip out about government regulation they don't seem to understand that most of these regulations are in place because corporations have grossly abused and lied to their customers in the past and a normal person understands that those things are unacceptable. It is unacceptable for a company to dump toxic wastes willy nilly into lake and river systems, for example. Do you want toxins in your well water making your kids retarded? Ahhh, but you know, a corporation would never do that in the first place, we don't need a government to tell them not to! Obviously the government does stupid shit from time. Its your job to figure out which is which

>>60091633
>ideological tenant
wat

>>60091652
never seen the word tenet written until now, only spoken. don't worry too much about it

>>60091633
>government always does bad things
Actually I don't but keep thinking that fuckhead maybe you should write more.

>>60091694
>let's give every nigger a home loan
>2008 crash

>let's give every retard a college loan
>???

>>60091694
Oh, then maybe you'd care to explain why the FCC regulations that were proposed were a bad thing from the standpoint of the government being "in control" of the internet despite that the regulations were regarding only what the ISPs were permitted to do, not anyone actually using the internet?

Go ahead, cuz, I'll wait. I'm not expecting much because right now you're realizing you said something completely baseless.

Data caps were put in while Obama was in office so anyone who thinks he did something is sorely mistaken.

t.comcast user

P.S. Nothing will change until local governments fix the right of way bullshit in their area. State governments are included. Comcast and others have spent years putting in roadblocks for competition after they saw what happened with dialup and POTS lines ( they had to compete).

>>60091633
>You believe the government always does bad things
there are good people on this gay earth?
WHERE?!?!?!

the government is made up of people... greedy, walking, talking, violent, power hungry, literally can be defined as bags of shitproducing meatsacks.

>>60091753
Not really mr.reddit typing faggot. I'm just jerking off to some good futanari right now.

>>60091763
Nice. Do you take it slow or do you try to get it over with as fast as possible? I tend to favor or savor certain material and slowly build up to a crescendo so to speak.

>>60091763
How good is it?

>>60090973
The fuck?!

>>60091761
>greedy, walking, talking, violent, power hungry, literally can be defined as bags of shitproducing meatsacks.

You're one of them. This is where the religious notion of faith is useful. If you have no faith in those people to get things right at least some of the time, you might as well just kill yourself, if you're being honest with yourself.

>>60091763
Well, like I said, at least I've made you realize how dumb you sound when you say shit like that around people who aren't morons. You should thank me for exposing that here on an anonymous forum where your ego can remain intact.

File: 1467076834440.png (107KB, 375x260px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 375x260px

>>60091814
>anonymous forum

>>60091722
haha
the simpsons predicts trump will do this and kill america with it
tfw it was his opponents who proposed and promised this instead
it's almost like the droves of idiots who watch the simpsons were brainwashed into voting trump

time travel or just some really well thought out plans?

>>60091825
my computer is going really slow and i think it has to do with my senpai RPMS. If I increase the power to my fan RPMS can I keep using this computer instead of upgradeing my proc socket?

Ajit Pai interview here. Fresh of the presses. I think he makes a good case.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1IzN9tst28

>>60091906
Absolutely disgusting

>>60082690

>implying net neutrality was a good thing.

Good

>>60091906
How is his case good? He says we should rely on voluntary good-faith measures from companies that have repeatedly acted in bad faith on a large variety of topics over the past 25 years.

Taking taxpayer money to build out infrastructure and then using some of that money to lobby for no longer needing to build out any infrastructure nor pay back taxpayers.

They have a long history of being crooks. Ajit Pai is demanding we trust the weasley man with a gold-plated tooth. He demands we trust con artists.

I refuse.

>>60091963
reddit spacing nice!

>>60091963
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/08/fcc-rules-against-comcast-bit-torrent-blocking

>>60091081
The Rothschilds want more gov't you idiot. That way their money can have more influence on the political process and be used effectively

>>60080644
I find it funny that people so "interested" in net neutrality take idiots who know nothing about it at face value and don't even bother to read the actual letter of the law.

>>60091906
A good case? I watched the first eight minutes and he doesn't have to make a case because that interviewer is not only clearly ignorant of the issue, but also has kid gloves on. On an issue this controversial, as the interviewer notes, he should come out swinging right from the start, but he's sitting there like "YEAH, why SHOULDN'T I get to use my spotify without incurring data usage!? No, you're absolutely right, it's not anticompetitive at all to give free data to spotify but not to others" What the everloving fuck is this guy talking about? That's not how you conduct an interview about consumer rights; you're not supposed to be this guy's friend-- he's not a fucking rockstar.

File: Net Neutrality wasn't even implemented yet.png (54KB, 1153x299px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 1153x299px

>>60092058
Forgot pic

>>60092070

Hi shill. Posting the same pic over and over isn't helping your case.

Go inhale bleach you parasite.

>>60092070
>>60092058
Just because it didn't get to come into effect, doesn't mean that it wasn't a good thing. ISPs all over the country are implementing data caps that affect video streaming services like Netflix. The issue is that Comcast is serving its TV content on the same lines that it's delivering Netflix content via the Internet. Given that, it makes no sense that Comcast should be able to say that one service is a burden for them to deliver while the other is not. It moreoever makes no sense when you consider that people are getting rid of their cable TV services in droves. It doesn't gel that Comcast needs to charge for bandwidth when more is being made available to them unless they're trying to claw back the money they're losing from network TV. Bandwidth caps are nothing but a means to target one of the top three use cases on the internet: watching video. You might think it's about stopping some neckbeard from downloading 50 terabytes of chinese cartoons, but that guy is a raindrop among the sea of YouTube and Netflix users. The other thing that ISPs would like to do is give preferential treatment to certain services by allowing them zero rated data. Again, they're already doing this. This practice goes beyond being bad for just consumers in that it encourages all sorts of anti-competitive practices and extends to being bad for businesses as well. Google could subsidize every ISP in America in order to zero rate their Play Music data and a new service that comes along, which maybe is better, or maybe has more of the music you like, that service may never be able to compete because they can't afford the data tax.

Everything the FCC regulations were seeking to stop has really taken off in the past five years. We were about to rein it in before it really got out of control, and now we have Ajit Pai acting as a mouthpiece for the ISPs to expand their programs.

>>60088056
Autism. Have you forgotten where you are?

>>60088361
the fuck is that?

>>60091148
It's already dead

File: 1491417667271.jpg (27KB, 399x385px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 399x385px

>>60092174
>Can't refute facts
>Calls you a shill

everytime

File: diagram.0.jpg (298KB, 1113x688px) Image search: [Google]

298KB, 1113x688px

>>60080644
F.

>>60088257

There is a mom & pop ISP in my area. It's in a rural area too! They offer 30 Mb/s/5 Mb/s and unlimited bandwidth for $100 USD a month.

However, their service is hardly ever working, and everyone in my area sticks to AT&T because AT&T is probably paying mom & pop to offer shit tier service so that customers will stick to AT&T.

Mom & pop need to retire, and die quickly.

>>60092565
They're likely a tier 3 provider and leasing the bandwidth from a larger ISP, so don't think they won't be at the mercy of whatever AT&T does.

File: Picard.jpg (279KB, 768x820px) Image search: [Google]

279KB, 768x820px

>>60091503

kek, faggot commie tranny here. we're still here. we play the long game, idiot.

>>60092222
>He wants the gov't to control the Internet, just like it does TV and radio
No, the FCC has a good history of fucking mediums up and essentially sanitizing them of anything that can be considered actual content. I'm willing to pay for access to sites if it happens (which I doubt because that's a good way to get people to stop using your service) begrudgingly. It's better to still have that medium left untampered with and be subject to the free market rather than regulate it over worries about an extremely unlikely event.

>>60092676

Undoubtedly. In fact, there is collusion between AT&T and mom & pop ISP. They work together on maintaining infrastructure in the hellhole I call home. I'm of the opinion that it goes deeper than that, it probably goes balls deep.

The mom & pop ISP are notorious for terrible service. They frequently delay repairs, leaving customers without service, refuse to credit them for downtime, and so much more bullshit that makes using their service untenable. I personally work from home, and I need a reliable connection, so I can't use mom & pop ISP.

I think Mom & Pop are being paid by AT&T to offer terrible service. They'd probably make more money that way than trying to compete with AT&T. Another horror show are satellite providers, and "wireless" internet providers claiming BLAZING FAST SPEEDS when they're offering 6 Mb/s or less, with horrible latency. Which effectively makes them useless.

I'm considering moving to a larger city. It has gigabit fiber, and basic ol' cable with reasonable speeds, at reasonable prices.

LOL at all the fucking jerks wanting to continue the lack of regulations on such shit tier service providers.

>>60086461
>bozo
shut it grandpa

To everyone who voted for Trump in the general election, and everyone who voted for Cunton in the primary: I hope you're happy, you retards.

>>60082987

That's just what the repugs want you to think. It sounds truthy on paper, but in reality, the FTC had even less authority to do the things the FCC saw fit to do under Wheeler, and really wasn't doing much of anything. Which is what these idiots want: regulation that does absolutely nothing to prevent them from lining their pockets in any way they can imagine.

>>60085795

The free market does not exist when it comes to internet access. Most people are served by a duopoly at best, and some people will never be served because their population density isn't high enough.

>>60086258

>collusion that hasn't happened

Nice try, but that's wrong. AT&T and Time Warner, for instance, deliberately avoided competing in order to argue that their merger wouldn't harm competition.

>>60086352

Literally all zero-rating schemes, you blistering single-digit IQ. In those cases, ISPs are actively promoting certain services by exempting them from data caps, while other services that aren't either provided by or in bed with the ISP in question still count.

File: Pol Tears.jpg (304KB, 600x601px) Image search: [Google]

304KB, 600x601px

Goddamn, the salt from Trump winning is even better than the salt if Trump lost. /pol/ would have gotten over that pretty quickly and gone back to obsessively hating everything the government does. Now they have to defend absolutely everything the government does not matter how bad it is because Republicans control everything.

File: pol post rate Nov 8 2016.png (48KB, 1007x855px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 1007x855px

>>60091517
>/pol/ had more traffic than /a/ and /v/ combined during the elections.
/pol/ still has a higher post rate than /b/. Hell, the night of the election it had a higher post rate than most of the other boards combined and was pushing the servers to their limits (posts could take a minute to go through because of this). What the worst part about it was though is that it was all basically spam and made the board pretty much unusable, and people still continued posting. Some of the threads on the board were getting sustained post rates up to 3 posts per second, threads were hitting page 10 in ~30 and 404ing in under 2 minutes, ~40 new threads were being created per minute, and the archive page hit 17 MB worth of HTML. That speed of discussion would make any discussion platform unusable. The board is basically full of subhuman retards who believe spam is actual discussion.

>>60086089
>lawmakers
House/Senate/WhiteHouse/SupremeCourt

They're all republican controlled. Unless you're a democrat and claiming you have any powers over republicans. Stop with the delusions.

If you're a republican, isn't this Hillary's fault for benghazi?

F

The dogma of "free market" is probably the most stifling force in politics today.

There is genuine conversations to be had about government overreach and inefficiency, but you just can't start that conversation when one side subscribe to blind absolutism.

It is possible that the FTC might be capable of dealing with ISP related abuses, like intentional asymmetric services, but they can only do so effectively with superficial fail cases, where there is a clear abuse with consequence for consumers, that can't be challenged in court. They are not capable of addressing the bigger issue of net neutrality, with regulation or broad oversight. They can shoot the robber once he is running away with the money, but can't make safes.

POO
O
O

>>60092544
>things that will never happen
apocalyptic faggots

>>60095005
Free market stuff comes from the corporations themselves.
Generally if you start thinking 'god dammit why is x like that?' realise that it's done on purpose by the people that benefit from things being done that way.

>>60095419
like BLM and niggers

>>60088303
I can choose from 4 providers in mexico

"Free market" never has worked for infrastructure. There's no single piece of infrastructure that did not rely on subsidies.

A "free market" requires a market. Almost no infrastructure could ever provide a proper market in an economic perspective.

>>60091761
>the government is made up of people... greedy, walking, talking, violent, power hungry, literally can be defined as bags of shitproducing meatsacks.
corporations is made up of people... greedy, walking, talking, violent, power hungry, literally can be defined as bags of shitproducing meatsacks.

Know the difference though? Governments are at least nominally responsible to the public. Corperations are responsible to no one but their shareholders. Yet all these retarded americucks trust multinational companies more than governments.

>>60095544
responsibility to spy on

pat sageack

>>60088355
Where was this?

F

>>60085795
le free market

AHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHAAH

Yes, goy, sell your nationalised industries over to private companies and let them ((Charge))) you at every turn

What's that goy? You're against the free market!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHQLQ1Rc_Js

>>60080644
>Pai Ajit
>PaiAjit
>Paijit
>Pajiet
>Pajeet

>>60097828
One too many poo in loo posts made the Indians activate their sleeper agent

File: 1485080101264.jpg (60KB, 601x237px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 601x237px

>>60091517
/pol/ started and seeded the reddit colony dipshit. Many of them were of course going to travel back to the source of all that was good. It wasn't bad for awhile until spring of 2016 when shit blew up beyond control since the normies took the bait.

>>60091517
>>60098754
>implying plebbit isn't head over heels about NN

>>60098803
>reddit is a monolithic entity

File: why.jpg (11KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 225x225px

https://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2017/db0426/DOC-344590A1.pdf

This is really bad and shouldn't be allowed to proceed.

>>60099585
Which part of that document are you specifically against?

>>60099613
Unfortunately I'm stuck at the "this guy is sucking the corporate penis as hard as possible" level that I can't choose specifics. The hosting by FreedomWorks doesn't help either.

>/g/cucks actually want the feds to have control over the internet
Fuck off commies. Fuck net neutrality.

>>60099712
This meme is bad.

>>60098754
>It wasn't bad for awhile until spring of 2016
>normies
kill yourself newfag

>>60099679
So you don't have any specifics?

>>60099722
Fuck off (((communist))), (((Net neutrality))) was just more (((big government))) (((regulation))). Now we have the chance to shut down degenerate leftist websites by giving them very low priority, america will be free.

>>60099777
This is probably what autistic posting looks like.

File: 1474681078967.jpg (479KB, 1536x2048px) Image search: [Google]

479KB, 1536x2048px

>>60082831
Here's why "net neutrality" is bullshit. This is FCC's new plan.

>>60099900
Based trump saving internet again, stay high energy my fellow pedes. Cucks won't derail this train.

>>60099900
>This study tells the story of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and its aftermath. In many ways, the Telecom Act failed to serve the public and did not deliver on its promise of more competition, more diversity, lower prices, more jobs and a booming economy.
>Instead, the public got more media concentration, less diversity, and higher prices. Over 10 years, the legislation was supposed to save consumers $550 billion, including $333 billion in lower long-distance rates, $32 billion in lower local phone rates, and $78 billion in lower cable bills.
>But cable rates have surged by about 50 percent, and local phone rates went up more than 20 percent. Industries supporting the new legislation predicted it would add 1.5 million jobs and boost the economy by $2 trillion. By 2003, however, telecommunications’ companies’ market value had fallen by about $2 trillion, and they had shed half a million jobs.
http://www.commoncause.org/research-reports/National_050905_Fallout_From_The_Telecommunications_Act_2.pdf
rly
mks
u
tink

>>60099999
shit pents

>>60099900
Ajit is presenting opinions as facts regarding Title II without proper representation and needs to be reality checked.

>>60100047
>opinions as facts
kek... go back to watching CNN and MSNBC, you fucking retard.

>>60100047
ISPs are not common carriers are therefore do not fall under the regulation of Title II or the FCC.

>>60100121
Yes they will not be considered common carriers thanks to Pajeet.

>>60100104
Useful commentary, bro.

>>60100218
Trump knows what he's doing, he's a kekistanian after all.

>>60100218
It's not over yet. If we can get Congress to back off and make enough noise that courts hear it, a judge can turn down Pajeet Pai's attempt to get rid of Net Neutrality.

>>60100254
No, the meme god kek has already decided upon the death of Net Neutrality.

>>60080644
>>>>plebbit

It's a great day. Regulating the Internet as a utility was a big, big mistake. Government censorship is what you should fear, not Comcast making Netflix faster.

>>60100328

Netflix is already traveling at the speed of light. Everything that isn't throttled is traveling at the speed of light.

The only way to make Netflix faster than everything else is to make everything else slower.

> Regulating the Intent as a utility was a big, big mistake.

Care to back up that argument of yours, shill?

>>60100372
>Care to back up that argument of yours
What? Of course not.
shill goy cuck )))reddit(((

>>60100254
You can't get a liberal judge to block everything, and you certainly don't have the support to do anything via congress. I'd recommend pulling your pathetic political party out of the gutter and stop catering to degenerates and sand niggers for starters, then maybe you'll amount to something

>>60100372
"net neutrality" isn't based on fact either. This throttling thing has never happened, it's pure conjecture. And it will never happen because a company that gimps their own product will never stay in business.

The current "net neutrality" regulations just open the door to more government censorship, more surveillance etc (all things we *KNOW* have happened)

The amount of internet package upgrades is going to be really exciting to choose from. Getting snail mail or injected ads telling me about the tier upgrades for my favorite site, 4chan will be my dream come true!

>>60100485
more delusion

>>60100454
>This throttling thing has never happened, it's pure conjecture
https://media.netflix.com/en/company-blog/internet-tolls-and-the-case-for-strong-net-neutrality
Nice meme you nigger.

>>60100497
Why not be delusional about the possibilities? It means there is a business opportunity ripe for the taking and if somebody else doesn't move then I definitely will. The amount of money I could make at the expense of citizens is unreal. Furthering the gap between the poor and the rich is something that gets me off.

>>60080644
Good.
This will punish those who stream their anime and hopefully improve /a/.

>>60100485
>>60100507
(((Net neutrality))) is a (((communist))) (((jew))) (((ideology))). The (((same))) (((people)) who (((support))) (((it))) also (((support))) (((big government)))

>>60100550
>every unauthorized ip is throttled to shit
>forced to go though crunchyroll plus to get your shitty weeb cartoons
Good job you stupid fuck at least nobody is streaming your faggot cartoons now, are they?

>>60100549
It's not possible because anti-competitive behavior is already illegal you retard

>>60100507
>m-muh Netflix is bribing Comcast to throttle others this is why we need net neutrality to protect muh small business
>Netflix are actually the ones who want net neutrality
At least keep your fucking story consistent, holy shit

You people are so fucking retarded, big companies like Netflix benefit hardest from net neutrality because they can now bribe the government directly (and we all know that the US govt can be bought)

But keep believing questionable claims from big biz to give the government more power while totally ignoring all the known ways the government fucks you and spies on you, you fucking mongoloid.

>>60100620
(((They))) don't want you to know that.

>>60100664
>it's another liberals acting as unwitting jewish puppets episode
SHOCKER

>>60100707
>unwilling

>>60100612
Why would they throttle unauthorized IPs instead of just focusing on the worst offenders? Throttling Netflix, youtube, and facebook video would address like 95% of the problem. Plus, even if what you say does come to pass, any true otaku buys the BDs anyway to support the industry.

>>60100719
I meant what I wrote

>>60100448

Net Neutrality isn't partisan. It is vital for Conservatives and Liberals, Republicans and Democrats alike.

>>60100749
>Why would they throttle unauthorized IPs instead of just focusing on the worst offenders? Throttling Netflix, youtube, and facebook video would address like 95% of the problem.
Because that's not how it works when money is involved.
>ISPs throttle all video streaming unless the companies pay to not be throttled
>only large streaming companies can afford to pay all the ISPs
>RIAA and MPAA give generous donations to ISPs
>ISPs in return throttle torrents
>ISPs now make more money while at the same time providing lower quality service

>>60100454

>"net neutrality" isn't based on fact either. This throttling thing has never happened, it's pure conjecture. And it will never happen because a company that gimps their own product will never stay in business.

That's not how it works dumbass. It's *selective* throttling. Impose an arbitrary and unnecessary data cap and exempt your own services from it.

>The current "net neutrality" regulations just open the door to more government censorship, more surveillance etc (all things we *KNOW* have happened)

No it doesn't. That is literally something you pulled out of your ass.

>>60101020
Irionic coming from someone harping on about throttling that never happens

>>60100621

So did you have to consume a Pajeet's Poo to come up with that load of crap? Are you the Loo?

>>60085795
It's completely impractical for everyone to lay down their own cables all over the country (expensive, logistical nightmare, and ultimately a fucking waste), which means you'll always have a de facto monopoly on internet access nullifying free market forces..

>>60101001
>ISPs throttle all video streaming unless the companies pay to not be throttled
You get what you pay for.
>only large streaming companies can afford to pay all the ISPs
Smaller ones could offer bundles to compete.
>RIAA and MPAA give generous donations to ISPs
>ISPs in return throttle torrents
>using torrents for filesharing anno domini ever
>ISPs now make more money while at the same time providing lower quality service
Then an ISP with a better business model should come in and out-compete them.
>inb4 muh free market doesn't apply to ISPs
I agree to some extent, but a smaller ISP should be allowed to lobby a municipality for access to pre-existing infrastructure at a reasonable rate if it can demonstrate that its business model would be objectively better in certain areas for consumers.

>>60101057

>Irionic coming from someone harping on about throttling that never happens

Purposely refusing to upgrade saturated peering links was throttling Netflix, pajeet.

Separately, imposing unnecessary wireline data caps and selectively exempting your own services is throttling everything other than the exempted services once it hits the cap.

https://consumerist.com/2015/05/28/att-wants-to-be-able-to-charge-video-streaming-services-for-exemption-from-customers-data-caps/

Your bait is low quality. This isn't your Loo to Poo in, Pajeet.

>>60101156
scoreboard, faggot. Do something

File: Redue and Computers.jpg (101KB, 1024x576px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 1024x576px

Just tell me how this will affect my ability to shitpost

>>60101264
it won't, TPP is kill

>>60101155
>You get what you pay for.
Companies that offer streaming shouldn't have to pay the customer's ISP for bandwidth (when the customer is already paying that same ISP for the bandwidth) in addition to paying their own ISP for bandwidth.

>Smaller ones could offer bundles to compete.
That's not how it works. Most cities don't allow new companies to come in and build their own infrastructure to compete with existing infrastructure.

>but a smaller ISP should be allowed to lobby a municipality for access to pre-existing infrastructure
And larger established ISPs that have a fuck ton more money to throw around would lobby against it. Take a guess at which would win 90% of the time. Hint: it's the group that can throw more money at the issue.

>>60101264

Less places to get pics from. Shitpost hubs will more likely to be institutionally attacked and throttled.

>>60101299
based on what, exactly?

>>60101432
Verizon blocked all traffic to 4chan back around 2010.

>>60101282
>Companies that offer streaming shouldn't have to pay the customer's ISP for bandwidth (when the customer is already paying that same ISP for the bandwidth) in addition to paying their own ISP for bandwidth.
It doesn't really matter whether it's the end user or the streaming service paying the ISP for bandwidth-the costs will all end up with the end-user anyway. That said, I don't see why the ISP wouldn't just cut to the chase and go right to the user with pricing (unless companies wanted to talk to the ISP about bundles to lower costs).
>Most cities don't allow new companies to come in and build their own infrastructure to compete with existing infrastructure.
Right, I think that is wrong and that they should allow that.
>And larger established ISPs that have a fuck ton more money to throw around would lobby against it. Take a guess at which would win 90% of the time. Hint: it's the group that can throw more money at the issue.
Counter-lobbying shouldn't matter if quantifiable standards are how it is determined. It would be a matter of a prospective ISP showing their service model exceeds the measurable standards and the city having no choice in the matter.

>>60101480
>It doesn't really matter whether it's the end user or the streaming service paying the ISP for bandwidth-the costs will all end up with the end-user anyway. That said, I don't see why the ISP wouldn't just cut to the chase and go right to the user with pricing (unless companies wanted to talk to the ISP about bundles to lower costs).
I recommend that you go and read how this shit actually works before continuing to spew shit.

>Right, I think that is wrong and that they should allow that.
Then you should fix that first.

>Counter-lobbying shouldn't matter if quantifiable standards are how it is determined. It would be a matter of a prospective ISP showing their service model exceeds the measurable standards and the city having no choice in the matter.
That didn't help Google role out their plan for an ISP at all.

>>60101471
>"Recently, Verizon Wireless security and external experts detected attacks from an IP address associated with the 4Chan family of web sites that was disruptive to our customers and our network. To protect both, we eliminated connectivity to the IP address. At no time was 4Chan itself blocked. Ongoing network security team monitoring has now determined there is no longer an immediate threat. Connectivity to those sites is being restored later today."
http://www.tomsguide.com/us/4Chan-Verizon-Block,news-5773.html

>>60101547
>I recommend that you go and read how this shit actually works before continuing to spew shit.
Not an argument.
>Then you should fix that first.
I'm not a legislator or bureaucrat:/
>That didn't help Google role out their plan for an ISP at all.
That's the fault of the law then, not the idea.

>>60099900
so... what did those regulations do? what changes are pajeet gonna make?
that paper is pure marketing bullshit, only talking about what "probably" gonna happen, but zero facts, neither about the regulation, the old changes or the new changes.

>>60102156

Thank you for Correcting The Record on Net Neutrality! Please collect your hotpockets in the Loo.

>>60099999
Holy shit. Quints blow the Clinton family the fuck out!

>>60092544
What is this retarded infographic?

You do realize that the instant internet companies start charging for tiered shit like this, people will stop using the internet and just stick to using mobile data, right? Or are you actually that retarded?

ISPs have nothing to gain from charging their customers more when the majority of their customers already hate the living shit out of them.

Retards like you and that other idiot who keeps shilling for the government and how it supposedly protects the interests of the American public should have hot sulfuric acid poured down your throats.

>>60102948

You're retarded.

Mobile data is capped in the single digits. In the places where ISPs have arbitrarily imposed data caps on Wireline it is well over 10 GB and often over 100GB.

You have passed Go. Please collect your telecom hot pockets in the Loo.

>>60103080
there are more mobile internet users than desktop now you fucking idiot

>>60103097

They don't fill all the same matket needs you fucking retard.

File: madfrog.jpg (7KB, 251x245px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 251x245px

>>60080644
Someone kill that asshole off already

>>60103114
for a large majority of people they do

>>60103160

Not for Productivity suites they don't. Not even remotely close. Then comes the smaller-but-still-large demographic of console and PC gamers. Then comes the much larger group of people who watch streaming videos.

>>60103214
>statistical minorites
do you know what majority means you dumbfuck? people watch youtube on their phones all the time, and NEET gamers are an inconsequential amount of internet users

>>60103276
> ignoring the two statistical majorities I mentioned

You have again Passed Go. Collect your second round of hotpockets from the Loo.

Here in the Netherlands traffic shaping is illegal, not treated all traffic the same / price differentiation is illegal, ISP's monitoring your traffic is illegal, decryption orders are illegal, email is going to be protected by our constitution.

And we still have fast internet and lots of competition to choose from. No free market meltdown yet.

>>60103552
*treating

So many paid big government shills in this thread. Go home, papa trump is fixing the government.

>>60103552
You're not white so your country means nothing.

File: C515J3qWMAAzk-H.jpg (71KB, 677x1082px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 677x1082px

>>60103582

File: 1462432900347.gif (62KB, 362x332px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 362x332px

>>60102948
>people will stop using the internet and just stick to using mobile data, right?
This is the intelligence level of the average /pol/ack.

>>60103637
No, you're retarded. The majority of people who access the internet are normies who do so through their smartphones.

Do you not go outside or are you just oblivious to everything that goes on around you? To me, it just seems like you're retarded.

>>60103637
/pol/ is full of successful millionaires while you're just a NEET, kid.

>>60103673
Mobile data is internet access. There's nothing keeping any bullshit ISPs try to pull for wired internet access from being applied to your mobile data plan as well. End yourself you subhuman.

>>60103768
Die commie