Ending net nutrality will be the best thing for the internet.

>>61334335
>net neutrality

You mean that thing we've always had, but only became an issue because Netflix lobbied Obama because they didn't want to pay what they owe?

>>61334335
The internet can be destroyed by ending net neutrality, but there is basically no chance you can rebuild it as a new decentralized thing. You will not get radio frequencies or cables for it.

>>61334401
Mesh nets will pop up using existing 2.4ghz and 5ghz frequencies.

>But it will be slow

Yes that's the whole point. It needs to be slow to cut out the social media cancer infecting it.

>>61334335
You got it wrong, you imbecile. It's the social media sites and netflixes who'll pay to have decent speed, and all ELSE will be slow unless YOU pay up.

>>61334442
But that's wrong. Sites like youtube and netflix are extremely high bandwith sites. They use up more data than other sites. Even FB Twitter and instagram are all full of video content. These sites will be the ones throttled first.

Any media site including 4chan is just apart of the cancer that needs to be cut out.

File: 1499731073116.jpg (24KB, 387x461px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 387x461px

>>61334476
>including 4chan

>>61334499
Trust me. We wont need this place anymore after we kick stacey and tryone off the internet.

File: 1498100354453.png (369KB, 660x660px) Image search: [Google]

369KB, 660x660px

>>61334335
Can you US warriors of social justice explain?
The rest of the world has been enjoying everything for free, why should we care if you have to pay for fresh air?

>>61334541
Basically if it passes, Stacy will have to pay more if she wants to post her selfies on instagram and share reddit memes of facebook.

ITT: Poe's law.

>>61334565

Social media is going to be free nigga, they're not going to unplug their surveilance machine.

Also the more sluts there are on the net, the better the amateur porn.

>>61334565
>Still no revolt for better internet in the American States of Freedom

>>61334335
Wait, is this what the state department meant about provocatively seeding discussions?

>>61334476
You're a delusional moron. Instead of decentralized democracy (in original sense of the word), it will end up starving millions and handing most power to the few. Just like certain political system which wanted "decentralized democracy".

>>61334541
It's the price we pay for not paying 60% income tax, senpai.

>>61334667
>too many temporarily embarrassed millionaires

>>61334887
I'd rather pay the tax and get some real live public services for real public benefit.

>>61334896
>public services for public benefit
How much of those benefits, in terms of raw dollar value, have you consumed? I hope it's half or more of what you've paid overall.

>>61334476
Op, kill yourself my man

>>61335031
Free Healthcare, not having to take a loan to go to university, Roads that don't have holes bigger than the cars that drive on them, being able to live off of the state for a few months if you can't find a job, and more.
I think it adds up.

File: pizza_cat.jpg (113KB, 631x537px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 631x537px

>>61334335

Tards thinking this was about anything more than Netflix and other content providers rent-seeking from the government to not have to pay their fair share of network usage fees to ISPs when they take up the majority of the bandwidth.

Net Neutrality = solution looking for a problem. Nevermind that banning municipal and state monopolies would have been far more productive.

>>61334335
Back to the psych ward with you.

>>61335116

Furthermore, the unintended consequences of Net Neutrality are that ISPs have less incentive to invest in their infrastructure now. You will see stagnating speeds and stability problems.

Think of a toll road. Do the semi-trucks and Smart cars have the same usage of the roadway? Do they cause the same amount of congestion? The same amount of damage? Etc...

So why the fuck should ISPs be forced by the government to give giant content providers a free pass on their networks compared to other regular traffic? The ISPs don't own their networks now? Are we going to fucking socialize the communications market? Where does this shit end?

>>61335107
You didn't answer my question. I don't give a shit about your idea of public good, how much have you personally benefitted? Having working roads is not an accomplishment, by the way.

lol at all the Americans defending this because Drumpf said so. If Hillary said she wanted this 4chan would go into a meltdown

>>61334515
Nigga i need to shitpost

What /g/ wants:
>as much freedom of speech as possible
>the ability to run servers from home
>no data caps
>no tiered pricing bullshit

Will ending net neutrality enable these things to happen? NOPE

>>61334437
>Mesh nets will pop up using existing 2.4ghz and 5ghz frequencies.

This is unironically exciting to me. My dad recently has been tinkering with mesh nets and showed me what he had using all commercial products. He's kind of a tinfoil but goddamn is it cool although he's retired so I'm iffy about the time investment required. "no time" to him is several full days of set up and optimizing the location of the receivers

File: jew association.png (292KB, 1492x1952px) Image search: [Google]

292KB, 1492x1952px

>>61335116
>>61335137
I'm leery about anything that helps out cable companies, but this really just seems like a hissy fit thrown by internet mega-corporations. The strategies they've used to promote this have been very questionable as well, I went so far as checking the IA site and it seems that they're only interested in spreading a bunch of tripe so filled with buzzwords and scare-mongering that it's impossible to ascertain any kind of informed opinion from their perspective (their shitty attempts at meme images in particular was insulting). A war between these companies and ISPs is probably in our best interest- if Net Neutrality dies they might be forced to lobby for something actually useful like ending ISP monopolies.

>>61334565
I love how these """progressive""" activists primarily attack chairman Pai's race as a fallback argument. Just as racist, hypocritical and ignorant as Cleetus.

>>61335335
>reddit
>twitter
>google
>facebook
Gee I wonder why they're using dishonest methods to achieve their goals.

Retards want to regulate internet content by going back to a 1934 law that led to telephone monopoly.

File: 18622464_653254111536768_6454942773726914804_n.jpg (15KB, 453x452px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 453x452px

THERE'S ANOTHER FUCKING PROBLEM THAT'S UNFOLDING RIGHT NOW

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

W3C co. with google, netflix & microsoft gonna JEW us all

THIS WILL BE SET IN STONE WITHING THE NEXT FEW DAYS

>>61334335
Why don't people start using GNUnet now? Seems like a superior choice.

>>61334809
>people are going to starve unless I have my normiebook REEEEE

>>61335031
I have paid a total of $50 for college and haven't paid medical bills in my life. How much have you paid for those?
This isn't about personal gain but about greater good. Even if I don't benefit from it there are people that do. You can't rely on optional charities because of selfish pieces of shit like you who wouldn't give a single cent to anyone else. This is why we need taxes and we should tax rich people more.

>>61334367
>You mean that thing we've always had, but only became an issue because Netflix lobbied Obama because they didn't want to pay what they owe?
Didn't the customers of ISP pay for acress to Netflix? Why would Netflix need to pay money to ISP? They already pays the backbone providers for their net access why do ISP get money for something their customers have already paid for?

>>61335107
So you want your whole life to basically be run like the DMV. Nice dude.
>muh gubbermint roads are good
Have you literally ever driven on state roads? They can't even do that right.

>>61334896
I will not partake in that transaction. What are you going to do? Force me? I fucking dare you.

What is going to happen?
Will we see shit like Freenet gain more popularity?

>>61336095
That was a metaphor referencing communism, you dodo.

>>61336173
>Will we see shit like Freenet gain more popularity?

Maybe a little bit but the average person will just accept whatever happens as long as they can get on facebook

>>61336116
Are you not aware of these incredibly anti net-neutral devices?

https://openconnect.netflix.com/en/

>/g/ - political discussion

>>61336245
>4chan - political discussion

face it, the whole site is /pol/ now

>>61336206
Where will 4chan's userbase go?
I just want to keep shitposting.

>>61336260
Not /jp/ though

>>61335137
>Arguing for a massive corporation
Are you retarded?

>>61335137
> the unintended consequences of Net Neutrality are that ISPs have less incentive to invest in their infrastructure now

I'm not sure what rock you're living under, but they don't have any incentive to do this as it is since people can only pick from one or two providers.

>>61334367
Netflix costumer were already paying their ISP, why should Netflix pay them too? They must pay their ISP but not the customers.

ISP SHILLS OUT
>Netflix costs more for ISPs to deliver
No it doesn't you fucking retard. It's the same bandwidth that the user is paying. It doesn't matter what website the user is visiting, because the bandwidth cost will be the same. That's what the customer pays for.

>>61338944
Same reason trucking companies pay extra tax to maintain the roads. Sure, I paid for the product in the truck, but the trucks are using up the highways more than anyone else. It's in their interest to help maintain it

The cognitive dissonance and mental gymnastics that /pol/ uses to justify this administration and non-partisan issues never cease to amaze me,

Many ISPs are also cable TV providers.
Netflix is hurting cable subscriptions.
ISPs would love to put their boot on the neck of Netfilx.

>>61336261
Are you retarded? 4chan isn't going anywhere.

>>61339018

not necessarily. most ISPs have peering agreements with major cloud companies (especially Netflix) that routes their traffic along a different path. all that constant streaming dumped onto the core ring(s) of an ISP would fuck it up for everyone.

Netflix doesn't pay shit for all that bandwidth used, which if net neutrality was repealed, they would.

>>61339251
and then everyone goes back to pirating everything

>>61339058
They pay at their end, trucks don't pay twice to use a toll road they pay more at the toll booth.

>>61334335
>$0.02 has been deposited to your account

>>61339310
>>61339018

File: 1490630303038.jpg (12KB, 251x242px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 251x242px

>>61334335
>internet right now is a highway
>retarded companies want to insert toll booths even though tye road is fine
>they want to make a dirt road next to the main road, then call the main road the "fast lane"
>they make you pay the same amount of money for the dirt road as they did the highway, and then you pay even more for the "fast lane"
They just want to rake in the shekels and fags like you will defend it. The internet is now part of this nation's critical infrastructure, and should be controlled completely by the government like electricity, because obviously these fucking kikes can't handle it properly. Fuck you for actually defending this.

is there anyway i can be informed on net neutrality without some reddit faggot fear mongering?

>>61339560
it's hard to believe people think this way, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree haha

File: really.jpg (11KB, 236x226px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 236x226px

>>61339726
>it's hard to believe the goyim know, I guess we'll have to shut it down haha

>>61339762
I'm 4th generation european american, why does opposing government control of private business mean I am jewish?

>>61335428
I think his race has a bit to do with his ignorance :^)

>>61339804
Then you are a shabbos goy

File: 1497547440469.jpg (239KB, 961x816px) Image search: [Google]

239KB, 961x816px

>>61339804
You're feeding the cable company kikes, retard. It's un-American. Stop it.

>>61334335
>think people will have to pay extra for the highest traffic sites and not instead have to pay to surf outside the mainstream

>>61339932
but you want our current RIGHT WING FASCIST administration to control you??

>>61340019
That depends if cable companies play host to those mainstream sites or not.

>>61334335
Uh, anon, Facebook is consistently in the top 3 websites. Facebook would pay ISPs extra to make access to Facebook cost less and not count toward data usage on cellular plans before ISPs started charging customers more for accessing Facebook. If anything, net neutrality ending would enhance the current social media cancer on the internet because those companies would have the money to pay ISPs to make their sites cheaper to access.

>>61340019
Over my cold, dead body am I ever paying for porn on government monitored sites.

>>61340239
*cringes*

>>61340239
Trump wants to end Net Neutrality. FCC control the internet, not Trump / Comcast

>>61340271
This is my gripe about this entire thing. It's just placing all the internet discussion into a virtual financial landscape when we really are getting distracted from the core issue. Us Americans have jack shit for lowering internet prices.

>>61340342
hmm I didn't know the fcc wasn't part of the united states government

>>61340378
They operate under Obama law Democrats fixed the internet. Trump want to break it.

>>61334437
>It needs to be slow to cut out the social media cancer infecting it.
I don't think you realize how slow that would be. The backbone routers on such a network would have a bit under 10 Gb/s of bandwidth to split between every other router they connect to, if you used every non overlapping channel available and the best hardware available today. One router connected to 3 others would give that router a synchronous download speed and upload speed of 1.66 Gb/s on each link. Assuming the mesh networks were local, you'd quickly drop to dialup speeds in larger cities, and that's before considering interference from everyone who wants to use their wifi normally. Try serving 400k+ people and you'd see bandwidth available per user drop so low that you'd be better off dialing into BBSes over your VOIP phone (or amateur radio equipment on the 2M/70CM bands).

>Join the Day of Action for Net Neutrality, or else we may all end up banned from 4chan.

>click link
>see john oliver supports net neutrality
dropped

>>61340579
not an argument, now sign the petition or be banned from 4chan forever drumpfkin

>>61340579
Even /pol/ supports this shit you retard.
If these fucks win- everyone from the most REEE of Tumblr to the most dipshit of /pol/ are at the whim of an asshole at a cable company.

>>61340664
argumentum ad populum

File: underage b&.gif (22KB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 400x300px

>>61340579
>I won't support net neutrality because someone I don't like supports net neutrality

>>61340579
t. r/the_donald

>Mark Zuckerberg supports net neutrality
dropped

>>61334335
ahahah, facebook and friends would buy their way to be first in line on any ISP's tier list, it won't stop anybody from using social media. Argument dead, end yourself.

repealing Net Neutrality, will take us to the stone age in internet infrastructure. The ISP's will not have to invest to make more money. Like always with this government, consumers end up with the short end of the stick. They don't want balance in this Jungle, they just want to prevail, by tying everybody's hands.

>>61340995
t. Drumpfkin

Just go back to /pol/ and make a thread there, most of the folks on /g/ are actually sick of this shit already so cn you guys leave now?

>>61340579
John Oliver also breathes, so you should probably suffocate yourself in protest

File: Bridge-for-sale.png (493KB, 615x427px) Image search: [Google]

493KB, 615x427px

>>61341492
sick of the net neutrality discussion? It's one of those few topics that belongs on /g/ or /pol/. I can't' see what /g/ has against it being killed though. More competition and choice is a good thing.

>>61334335
I agree. If we remove net neutrality I can enjoy youtube, netflix, and facebook in comfort knowing that even a billion dollars in comcast tax is immaterial for these 12-figure companies while /pol/tards cry waiting 2 minutes for their frogpics to load. I can't wait to chat and laugh with Stacy and Chad about how smooth and easy to use the new internet is and how all those retarded /pol/ losers suddenly disappeared (lol)

>>61336140
The IRS is armed now, gadsdenfag. Your life really is worthless if you don't pay denbts.

>>61334335
>he thinks social media is what will be crippled and everything else will keep working fine, because big corps want nothing more than to restore the internet to some dude's idea of glory
>you are this fucking naive and putting this much trust into the people who have all the incentive in the world to screw you over

>>61341492
desu if Zucky is for it, at least be wary.

>>61341602
>More competition and choice is a good thin
Yeah I sure do love paying my Premuim Comcast™ package to view certain content and being throttled for no reason other than to charge me more money. Being against NN is the same as saying you love BCC ( big company cock) shoved down your throat and your rights as a consumer trampled upon.

>>61341808
>Being against NN is the same as saying you love BCC
As long as he gets to watch his wife's next son being created, I don't get the impression anon minds much.

File: stock-photo-two-beautiful-girls-laughing-and-pointing-at-camera-53857132.jpg (587KB, 1500x1143px) Image search: [Google]

587KB, 1500x1143px

>>61341768
then why are all the biggest corps fighting against NN if they're going to benefit from NN going away?

makes no sense

File: bait.jpg (26KB, 308x308px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 308x308px

Nice post, anon

>>61341808
unhappy with your ISP so you want to give them the government approved monopoly instead of switching service providers.

>>61341794
>>61341517
if these people are for something then I'm not likely to be for it.

>>61340620
>>61340664
>>61340723
>>61340938
>>61341492
two people that /pol/ hates:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PX0Ituesovg

>>61341953
True. That's not a reliable enough rule to bet the whole of society on though.

>>61341953
>unhappy with your ISP so you want to give them the government approved monopoly instead of switching service providers.
>switching service providers
>thinking big companies actually compete
Underage b&

>>61334335
>Ending net nutrality will be the best thing for the internet.
t. comcast kike

File: B.jpg-large.jpg (54KB, 1024x575px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 1024x575px

>>61341934
thanks B

>The internet needs to be destroyed and rebuilt in manner that makes in decentralized and has a higher barrier something something normies

You're a fucking moron and you don't even understand the internet.

Poo in the loo, (P)Ajit.

>>61341953
>unhappy with your ISP so you want to give them the government approved monopoly instead of switching service providers.
I love my ISP currently but giving them the power to fuck me over and essentially do what they want since they have a monopoly in my area is wrong. NN keeps those things from happening since it protects the consumer.

>>61342004
>>The internet needs to be destroyed and rebuilt in manner that makes in decentralized and has a higher barrier something something normies
This whiteboy thinks anon's got a point there. The hierarchical Internet is shit.

>>61342027
>protects the consumer.
To them, this is PeTA talk.

>>61334335
Only a burger could be cucked enough to think getting rid of net-neutrality would be good for consumers.

>>61341975
i don't know what to tell you. maybe shop around kid.

>>61339310
they would pay for it by charging the users more, so nope, no thanks. I don't give a shit about ISPs, they're the biggest monopolies in the states and honestly if it were up to me, i'd limit their profit margins by 5%, the rest has to go back into the business either for improving infrastructure and customer service and paying up for that extra bandwidth netflix uses
They don't deserve to profit off of a monopoly, free market was a mistake

File: 1468847085553.png (880KB, 587x775px) Image search: [Google]

880KB, 587x775px

>>61342102
Of course getting rid of NN is great for big corps goy!! That's why they're fighting to keep it!

>>61339350
yeah but netflix original shows are much better than most TV shows shat out by any tv network these days. Only people they're good for are literally old people who don't know how to use computers, and once they're dead, there won't be any more TV at all.

>>61339804
>private business
the very idea of something so big and important being controlled by a private business and not by an elected government is something only a total ancap lunatic would think of in a fever dream

>>61342108
Anything you have to say is based on fantasy, fiction, and faith. Fuck you and your muh introductory pricing bullshit games, Comcast shill.
t.been in this business for 20 years and sick of you little shits playing games with other people

>>61342226
great post commie

>>61342199
>but netflix original shows are much better than...
>>>/trash/

>>61334335
GGGOOOOOODDDDDD FFFUUUCCCKKKIIINGGGG DDDAAAAMMMMMMMIIIIITTTTTT

>>61342246
no u
have you fucking turned on a tv in the past maybe 2 years? What do you see? Some documentary about some guy talking about some very trivial thing that only old people don't know/forgot cuz of amnesia? An occasional poorly written crime/drama original tv show? Sports games live?

It's all absolute trash, the only channels on TV that are somewhat worth watching are ones that have thematic movies, like westerns or action movies go 24/7 on them, good way to discover movies like that. But Netflix originals have revived and improved the quality of /tv/ so much in the past few years that there's just no contest that it will take over sooner or later when 1995+ gets into their 30s and their parents die off
There's no television left on TVs, only Netflix and other internet services.
>>61342245
>wanting legitimate consumer protection laws and anti-monopoly regulations somehow make you a commie
Face it nigger, internet is like gas/water/electricity etc, it's necessary, and thus, it should be regulated by the government, not some private kikes looking to make a profit. The main goal should be collection of government taxes and then spending of those taxes on improvements to the service and upkeep, not just 'for profit'

>>61334335
Except facebook and instagram are the kinds of sites that would pay for a fast lane. It's all the other smaller players that will get fucked. Facebook and Instagram will just get bigger

File: tf.jpg (35KB, 344x505px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 344x505px

>>61342368
>Face it nigger, internet is like gas/water/electricity etc, it's necessary
jesus christ

> it should be regulated by the government, not some private kikes looking to make a profit
aren't all those "kikes" supporting NN?? put 1 and 1 together you fucking brainlet

File: 1469702888007.jpg (48KB, 492x449px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 492x449px

>>61342398
>another great post on why big players are going to benefit from repeal of NN but somehow forgets that all big players are shilling like hell for NN

really makes my neurons fire up

>>61342415
nope, the kikes are supporting the removal of NN
Comcast, Verizon etc
the centrist/left wing politicians/socialists are against NN
it's a very clear bad vs good story.

>>61342435
maybe they don't want to ruin their public image by siding with the more obvious kikes? lmaoing @ ur life you dummy

>>61342435
https://www.cnet.com/news/net-neutrality-netflix-reed-hastings/

File: 1346016393228.jpg (40KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 500x500px

>>61334335
lots of troll threads today

>>61342479
>the centrist/left wing politicians/socialists are against NN
>it's a very clear bad vs good story.

are you a child? make a fucking harry potter analogy while you're at it

>>61342479
>nope, the kikes are supporting the removal of NN
>Comcast, Verizon etc
>>61342492
>maybe they don't want to ruin their public image by siding with the more obvious kikes?

all big internet players are not looking for extreme profits and are not run by kikes. okay buddy. go suck zucc's cock you commie shill faggot.

File: spurdo.gif (532KB, 700x490px) Image search: [Google]

532KB, 700x490px

if you're wondering what ISPs will do if net neutrality is repealed, we already know.

2005 - Madison River Communications was blocking VOIP services. The FCC put a stop to it. https://www.cnet.com/news/telco-agrees-to-stop-blocking-voip-calls/

2005 - Comcast was denying access to p2p services without notifying customers.

2007-2009 - AT&T was having Skype and other VOIPs blocked because they didn't like there was competition for their cellphones. http://fortune.com/2009/04/03/group-asks-fcc-to-probe-iphone-skype-restrictions/

2011 - MetroPCS tried to block all streaming except youtube. https://www.wired.com/2011/01/metropcs-net-neutrality-challenge/

2011-2013, AT&T, Sprint, and Verizon were blocking access to Google Wallet because it competed with their bullshit. http://www.businessinsider.com/verizon-blocking-google-wallet-2011-12

2012, Verizon was demanding google block tethering apps on android because it let owners avoid their $20 tethering fee. This was despite guaranteeing they wouldn't do that as part of a winning bid on an airwaves auction. https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-tech/post/fcc-fines-verizon-125m-for-blocking-tethering-apps/2012/07/31/gJQAXjRLNX_blog.html

2012, AT&T - tried to block access to FaceTime unless customers paid more money. https://www.freepress.net/press-release/99480/att-blocking-iphones-facetime-app-would-harm-consumers-and-break-net-neutrality

2013, Verizon literally stated that the only thing stopping them from favoring some content providers over other providers were the net neutrality rules in place. https://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/2013/09/18/verizons-plan-break-internet

This is the future you choose when you shill against net neutrality.

>>61342550
well yeah bumpf is the voldemort of the story, bernie is the hero and jeb bush is the real hero
>>61342550
>le commie
>le shill
>le gay
buzzwords all accounted for
well done anon
here's a (you) for (((You)))

>supporting net-neuter-ality

File: 1453931382891.png (73KB, 454x453px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 454x453px

>>61342594
>>>61342550 (You)
>well yeah bumpf is the voldemort of the story, bernie is the hero and jeb bush is the real hero
>>>61342550 (You)
>>le commie
>>le shill
>>le gay
>buzzwords all accounted for
>well done anon
>here's a (you) for (((You)))

fuck off back where you came from shill

>>61342550
kek

those in the university day care program have trouble understanding politics, free market, and any ideas not relatable to Harry Potter story arcs.

Don't worry, there will always be a John Oliver to tell them their opinions and how to avoid being an idiot by dissagreeing with him

>>61342611
you're the shill here, everyone on 4chan should be for net neutrality, being against it is being an uneducated alt-righter

File: Captain Amerismug.png (416KB, 623x527px) Image search: [Google]

416KB, 623x527px

>people thinking that net neutrality going away will have any effect on them, this site, or their browsing habits

literally nothing at all will happen, it's like all the happening faggots on /pol/ whenever someone shoots a gun in a public space.

ISPs want customers, they aren't going to implement fast lanes or grab you by the neck demanding more shekels, it's just propaganda the left has been pushing to scare tech-illiterate retards into joining their side.

>but what if there's no other company in the area? they can do what they want!
until another company opens up and creates competition, driving prices down.

it's called capitalism fuckers, maybe instead of going against it every waking moment of your life and complaining about how it sucks, you actually try working with it for once.

if there's anything I didn't touch on, reply and let me know.

File: 1468847737496.jpg (16KB, 321x285px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 321x285px

>>61342633
>uneducated
im very well educated on networking thanks anyway shill

>>61342624
> there will always be a John Oliver to tell them their opinions
fucking this

>>61339560
The current debate isn't over whether to allow companies to do stupid shit or not - there's nothing legally preventing a company like Comcast or Mediacom from chopping up your internet or throttling your service now, and there hasn't been for the last 20-30 years.

The debate now is whether or not to repeal a bill passed under Obama's Administration which would grant the FCC incredibly broad and overreaching regulatory powers over the internet and service providers.

Considering the last time something like this happened (the Telecom Act of 96) it created the regional monopolies we've been fighting back against for the last twenty years, I'm surprised so many people are happily cheering for a repeat performance.

>>61342668
>ISPs want customers, they aren't going to implement fast lanes
See >>61342583

File: chrischristie_ap_img.jpg (135KB, 1500x975px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 1500x975px

>>61342633
there it is.
Everyone should agree with me and if you don't your an uneducated alt-righter.

there it is folks.

>>61342668
>until another company opens up and creates competition
HE ACTUALLY THINKS THERE'S COMPETITION IN THE TELECOM INDUSTRY

HAHAHAHAHA EVERYONE POINT AND LAUGH AT THIS LITERAL UNDERAGE RETARD

File: rmsnoam.jpg (196KB, 1365x859px) Image search: [Google]

196KB, 1365x859px

>>61342550
>you commie
when did communism become a bad thing on /g/? what the fuck did I miss?

>>61342679
well you're not because your opinions are ignorant and wrong

File: fags-today.jpg (41KB, 492x800px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 492x800px

>>61342699
>your opinions are ignorant and wrong
is this bait posting as a fucking retarded liberal?

>>61342696
>when did communism become a bad thing on /g/?
communism always was shit on /g, and everywhere else. fuck off with stallman he's a meme you dummy

File: Annoyed.jpg (20KB, 306x306px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 306x306px

>>61342695
All I want is a genuine counterargument, is that too much to ask for?

>>61342757
my argument is that there is no competition in telecom space, learn to fucking read you underage faggot

>>61342748
>communism always was shit on /g
no it wasn't /pol/

>>61342779
yes it was you summerfag

So first of all I am no telling ISP what I am browsing. I have my whole house VPNed so that they cannot sell my shit. Now how are they going to tell if it is Youtube I am streaming or what? Are they going to slow the whole damn thing down? Fuck them! Internet costs in US are insane as they are!

File: Proofs.webm (889KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

889KB, 320x240px

>>61342773

stallman isn't communism. He just gives everything away for free in a capatilist market.

>>61342805
They block your vpn for lulz until you pay for the $50 youtube shabbos good goy premium package (50 videos free with $0.50 for ever video after that! what a deal!)

>>61342795
>I started browsing /g/ last year so heh I guess I'm not a summerfag this is a pro-nazi board you guys

N O M O R E A M E R I C A N S O N / G /

>>61342810
>using the proofs meme wrong
>tripfag
>thinks telecom industry is competitive where there are places in the USA where it's literally illegal to start up a competing ISP
Just stop posting before I filter you

>>61342841
I didn't use it wrong, you're making all these claims that are bullshit for all I know, you've given no evidence to further your case

>wah wah he's saying mean things to me stop or ill block you
do it faggot
you know you won't

File: 1489767883447.jpg (179KB, 1024x708px) Image search: [Google]

179KB, 1024x708px

>Muh big daddy government would allow no wrong
>Muh super idealistic free market will always provide the best outcome
>People actually think big companies aren't in cahoots with politicians/government to get what they both want, profit, power and control
>Basically passing legislation which makes legal fucking everyone in the ass
>US is so retarded they'll even defend this to death
You guys are so screwed

>>61342810
>>61342918
There is a good reason why he called you underage, this is common knowledge and you didn't even tried to google it.

>>61342841
>not filtering all tripfags as a matter of principle

I oppose net neutrality solely because of hard it triggers leftists. Fight me /g/.

File: Sad.gif (1MB, 300x188px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 300x188px

>>61342948
holy shit you're both retarded

The burden of proof is on the PERSON MAKING THE CLAIMS

He made claims that he provided no evidence for, and you just said it should be common knowledge. This is not arguing, this is just being a dumbass.

read a book you absolute retards

>>61343003
There's a lot of money to be made off idiots like you, there's no shame in admitting what you did.

>>61341953
>unhappy with your ISP so you want to give them the government approved monopoly instead of switching service providers.
My problem is that collusion will be inevitable and there will be no "other ISP" worth switching to. The big national ISPs cover the vast majority of America and in a lot of markets there is no alternative. They will all impose the new fee structures and/or limitations at the same time.

They did this with the banks and with the airlines. Unreasonable user fees and fucking over their customers would tend to drive consumers to the competition but lo and behold he competitors decided to implement the exact same cash grab fees at the same time.

Wealthy old men sat down and decided what ATM fees should be. Another group of wealthy old men sat down and decided what baggage fees should be set at. They agree on a date and they make it happen. As long as there is collusion they can all fuck over the customers as long as they all agree to do it at the same time. They won't gain market share but their piece of the pie becomes more valuable. It is like found money for them and there is no reason for them not to impose price fixing like this.

Consumers have no power of choice when the big corporations team up to fuck them over. That is what people are worried is going to happen to the internet. The old men have already sat down and planned out the fee structure for the new internet. They just need to keep pumping money into Washington to make it a reality

I don't support these onerous regulations because I don't want my bill to go up anymore.

>>61343024
I don't consider people making money to be a bad thing because I'm not a net drain on society like yourself and most leftists.

>>61343038
>collusion will be inevitable
Exactly this. The muh competitards just don't understand that businesses know it's better to collude than compete. Too much /v/idya warps minds that way.

>>61343048
>can't support onerous regulations
>that prevent them from billing you for bullshit
Good goy.

>John Oliver supports net neutrality
Yeah fuck it, I'm happy if it goes away.

>>61343061
Point out exactly where I said making money off idiots like you is a bad thing.

>>61343071
If you look at your phone bill, you’ll see a “Universal Service Fee,” or something like it. These fees (what most Americans would call taxes) are paid by Americans on their telephone service and funnel about $9 billion each year through the FCC, all outside the congressional appropriations process. Consumers haven’t had to pay these taxes on their broadband bills because broadband Internet access service has never before been a Title II service.

>>61343081
You implied that it's a bad thing for me but I'm not the one who will be losing money here.

>>61341872
I think you forgot a word like not in there because your question makes no sense.

>>61334335
>no more porn
THAT'S A GOOD THING?
ARE YOU FUCKING CRAZY?

>>61343131
>You implied that it's a bad thing
Point out exactly where I implied that. Use direct quotes.

>>61343107
>“Universal Service Fee,”
You mean 911 fees?

>>61343007
>The burden of proof is on the PERSON MAKING THE CLAIMS
These aren't claims but COMMON KNOWLEDGE, if you don't know that much it mean you're an idiot.

>>61342415
>>Face it nigger, internet is like gas/water/electricity etc, it's necessary
>jesus christ
just because you live in Bumfuck, Ohio doesnt mean everyone else leads an amish lifestyle like yours. internet is crucial in big cities, IT jobs, etc

File: Capture.png (86KB, 363x260px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 363x260px

>>61343107
No. All these new taxes will now be on your broadband bill.

>>61343139
>There's a lot of money to be made off idiots like you
Right here, the implication is that I'm being swindled, which would naturally be a bad thing for me.

>>61343107
>If you look at your phone bill, you’ll see a “Universal Service Fee,” or something like it. These fees (what most Americans would call taxes)
Most Americans are whiny little shits living in a narrative rather than in the real world. Why would I care too much what they think?
>are paid by Americans on their telephone service and funnel about $9 billion each year through the FCC, all outside the congressional appropriations process
So?
> Consumers haven’t had to pay these taxes on their broadband bills because broadband Internet access service has never before been a Title II service.
Are you too much of an amerinigger to consider how rates themselves would change under Title II, or are you too busy desperately comparing your small penis to the next guy in hopes for some millimeter of self-superiority?

>>61343175
>common knowledge
Doesn't mean it's factual or true. Real power relationships are under no obligation to conform to the fantasy narratives of kids who think econ 101 makes them smrt.

>>61343230
OMG I'm arguing with a literal female. Show me your tits, cunt.

>>61343143
Universal service fees go into a fund that helps subsidize rural phone services. Running land lines to farms and small towns costs far more per customer than it does in the city. The universal fee helps balance things out so it doesn't cost $187 to make a phone call from a farm in Minnesota.

The phone companies have to pay this fee. At their discretion they may pass this fee on to their customers (which most do).

>>61343197
It's a bad thing for you, but I never implied that making money is bad.

Looks like it's time to go back to your remedial reading classes, dumb dumb

So does this give the ISPS more or less power? I dunno how it is for everyone else, but in my area, spectrum is the only provider in the entire metropolitan area. If I want to use the internet and not get something like satellite internet, I have to use spectrum. They can charge as much as they want because they know they're the only choice. I just don't understand how that kinda shit isn't against antimonopoly laws. I mean, I hate kikebook and Netflix, but I'd rather side with them than the isp. I can choose to not use kikebook or netflix.

>>61334541
This, fuck whatever dumb shit America does. Europe be getting on just fine, fucking burgers need to stop chimping out

>>61343230
Europe generally classifies broadband as a utility, and they have worse rates than the US in rural vs. urban broadband speeds. I don't want that for our poor farmers.

>>61343278
>You implied that it's a bad thing for me
As you can see my reading comprehension is immaculate while you seem to be confused to the meaning of your own posts.

File: Mr_Burn's_Chair.jpg (67KB, 500x385px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 500x385px

>>61343292
>So does this give the ISPS more or less power?
All the ISPs came together and delivered trucks full of money to lawmakers in Washington. They would not be doing amount of lobbying if it would not grant them enormous unrestricted power.

When an excessive amount of money is being used to buy a law it has historically never benefited the American people. Ever.

File: child_luring1.jpg (45KB, 770x433px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 770x433px

A lot of Comcast shills in this thread. Ending NN helps nobody other than ISP monopolies.

Anon, let's summarize your post. Social media, news and profiteering = bad. So you think a capitalist would simply allow the most profitable invention from the last 100 years to self destruct. Just so you can have what you want, right Anon?

Go back to /pol/ and talk some more nonsense.

>>61343323
Are you sure that's not just because internet in the US is slow for both dirt farmers and inner city kids?

>>61343409
No, it will really, really hurt small ISP's the most. They can't afford to compete with the big boys.

>>61343260
>isn't desperately comparing his penis to everyone else's
>therefore must be a chick
>>>/r9k/

>>61343323
Look to Asia, then.

>>61343421
It's not unprecedented. Consider the city trolley systems. If it were no longer a source of profit *and control* they might very well destroy the thing or at least reshape it to their exclusive benefit, which is what capitalism is all about.

>>61334367
Oh yeah the powerful shadowy lobbying arm of of fucking Netflix, a company that literally wasn't even fucking profitable in 2014 when Net Neutrality was implemented.

>>61343470
82% of Americans, and 48% of rural Americans, have access to 25 Mbps broadband speeds. In Europe, those figures are only 54% and 12%, respectively. Similarly, wireline broadband providers in the United States are investing more than twice as much as their European counterparts ($562 per household versus $244). The data for wireless broadband providers shows the same pattern ($110 per person versus $55). In the United States, broadband providers deploy fiber to the premises about twice as often (23% versus 12%). And with respect to mobile broadband, 30% of subscribers in the United States have the fastest technology in wide deployment, 4G LTE,
but in Europe that figure is only 4%. Moreover, in the United States, average mobile speeds are about 30% faster than they are in Western Europe.

Reminder that corporate bigwigs and shills in the government will never stop this and will keep on pushing until they get what they want at long last no matter how long it takes. Any "victory" against them is simply delaying the inevitable. They will keep on doing this forever as long as these subhuman rats think they're invincible to the law or justice by other means, which there's really nothing out there to make them feel like they're not.

>>61343486
Small ISPs are already fucking dead. Nobody uses them unless there is no other choice because they can't offer the same services. If you're deluded enough to think that the ISP market isn't already an oligopoly then you should probably wear a helmet when you go outside.

>>61343497
>profitable
>thinks companies need to be profitable
>doesn't understand private subsidies to reshape society
>would be completely BTFO by even thinking about Uber

>>61343513
>Any "victory" against them is simply delaying the inevitable
Only "victories" delay the inevitable. The only way to be truly victorious is to kill them.

>>61343528
Small ISPs are often the only ones willing to bring fiber internet to undeserved areas. That is until Comcast sues the city itself to stop them. The giant companies offer the bare minimum at all times for as high a price as possible.

>>61343528
Monopoly rules designed for the monopoly era will inevitably move us in the direction of a monopoly. President Obama’s plan to regulate the Internet is nothing more than a Kingsbury Commitment for the digital age. If you liked the Ma Bell monopoly in the 20th century, you’ll love Pa Broadband in the 21st. A few years back 140 of these small ISP's joined together to tell Obama how much these regulations would hurt. If you want less access to broadband from fewer ISP's at a higher rate, then go ahead and support a Title II classification.

>>61343230
SHOW ME YOUR TITS YOU FUCKING CUNT

>>61343230
>Doesn't mean it's factual or true
Yes and you don't need to breath, I mean it's common knowledge you need to breath, but it doesn't mean it's true. How about you google it and stop making yourself look like complete moron? Years ago ISP providers came in agreement to divine market and keep prices at certain level, there is no competition on market because big boys are actually buttbuddies and bully out everyone trying to change their balance of power, this is why internet in Romania is cheaper and faster than 99% of USA.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ilMx7k7mso here video explanation on your intellectual level.

>>61343573
Like you said, until Comcast sues the city itself. It's an inevitability. Deregulating companies like Comcast will not help smaller companies that are doomed to fail anyways.

>>61343605
Monopolies will happen whether regulation occurs or not. Competition is impossible when a company becomes too large to fail.

>>61343573
>Small ISPs are often the only ones willing to bring fiber internet to undeserved areas. That is until Comcast sues the city itself to stop them.
The current laws are meant to protect small ISPS and give them fair access to utility poles etc, but the big ISPs still mange to fuck them over.

>The FCC's net neutrality order enforced the provisions of Title II's Section 224, which governs pole attachments. More generally, Title II also requires ISPs' rates and practices to be "just and reasonable" and allows consumers and competitors to file complaints about unjust or unreasonable rates and practices.

>Google Fiber had trouble deploying service because incumbent ISPs stalled in providing access to utility poles, Falcon noted. (The Google Fiber deployment problems started before the 2015 Title II reclassification.)

>"If a company the size of Google could be stifled without the law supporting them, what hope does a smaller ISP have in entering into a market where the incumbent broadband provider owns the poles that are a necessary component to deploying the network?" Falcon wrote. "The FCC chairman's plan fundamentally ignores this problem and offers no clear solution to competitors. An incumbent broadband provider that owns a lot of the poles is going to have no federal legal obligation to share that access at fair market rates if broadband is no longer a common carrier service."

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/06/30-small-isps-urge-ajit-pai-to-preserve-title-ii-and-net-neutrality-rules/

>>61343641
Fucking romania? Land of the Gypsis, a fraction the size of the US?

>>61343512
That's actually interesting. Do you have a single source for those statistics or did you compile it yourself?

>>61343655
Google failed because they didn't want to pay to use the ISP's poles. For one, the rate that broadband providers—ranging from small-town cable operators to new entrants like Google—pay to deploy broadband will go up by an estimated $150–200 million per year. And that’s because the Communications Act establishes a higher rate for telecommunications carriers to pay for access to poles, conduits, and rights of way than other Internet service providers.While it may not be the “Commission’s intent to see any increase in the rates for pole attachments,”the agency has no power to stop it. The actual utilities that own these poles get to charge what they want up to the statutory maximum, and the FCC has just raised that maximum. Or to use the FCC’s preferred parlance, utilities will have the “incentive and ability” to exploit this new maximum rate for Internet service providers. The end result: Reclassification would subject Internet service providers “to significantly higher attachment rs, inadvertently threatening the very broadband deployment the Commission seeks to facilitate."

>>61343694
>implying I made up shit myself
laffin at you, sempai. It's clear you haven't done any amount of serious research into the disastrous effects of a Title II classification. Like Healthcare, Americans should expect the prices to rise, while service to fall. Thanks, Obama for my healthcare that rises 20% a year, while deductibles are un-affordable.

File: 61MvIVaurSL[1].jpg (95KB, 648x1000px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 648x1000px

>>61334335
(you)

>>61343735
I'm not even American. Guess I just fell for those
>Latvian dirt farmers have better internet connections than american
memes.

I'm having this problem where I don't pay my ISP and my internet turns off?? Shouldn't this not happen under Net Neutrality? because the internet is an inalienable RIGHT for all people, necessary for life itself, also it is unlimited in breadth and speed.

>>61334401
Bluetooth?

>>61343763
https://www.law.upenn.edu/live/files/3352

Here ya go, friendo.

>>61343641
>I mean it's common knowledge you need to breath, but it doesn't mean it's true
The logic error there is astounding, ass. Each piece of common knowledge stands on its own as to truth value.
>Years ago ISP providers came in agreement to divine market and keep prices at certain level
The fantasy narrative of competition was the one I was talking about, pajeet.

>>61343625
This is a blue board.

>>61343703
>the ISP's poles
That's interesting. Pic related from this here lawyer
http://www.kandutsch.com/articles/access-to-utility-poles-for-ftth-providers
>And that’s because the Communications Act establishes a higher rate for telecommunications carriers to pay for access to poles, conduits, and rights of way than other Internet service providers
No, only unregulated information services. Under Title II, they would get cheaper rates. Why are you lying when the Internet proves you wrong so easily? Why aren't you posting the link to the livestream where you kill yourself?

>>61343779
Cheers mate!

File: 1479448328325.png (96KB, 661x847px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 661x847px

>>61343808
>pic related
>fails to post pic related AGAIN

>>61343735
Stop deflecting you fucking bootlicker. Your muh obongo bait is showing real desperation. This is not a political issue. This is bigger than that. This is a corporate issue.

You fucking /pol/tards are infesting everything with your asinine conspiracies when real power is far more straightforward. This is not about your fucking partisan bullshit this is about the rich vs the poor and it always has been. If you take the side of the billion dollar global corporations you are the enemy. Period.

File: 1461262274864.jpg (41KB, 688x456px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 688x456px

>>61334335

File: e8d44857a79cd7f282405c85ebff91438d89caf0dc23d55738a35ec7fb7aa363.jpg (23KB, 232x270px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 232x270px

>>61343808
>Each piece of common knowledge stands on its own as to truth value.
No if piece of common knowledge can't stand on it's own it's no longer a common knowledge but urban myth.
>The fantasy narrative of competition was the one I was talking about, pajeet.
Now scroll up and check reply chain moron.

>>61343911
>>61343911
>when real power is far more straightforward. This is not about your fucking partisan bullshit this is about the rich vs the poor and it always has been. If you take the side of the billion dollar global corporations you are the enemy.
/pol/, being temporarily embarrassed millionaires in their hearts, have always taken the side of the rich, in the hope, however futile without daddy's money and connections behind them, that they can be self-made men.

>>61344007
>follows linked list
Thank heavens for 4chan-x. Right. Competition is an urban myth.

>>61343808
>Under Title II, they would get cheaper rates
That is assuming the cable company didn't deliberately drag their heels even when the small ISP was allowed access to their poles.

>"Our technician Mr {STEVE KOWALSKI} will meet you at the utility pole between {8:00AM} and {11:00PM} on {September} {first} or {September} {23rd}"
>Have your own technician parked at the utility pole for a fucking month waiting for {STEVE}
>he never shows up
>the phone number you are given connects to a phone maze which leads to a call center, which leads to a message to call a different number
>This happens every single time you try to get work done on utility poles
>your customers lose confidence in you
>your projects all fall months behind
>your investors get pissed
>It turns out Steve Kowalski retired in 1968

Boy this thread sure does make me want to buy a bigger gun for the coming class war.

File: people unironically support this.jpg (298KB, 1113x688px) Image search: [Google]

298KB, 1113x688px

>>61344131
Guns will be one of the few things you will still be allowed to purchase without it being part of a bundle.

>>61344122
Cool story, fgt. Besides aren't most of those poles owned by electrical utilities?

>>61343486
I'd like some specifics on this please. How does this specifically impact small ISPs in any way?

>>61336115
If I were to distribute what I paid for each of those across my net income over the same period, it would cost me less than 5% of what I make. Hell, someone with a simple 80k annual would have to spend 4k per year on medical bills for it to cost 5% of their income. That's absurd even with no insurance at all.

>This isn't about personal gain but about greater good.
Cucked. You realize not the only person in the world that's getting scammed by taxes, right? You are part of a demographic, meaning if you don't personally benefit then there's a fuckton of idiots in a similar situation that also don't benefit. Same goes if you suffer. Same if you benefit.

Policies that benefit you will benefit the common good you are part of. The policies you're describing hurt your common good, while disproportionately helping cheap foreign laborers that the government actively wants to devalue your work through competition. Oh, and they also get community service for raping children. Nice first-world country m8.

>>61343911
The irony is you are giving a regulatory framework over to the existing ISP's that has proven to produce monopolies. These regulations will lead to higher bills, higher starts up costs to new ISP's, slower speeds, less competition, and total control of the internet, including regulation content, to the FCC. The FCC’s newfound control extends to the design of the Internet itself, from the last mile through the backbone. Section 201(a) of the Communications Act gives the FCC authority to order “physical connections” and “through routes,”meaning the FCC can decide where the Internet should be built and how it should be inter connected. You are supporting a corporate agenda, the same thing that will be good for Google, Netflix, AT&T, but you don't even realize it. You can't wait to get back to 1934 style of regulating, can you? Can we actually have some laws, instead of a """"regulation""""" that can be thrown out the window at any time? No one is arguing about the concept of NN, not Chairman Pai, not me, not you. The fashion this should be achieved is in the framework of our constitution and legislative process, AKA write a fucking law. A blatant power grab such as this by un-elected, unaccountable bureaucrats, that just so happened to previously work for as CEO of President of the National Cable & Telecommunications Association and CEO of the Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association, and a literal JEW, should not be supported by me, and not by you.

File: cable-man-upgrading-cables-on-telephone-utility-pole-wearing-hard-F6PC4R.jpg (250KB, 1300x956px) Image search: [Google]

250KB, 1300x956px

>>61344197
>Besides aren't most of those poles owned by electrical utilities?
THe fuckhuge mainline are. Modern electrical companies run everythign underground whenever possible now. Some areas still have above ground power distribution but they are moving away from that.

The utility poles you see now in a modern American city are mostly owned by phone/cable providers.

>>61344257
>demographic
False. It is possible to exclusively benefit particular people in a group simply by dividing that group across a different axis, and "on average" and "on net" don't matter to real people. Who's cucked, now?

>>61344344
Then fine them for non-performance and make it hurt. Why have we as a people gotten so soft that we can't punish the hell out of businesses that don't live up to their obligations?
>the corporation cries out in pain as it strikes you

>>61344155
It's funny that I use none of these things except Amazon, which I could always just use a middle service for.

Newegg isn't even participating in the jew protest, by the way. They apparently don't care like certain google-owned or amazon-owned sites and normalfag communication platforms do.

File: wheeler.png (715KB, 487x615px) Image search: [Google]

715KB, 487x615px

>>61344257
So if one Internet service provider wants to follow in the footsteps of Google Fiber and enter the market incrementally, the FCC may say no. If another wants to upgrade the bandwidth of its routers at the cost of some latency, the FCC may block it. Every decision to invest in ports for interconnection may be second-guessed; every use of priority coding to enable latency-sensitive applications like Voice over LTE may be reviewed with a microscope. How will this all be resolved? No one knows. Ne businesses will have to decide for themselves with newly-necessary counsel from high-priced attorneys and accountants—whether to take a risk. Regulations take a shit ton of money for a small ISP, such as the 140 small ISP's which came out and said that they wouldn't be able to compete because of all the Title II regulation. The fact alone that your taxes WILL go up under Title II is enough to deter me from supporting it, the regulations, and power grab is just icing on the cake.

pic related Tom "trust me goy you need new regulations for our Jewish owned companies to pump as much jewish multiculti tranny loving propaganda into your home as cheep as we want" Wheeler

>>61335116
If ISPs wanted to demand people pay their fair share of bandwidth, they should be enacting higher bills on actual clients of their using higher amounts of bandwidth, not singling out sites and charging extra for them.

Also, it's not an issue of banning monopolies, it's an issue of finding an affordable entry to market. You have to lay down thousands of miles of cable, which means you have to get approval for it from landowners or else get the state to force them through eminent domain, both of which take time on money on top of a process that already takes a shitload of time and money, especially when your competitors are already in the market and are both likely to have higher brand recognition and also more funding to spread propaganda preventing you getting the permission you need.

>>61344391
>Who's cucked, now?
Probably the person making theoretical arguments to justify the government taking his money for services he doesn't need. Just a hunch though.

>>61344407
Newegg isn't a cloud services provider. No skin off their nose.

>>61344450
>le his money meme
It was never your money. It was and remains always the government's.

>>61344407
Anything not shown ina bundle costs substantially more.

The bundles "save" you money by steering you only to those approved sites. Using other sites will be allowed but you pay more per GB. Things like torrents would be impossibly expensive.

>>61344417
I see, you're referring to the if net neutrality exists. I thought anon was saying net neutrality being gone would somehow hurt small ISPs. It is true that barriers to entry, in the form of regulatory procedures (which invariably cost a fuckton of money) stifle competition.

Only the liberal kikes want fast internet guys, give Comcast your money and shut up.

File: 1373159564927.gif (260KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

260KB, 500x281px

>>61344274
Hold on what are you even talking about? The "fashion this should be achieved is in the framework of our constitution and legislative process?" You're arguing about process now? You think we should be handling consumer protections differently and your solution is to not have any?

We're done talking about this.

>>61344485
I can utilize money that hasn't been taken by taxes to further my goals, unlike the alternative.

>>61344503
>paying per GB
Must suck being canadian.

>>61344561
Doesn't mean it's yours, and doesn't mean society should be giving you the ability to coerce others to support your goals against public policy and the greater good.

>>61344560
>fashion this should be achieved is in the framework of our constitution and legislative process
That's the tell of someone who's got a big lobbying arm.

>>61344561
Yeah like for the $159.99/month you'll be paying for your 200mb capped landline with access to Comcastbook AND Comcastflix you fucking moron.

>>61344576
That is the most likely outcome of all this.
>unlimited internet only applies to approved websites
>monthly cap at 2gigs for using other sites
Addition fee of $5/gig

File: wheeler1.jpg (1MB, 3164x2082px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3164x2082px

>>61344560
No, not at all stop being so presumptive. I'm saying we should make a new law, something modern. Not go back to the 1934 model, which is woefully inadequate for today's broadband marketplace, and helped create Ma Bell. You want old style laws, put into place through bureaucracy alone. This should not be a regulation that can be annulled at any moment by any executive. Pai wants open internet, we all want open internet, just not by these regulations put into place that will not benefit anyone but existing ISP's and corporate giants. I made a pic for you, this dude is your hero? A lobbyist?

>>61344584
I was given that money for my work, and had the whole ability to not work or work elsewhere. I am a free man after all, I owe society nothing.

>support your goals against public policy and the greater good.
Any greater good that you yourself do not benefit from is a scam.

>>61342525
>lots of troll threads today

i bet you think people on /pol/ are ironc, they aren't

File: the commedian.jpg (106KB, 561x864px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 561x864px

>>61344682
You fundamentally don't understand modern post-irony.

>>61344644
>using comcast
>using facebook
>using netflix
>implying that there is literally anything stopping ISPs from hiking prices up right now if they are so inclined
My sides.

>>61344652
Curious that non-mainstream sites are the ones that don't seem to give a single shit about this issue. Curious that every single fag I talk to shouts a different made-up pricing scheme like it is relevant to the discussion in any way whatsoever.

>>61344743
Curious they don't mention your broadband bill will go up.

Tell me corpcucks, you don't need unlimited speeds or even a TB of data right?

You don't mind then if they stopped selling TB harddrives and jacked up the prices on the other ones right? afterall it's their business :^) also you're not allowed to self host as that costs Mr Noseberg shekels at comcuck

>>61344768
This, throttle everything linux and open source on the net. This is what we want.

>>61344759
If prices have the capacity to go up why haven't they gone up already?

>>61344673
>I was given that money for my work
At least you acknowledge that it was given to you, not actually earned. Earning is in the eye of society.
>I am a free man after all, I owe society nothing.
Kek. We owe you nothing, especially not the moral endorsement of your solipsistic sociopathy.
>Any greater good that you yourself do not benefit from is a scam.
Think long and hard about this stuff. Don't assume the game ends with your next move like some americuck. Don't assume that other people care more about your muh morals than their collective own.
Do you not benefit from people not building a wall around your muh property? Do you not benefit from not having your head stuck in a guillotine? Think, nigger. Only liberals are tolerant. The left has no problem treating you like a two-timer in a drug gang.

>>61344759
>Curious they don't mention your broadband bill will go up.
Proofs, not begging your own narrative, or gtfo.

>>61344793
DELET

>>61344800
They don't need to, yet. It's about servicing Wall Street usury over a longer scale than next quarter.

>>61344768
>Calls people corpcucks
>the main opponent of NN are literally corporations
What did he mean by this?

Reminder Comcast already imposed 1TB data caps and only gives you another terabyte for $50. They're no longer an unlimited data company, NN would only prevent them from throttling your data use and protect content.

Wait, Canadians have bandwidth caps? Don't they have net neutrality to prevent it?

>>61344825
Anti-NNfags are corpcucks

>>61344825
Cool talking point, bro. Which side almost completely lacks non-corporate support?

So to summarize thus far
>People think that Net Neutrality existed forever and they are somehow going to lose it to big tech private companies
>People don't believe they actually get good speeds for dirt cheap right now because said private industries put tons of money into R&D
>People think giving the internet to the govt would not literally halt any sort of developement for it
You can act as socialist as you want, but it is a proven fact that when the governemnt gets its hands on anything, everybody else loses
Unless there's a war, ofcourse
>[citation needed]
Just think how far processors or cellphones have advanced in the last 15 years because of competition of Intel vs AMD, or Sony vs Samsung or whatever
Do you think anyone'd bother to actually throw money in that if they had the entire monopoly?
That's what's about to happen though and while by all means ISPs are NOT the good guys, it's a choice between bad and utter shit, and I'd much rather pick bad

>>61344800
THEY HAVE BEEN FOR DECADES
WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT

>>61344800
As powerful as they are they need a reason or scapegoat. With rules lifted they can now charge more or deliver less and can single out specific high traffic sites as the culprit.
>it's netflix's fault we have to raise your bills
>by the way we have our own steaming service coming soon which won't have a bandwidth cap

File: wheeler2.jpg (1MB, 3164x2082px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3164x2082px

>>61344856

>>61344864
>You can act as socialist as you want, but it is a proven fact that when the governemnt gets its hands on anything, everybody else loses
>proven fact
Prove it or kill yourself on live stream right now.
Also stop pasting talking points from your sheet.
>>People think that Net Neutrality existed forever and they are somehow going to lose it to big tech private companies
Neutrality was a custom until 2005, when companies slowly ventured into practicing non-neutrality, in part because the hardware to do so became available thanks in part to the war on muh terror.
>>People don't believe they actually get good speeds for dirt cheap right now because said private industries put tons of money into R&D
What R&D? Comcast does no research whatsoever. They buy gear from Motorola or whoever, who spend maybe $50 million a year on real R&D, and install it.
>>People think giving the internet to the govt
Melodramatic exaggeration from your talking point sheet.
>>would not literally halt any sort of developement for it
Proven false by the internet's own state-funded development history.
You simply need to kill yourself.

>>61334335
Facebook it's literally zero rated on most parts of the world without NN, (You) will be paying for non meme shit

>>61336116
you don't get it
I pay for down
Netflix pays for up
If Netflix and I both had Verizon that would be the end if it, but Netflix had it's own provider. Level 3 Communications pays for peering into my ISP's network. Peering rates are what providers pay each other barf on how much traffic they route through each other. The internet has been this way since it became a commercial entity. Usually the rate is low or 0, because I route my traffic through you, you route through me, so if we both a similar number of customers, it's a wash. Netflix, and to a lesser extent youtube and Facebook, totally upended this order by creating massively asymmetrical peering ratios with all the tier 1 ISPs. That Netflix owns Level 3 masks the true nature of the dispute. ISPs are not threatening a group boycott of a popular service to extract rent, they're just demanding Netflix's backbone provider pay a reasonable peering rate for the enormous amounts of bandwidth they're consuming.

>>61344822
>At least you acknowledge that it was given to you, not actually earned. Earning is in the eye of society.
This isn't of any consequence to me. You can call it trading or ransom, the point is I am needed so in exchange for my work I receive adequate compensation. It is in my best interest to get the most possible.

>Kek. We owe you nothing, especially not the moral endorsement of your solipsistic sociopathy.
Now you're just avoiding the point.

>Think long and hard about this stuff. Don't assume the game ends with your next move like some americuck. Don't assume that other people care more about your muh morals than their collective own. Do you not benefit from people not building a wall around your muh property? Do you not benefit from not having your head stuck in a guillotine? Think, nigger. Only liberals are tolerant. The left has no problem treating you like a two-timer in a drug gang.
The only one making assumptions right now is yourself. What you or your group want or care about doesn't matter, because I have value, and I can live anywhere by leveraging my value.

>>61344946
I dont have to prove anything
I'm not a burger, when you do pass Net Neutrality laws and get uber cucked by the government, the only change in my life that will happen is deciding that migrating to most 1st world countries is a better option than the US now
Have a fun life friendo, and remember that regulating the free market always gets you the short end of the stick

>>61344822
I don't have all these bullshit charges on my internet bill, and neither do you. Yet. >>61343196

>>61343196
holy fucking shit look at all that theft

>>61344860
The same side that has spent the most money advertising this issue, I assume.

ITT: /pol/acks and right libertarians try to argue that Comcast and time Warner being able to choose what you can access on the internet while throttling bandwidth is somehow a good thing for the free market.

Next we will get rid of the FDA so we can sell cold medicine with cocaine and heroin in it right??

>>61345129
Nice strawman m8.

>>61345129
>Next we will get rid of the FDA so we can sell cold medicine with cocaine and heroin in it right??
Worked out fine for Portugal.

>>61345129
your views of the free market are very mixed up with what is called corporatism
Also if you think that /pol/acs support (or have ever supported, especially when /pol/ was extremely leftist) anything resembling a free market, you're extremely wrong. They are just succing the Trump penor.
The problem here is that none of the choices are helpful to reach a free market state, you either get cucked by the US, or that_one_big_company (TM)
It's just that I really really really hate governments and would much rather pay more for something, than not get it at all, and if you disagree with that that's completely your freedom, but this is my point of view
t. unironical ancap

>>61345129
>implying nn isn't a scam to dump unlimited data into other networks for free at the expensive of legitimate customers
>implying cocaine is bad if ingested
>implying opiates aren't effective painkillers
how did you gain this level of retardation

File: radium water.jpg (46KB, 640x528px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 640x528px

>>61345129
>Next we will get rid of the FDA so we can sell cold medicine with cocaine and heroin in it right??
Heroin actually relieves cold symptoms, especially the sore throat and cough part. THati si what it was invented for. It works as long as iti isn't abused.

Without the FDA it would be more like a return to the days of snake oil, sugar pills, medical mercury and liquid cancer (pic related).
>you feel that tingle from the radiation? That means it's working! Your arthritis will be gone in no time thanks to our radium tonic

>>61345213
>The problem here is that none of the choices are helpful to reach a free market state
You seem to have lost your focus somewhere. Even if neither one solves the issue, one side is promoting regulation to mask a problem that shouldn't exist while the other is stripping regulation to allow people to see the problem for what it is. Sometimes you have to backtrack to get onto the correct course.

>>61334335
>but what if there's no other company in the area? they can do what they want!
until another company opens up and creates competition, driving prices down.

it's called capitalism fuckers, maybe instead of going against it every waking moment of your life and complaining about how it sucks, you actually try working with it for once.

>Being this fucking retarded. KYS

>>61345046
>implies that if they aren't line items they aren't being charged
Wow.

>>61345129
>cold medicine with cocaine and heroin in it right??
Illegal drugs work better anyway.

>>61345310
>until another company opens up and creates competition, driving prices down.
Because this shit just happens in every conceivable market? More fantasy. There's no reason for companies to enter markets that they don't believe will profit them without holding a gun to their head.
>it's called capitalism fuckers
It's called global rule 2, niggers. Kill yourself.

>>61345310
>a oligopoly instead of a monopoly

File: radium suppositories.jpg (184KB, 1297x1045px) Image search: [Google]

184KB, 1297x1045px

>>61345266
Pic related was radium tablets designed to be jammed up your ass. They were made in Denver in the 1930s.

The 1938 safe drug act put an end to all this evil shit. It took over 100 deaths from one particular newly released elixir to bring about these rules and regulations.

The government is no better than corporations. Just trading one master for another. Open up the market and end local monopolies.

>>61345129
yeah if they truly fuck it up so bad and everyone is unhappy it only makes opportunity for new companies

>>61345401
>The 1938 safe drug act put an end to all this evil shit.
Until the FDA got pwned by the drug companies, thanks not to the FDA proper, but to legislation overruling the FDA.
Representative republics are nothing more than cuckoldry dressed in pretty language. Only direct democracy ever works, and with blockchains and smartphones, there are no legitimate excuses not to be doing this right now.

>Net neutrality is the principle that Internet service providers and governments regulating the Internet should treat all data on the Internet the same, not discriminating or charging differentially by user, content, website, platform, application, type of attached equipment, or mode of communication.
>retarded people want to get rid of this

>>61345310
>socialists oppose capitalism because of monopolies
>socialists socialize ISPs
>SocNet is now only provider
>service is shit
>goes bankrupt
how do these people remember to breathe?
>internet for none, equality for all
>have to interact with other people again
>meet grill
>get married
>have kids
>be happy
but I'm willing to work with them for all the wrong reasons

>>61345401
>>61345266
Selling poison as food or medicine is murder to begin with. Why exactly is a whole additional regulatory framework necessary to deal with them?

>>61345437
>Create startup isp
>Time Warner and Comcast gang bang you out of business

Yeah no.

>>61345462
FDA is one of the main pillars of the country's pharmaceutical complex. It creates an incredibly high barrier for entry to the industry, and that barrier to entry filters down competitors enough that insane patent laws can be enforced.

If not for the FDA it would be possible for small-scale pharmacists and chemists to operate by selling patent-infringing medicines at lower prices.

>>61345463
but they are going to throttle everyone's internet so bad and they will be so despised it will be easy!

>>61345525
patents only last 2-5 years and most of the "new" drugs that hit the market each year are old drugs with an extra hydrogen or whatever, they'd just sell generics
>>61345549
group boycott is already illegal

>>61345462
>Selling poison as food or medicine is murder to begin with.
Because even now corporations can lobby a weak willed congressman and have their toxic substance labeled NOT POISON and introduce it to our food chain. For profit.

Monsanto is a good example of this.They have killed thousands but with enough money all deaths can be labeled "inconclusive". Only this year has a single state finally come forward and admitted that roundup is liquid cancer, and this is something the rest of the world did ages ago.

Republicans defended Monsanto the same way they defend big tobacco and now big ISP. Corporate profits must be protected at all costs. To do any less is communism.

can someone give me the tl;dr of this whole bullshit and why I should give a fuck as a non-American?

>>61334565
Why the fuck should I care about that?

>>61345585
That's a moot issue. The FDA isn't impervious to corruption where the rest of the government isn't. If anything they're even worse, being appointed rather than elected.

>>61345595
The only way this affects you as a non-american is that if it works for americans then it might undermine your current ruler's position on the issue should it be opposite.

>>61345595
>why I should give a fuck as a non-American?
Internet providers are exploring methods of increasing the profitability of their services even if this means raising costs for the end user and limiting what content you have access to.

If successful it will be coming to your own country very soon.

>>61345595
ISP's are butthurt because some garage made companies are making billions using their infrastructure and offering better products than their shitty affiliate company offers. So ISP pays pajeet Pai to tear down the legislation paid by the garage companies in the previous administration.

As a non-american services you might use would jack up the prices, because is YOU the consumer that has to pay for whatever the ISP charges those business.

File: 1497329294184.png (889KB, 877x839px) Image search: [Google]

889KB, 877x839px

>>61342191
Even small internet startups are fighting for Net Neutrality. Only ISPs benefit from its removal.

Big corporations don't want to pay for higher speeds and smaller companies realize that they don't stand a fucking chance if bigger companies can afford faster speeds.

>>61345704
>amazon
>netflix
>microsoft
>twitter
>facebook
>reddit
>garage mode
This is getting pathetic.

Last I remembered the ISPs didn't give a fuck until Hollywood stepped in to force ISPs to send out warning letters etc for downloading movies.

>>61345760
You're contradicting yourself. If paid prioritization is disadvantageous to the little guy why are all the big websites opposed to it?

>Not seeing the true root of the problem is municipal/state cronyism fucking everyone.

>>61345565
>patents only last 2-5 years
Data exclusivity lasts much longer, at least 10 years. Also, creating a "new" combination of dosage form and active ingredient extends the patent on the active ingredient.
>group boycott is already illegal
Only against Israel.

>>61345828
>You're contradicting yourself. If paid prioritization is disadvantageous to the little guy why are all the big websites opposed to it?
Because it is neutral within the universe of content providers but detrimental to the whole.
Is shilling the best job you could get? Your talking points are shit. Go away.

>>61345828
Paid prioritization would be based on size. Small sites will have low traffic, thus it will be cheaper for them to pay for prioritization, while big sites will get absolutely fucked. It's no wonder that media giants are in a huge panic.

File: retarded.gif (2MB, 500x333px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 500x333px

>>61345828
because it's a disadvantage for big companies as well. Netflix doesn't want to spend more money to keep Hulu down when they are already in the lead. Right now all they have to do is provide a more compelling service at a competitive price.

>>61345828
every website is against it because the only one the profits is the tier 3 isp

>>61345882
lmao, I used to do what the guy in that gif is doing when I was little. I'm guessing that's from Goldenboy?

>>61345908
Yes

>>61345877
Paid prioritization is actually a huge competitive tool for the internet. Right now nobody gets priority, so as long as a site is online and properly optimized they never have to be worried about someone providing a faster service, no matter how massive they become. With paid prioritization some independent streamer could pay a trivial amount of money to deliver a faster service than Google pays hundreds of thousands for. NN is anti-competitive as fuck and is one of the main driving factors of the ongoing consolidation of services on the web.

File: 1472716328168.jpg (202KB, 1920x1330px) Image search: [Google]

202KB, 1920x1330px

>>61345908
But now you can do it in style.

>>61345987
>NN is anti-competitive
>proceeds to outline utter fantasy situation which will never happen irl
Competition gets in the way of service, you religious cuckold.
All of you ISP shills need to be killed.

>>61346129
Competition is what has driven this world forward in the past 3000 years, and will continue to do so for the next 3000.
It's just simple economics, there is no need for action when a perfect state is achieved.
In this case the perfect state is a monopoly, after which thw company/government does not have to appeal to anyone but itself.
That's why governments are inherently bad, they never compete, they are their own monopolies

>>61346047
Do they still make those? I remember seeing pictures of one in a book when I was in elementary school, then never again until you mentioned it just now

>>61346129
>Competition gets in the way of service
That's the exact opposite of what competition does.

>>61346224
AliExpress my dude.

>>61346217
>Competition is what has driven this world forward in the past 3000 years
Appeal to tradition. Also, your (((world))) is not the only world. Eastern civilization has been driven forward by cooperation, and frankly, they're less toxic for it.
>and will continue to do so for the next 3000.
False.
>It's just simple economics,
Appeal to ignorance.
>there is no need for action when a perfect state is achieved.
Exactly. The Cult of Doing is a Fascist meme, btw. What do you *need* action for? What's with this primordial debt obsession to muh progress?
>>61346217
>That's why governments are inherently bad
False assumption: that goverment must necessarily and inherently be an other from the people. That's the past 3000 years, but now we know better. The world is non-ergodic. It is not constrained to behave as it has in the past.
>That's the exact opposite of what competition does.
Begging the question. It's incorrect to assume they're competing for my favor, rather than Wall Street's. Two elephants competing doesn't do shit for me but trample the grass. Two sluts competing by flashing me more doesn't make for a better business partner.

>>61345780
>amazon
bezos bought some no name company in the 90's
>netflix
some dudes dumped their old companies and got mommy's money to fund a new company
>microsoft
Some dudes in a dorm started selling software
>twitter
some dude created a sms thingy
>facebook
some dude stole the idea of some other dudes
>reddit
some dudes created in a dorm
>this isn't garage made

These companies started really small and rode the internet boom.

>>61345987
>You're a small company with a good service, but no money to pay the ISPs absurd fees
>You get fucked because an already established company with a lot of money
>This is competitive

Wew

>>61346289
>Eastern world
so in your parallel universe communist korea has moved ahead of capitalist korea?
>muh progress
I would hate playing with muh sticks until I die at 22 by old age
>governments used to be bad for 3000 years now, and it worked for each and every one of them granting them immense power, but now we know better so they'll stop doing that
Two companies competing for the greater share of the market also works in your benefit for reasons I deemed obvious, since you get services better than you would, and usually for prices way lower than if there existed a monopoly

>>61336273
Wait until the 2020 olympics.

>>61334401
>>>61334335 (OP)
>The internet can be destroyed by ending net neutrality

I got news for you buddy. Murica is not the Internet.

We don't really give a shit, nobody owns the Internet.

So stop making this everyone's issue, because it's not.

>>61334335
>fake news
Retard who needs to be gassed detected.

>>61345861
group boycott is something else, but I'll assume you're being snarky

>>61346357
Russia, you stupid fucking nigger.
>>61346357
>I would hate playing with muh sticks until I die at 22 by old age
>because if we stop doing shit for no reason other than muh primordial debt now, everything from the past goes away
Typical nigger, doesn't know when to quit.
>>61346357
>Two companies competing for the greater share of the market also works in your benefit for reasons I deemed obvious
Obvious, because you have no facts to back up your case, omnly economic theory written to benefit the ruling class.
>you get services better than you would
Begging the question, you cuck.
>>61346357
>usually for prices way lower than if there existed a monopoly
>usually
Nice weasel word. It's unreasonable to compare unregulated competition to a regulated utility to a municipal broadband service. There were real technological limitations 33 years ago that do not exist today. Everyone is buying the same equipment off the same docks now.
You've simply never left the basement to see how things work in the real world or acknowledge that other people exist.

File: hardo.gif (26KB, 300x291px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 300x291px

The internet was better before all those AOL fags and iPhone normies. Back to shitpostan on usenet and IRC! \o/