Tell me, within 60 seconds or less why should i care about peering

Literally no one on this board even knows what net neutrality is. They just know they want daddy govt to dictate how the internet is managed, to protect them from ebil corporations.

>>61340254
Companies cannot be trusted to uphold honest and good practices in nearly any paradigm, and they cannot be held accountable by the public due to the decades-long, multifaceted psyop to undermine the consumer's power.

here's the thing

even if removing NN results in better competition, it will still allow for censoring.


It seems that the arguments both sides are using are completely independent; one side is saying that x, y and z bad things will happen, and the other side is saying that a, b, and c good things will happen. And abc/xyz things are not related...

>we may all end up banned from 4chan

You say that as if that's a negative or bad thing, I mean really.

Its pretty simple, without net neutrality pretty much all traffic was handled equally other than Comcast throttling torrents which they still do to this day because it is impossible to prove that they do. Then one day huge streaming services like netflix and youtube were asked to pay their fair share for using half of the backbone bandwidth. Suddenly net neutrality was an important issue or you aunt was going to have to pay and extra five bucks a month for Facebook when this had never happened before. It is just a scam so netflix can get out of actually paying for the cost of their operations.

I would love for net neutrality to not pass so that people will finally dump these shitty Internet corps.

Maybe that will be the straw that breaks the camel's back. People are willing to get raped by Comcast paying a shitload for 20Mb down 250gb capped.

>>61340694
you're forgetting how netflix literally offered FREE caching servers for comcast, twc, etc but were rejected
it's not about network usage, it's about double dipping and increasing profits
phone companies dont charge the person who is being called (unless it's an 800#), they charge the person making the call.
the mailman doesnt charge you for receiving a letter, they charge the person sending the letter.
toll roads dont charge your destination, they only charge you for driving on it.
etc.
gr8 b8 m8 you got me to respond

Im not American.

>>61340775
We'd be stuck for 4-8 years with it, though, as I doubt Trump will drain the swamp that is the FCC (as if he's been draining the swamp at all...)
>willing to get raped by Comcast
I literally moved several blocks over just because my old house wasn't being covered by Google Fiber. Comcast was my only option (unless I wanted to get satellite internet). If I was a poorfag, I'd still be stuck in my old shithole, with the same awful tech support and unreliable service.
The US needs competition. I'd actually be ok with removing NN if they also made franchise agreements illegal and allowed munincipal ISPs, as then Comcast etc would start to face serious competition

>>61340454
That was my first thought when I saw it

>>61340352
You stupid faggot, who do you think wants net neutrality the most?

Google, Netflix, Rackspace, and other supercorporations that don't give a fuck about you.

>>61340208
>why should i care about peering issues between large corporations.

Nobody will be able to bite at obvious bait on 4chan anymore.

>>61340954
That's pretty much the core of the issue.
You either have NN or have actual competition between the ISPs. If you have neither, you end up with everything NN is trying to prevent.

Without a way to end ISP monopolies, you need legislation to stop them from fucking over consumers. There's no inventive for them not to at that point.

>>61340208
If we have to explain it then there's no hope for you. Plus I feel like you only made this thread to watch the /g/ and /pol/ (<tired of their fuck shit) autists go at each other.

>>61340208
FUCKING CUNTS, STAY ON ONE THREAD

STOP SPAMMING THIS SHIT, YOU FUCKING REDITURDS

>>61340208
reminder: the internet is not USA-only

File: 19748542_249546135547537_5838557795250617998_n.jpg (81KB, 640x960px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 640x960px

>>61342180
Fuck you, you're not my mod.

>>61340352
you mean CEO's
engineers just want the fucking network to work in proper order

Sorry I'm watching my favorite Rogers owned sports team play the neighboring Roger's owned sports team at Roger's Arena on my favorite Roger's owned cable sports station over muh Roger's wifi.
What about giant corporations like Netflix again? Are they making it hard for Rogers to make money?

>>61342723
LoL, Engineers just want a high five figure paycheck for as little effort as possible.

glorified tradesmen, the lot of 'em.

File: 18mn5vrly9hlvjpg.jpg (206KB, 636x848px)

206KB, 636x848px

Net Neutrality is about stopping cable internet providers from eventually imposing their content tiered system on everyone, which is found in their failing television business model. They HAVE to keep cable television around regardless of how many people are dropping it. They have to squeeze every last dollar from their customers (which at this point is almost everyone that wants to use the internet in the united states.)

You might think it's a meme to assume they will charge you different rates for different addresses you access, but they can absolutely do that. It's entirely up to them if net neutrality is out the window, because they won't be breaking the law.

All traffic should be treated equally.

>>61342781
This is about the united states, bro.

>>61340208
It means (if you live in america) isp's can dictate what you want to view on the internet, they can also freely monitor all your activity and f you do anything illegal i.e. bypassing restrictions, torrenting, you will be pressed for charges or incrimination.

>>61342892
>All traffic should be treated equally.
so the network should get bogged down by everyone using netflix?

>>61343035
For now.

>>61340694
>Then one day huge streaming services like netflix and youtube were asked to pay their fair share for using half of the backbone bandwidth
the consumers pay for that, you enormous fucking retard

>>61343181
It is not bogged down if they invest in proper networking equipment and don't overcommit traffic.

Do not allocate 128GBs of RAM to a VM when you only have 2 available.

File: scared merchant.png (20KB, 183x232px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 183x232px

>>61343181
>oversell bandwidth
>users use it
>network sucks because i'm a greedy jew

m-muh netflix

>>61343181
If I want to use all my capped data on netflix, i should have that choice. I'm paying for it.

>>61343181
You pay for a certain amount of bandwidth, correct? Like, say, 30 mbit/s.

In that case, it doesn't matter what you use it for, be it 30 mbit/s of Netflix, games downloading at 30 mbit/s, or just browsing 4chan.

Data is data, it's not any bigger whether it's 1 gig of ebooks or 1 gig of streaming movies, and you're paying for that bandwidth.

>>61343181
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bruce-kushnick/the-book-of-broken-promis_b_5839394.html

Look me in the face and tell me
Four
Hundred
Billion
Dollars

Was not enough to upgrade their existing network infrastructure.

>>61343181
nn allows qos control, just not throttling due to arbitrary policies and politics

god you americans are so fucking simpleminded and slow

roads allow all cars to drive on them, all under the same rules. that doesnt mean there cant be traffic lights

>>61340208
If you are a normie who only uses the most basic of social media sites (Facebook, Reditt, etc.) you will probably benefit.

Those of us who use 4chan and other things that are more niche will be forced to pay more just to go about our business.

Anons will lose and have to pay for normies to be normies.

>>61340208
Cast your vote
http://www.strawpoll.me/13420739
http://www.strawpoll.me/13420739
http://www.strawpoll.me/13420739

>>61343307
>upgrade everything to fiber
I'm hoping that means adding in fiber and not ripping out perfectly fine copper phone lines

File: 1495959406210.png (167KB, 318x308px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 318x308px

>>61340352
>Companies cannot be trusted to uphold good and honest practices
And the government can?

>>61343890
Since they don't directly profit from the internet like businesses do, yes.

>>61343890
this is such a false equivalence, I can barely come up with a response you might understand.

the government has REGULATORY CONTROL.

the ISPs want ABSOLUTE CONTROL.

the government's REGULATIONS are what prevents the ISPs from having ABSOLUTE CONTROL.

there is a very stated difference.

>>61343928
I can't even trust the government to put in a road in a timely manner
a good example of public/private ISP's is click! in tacoma washington

Honestly hope it passes so the Americans start their own cyberpunk dystopia while the rest of us watch.

>>61343928
>The government can be trusted to uphold good and honest practices
You have to be 18+ to post on 4chan.

>>61344044
I want to repeal net neutrality now wth

File: faggot.jpg (176KB, 600x716px) Image search: [Google]

176KB, 600x716px

>fuck net neutrality
>mobile posts

File: 1467031331604.gif (3MB, 400x225px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 400x225px

>>61340399
>it will still allow for censoring
>censorship isnt already happening on the top sites

>>61344044
>so the Americans start their own cyberpunk dystopia
>start
It began long ago my friend. Americans have brainwashed themselves to follow two identical parties while the corporations enslave them, slowly bleeding the middle class dry and creating nothing but a college educated slave race.

This is the future they have chosen, there is no going back. The rest of the world can only hope that the corporate army spares them from freedom and capitalism.

>>61344195
Fun fact, those top sites are privately owned and thus don't have to broadcast your opinion.

>>61344240
Same with ISPs

>>61344240
thats why nothing is going to be different.

>>61344254
ISPs are, or rather should be, a utility like a phone company. Imagine a phone company cutting your call short because your opinion doesn't line up with theirs. Unthinkable, no?

A utility is different from a social media site. There is a very large, very clear distinction here.

>>61340208
Because it fucks the consumers over and gives companies more profit in an already monopolized market.

>>61340994
This is true. These major companies have been supporting NN for years. I don't know how they profit from it though and would like a genuine explanation. Please and thank you.

>>61344436
Netflix is the easiest one to explain. The separate ISPs all have connections to large cable companies, who are losing ground to Netflix fast. If ISPs get free reign, Netflix will be throttles out of a distance in favour of cable.

As for Google, some ISPs have tried redirecting customers from Google to their own affiliated search engines because ad revenue is lucrative stuff.

The final one I don't know a whole lot about but the general trend is that if ISPs get their way they'll favour affiliated services to the detriment of their customers. This also hurts these specific customers.

>>61340352
Neither can the government. So what's the real solution here?

>>61344535
>throttles out of a distance in favour of cable.
*throttled out of existence. Yes, I'm a phoneposter

>>61344535
>Netflix will be throttles out of a distance in favour of cable.
Or they'll do the smart thing and cut a deal with mobile internet providers to offer cheaper plans for phones and tablets and undercut the cable companies even further.

>>61344538

That's exactly the point, I don't know what you don't understand. Nothing in NN lets the government throttle the internet. All it does is give them the power to smack any corporation that tries. If the government wanted to throttle, NN doesn't let them do that. I don't know where you got the idea that it does.

>>61344578
I think throttling is the least of my concerns with all this.

>>61344578
It gives the government the power to smack down any service provider that isn't meeting the standards it decides on. What happens if those standards change? What happens if the next administration decides that certain sites and services are harmful to network neutrality?

It's easier to give the government power than it is to take it back.

>>61343928
so the ISPs will just continue lobbing as they do now, cool

>>61344577
Yes, because restructuring their business to target only mobile devices is a viable strategy.

Also, all the biggest cellular carriers offer TV packages. How receptive do you think they'll be to competition?

>>61344535
Oh shit, well that sucks. Even without NN though, wouldn't there be businesses that made sure their model was no throttling, just to quickly grasp the brunt of the market? That seems very likely to me. Of course I'm not sure how well that would work with traffic, so for argument's sake, let's call it a bunch of local companies via county instead of say city or town.

>>61344619
>standards it decides on

Yeah, "All traffic must be treated the same". That's the standard. If the government changed it, they'd be violating their own law and it would be the easiest thing in the world to detect and whichever political party that wasn't involved would eviscerate the other.

I don't know what part of that offends your precious little feelings, but if you can't handle that, maybe go back to your AOL keyword sites. I don't think you understand what NN is or even how the internet works or even how the government functions outside of what InfoWars tells you.

>>61344649
>Even without NN though, wouldn't there be businesses that made sure their model was no throttling, just to quickly grasp the brunt of the market?
That sounds like a wonderful solution but then you're looking at a new company springing up across the entire US, or as you put it, a whole bunch of companies, which means a MASSIVE investment in infrastructure. That's not likely to happen. Even if it did, net neutrality is a good thing here as it doesn't raise the barrier to entry, it just limits fuckery once you achieve market dominance. Rarely ever has an issue been so simple and yet so clouded by corporate lobbying.

>>61340994
Only only people not in support of NN are the ISPs. (aka the people who will benifit the most out of this bullshit).
Of course internet companies like netflix and google will be in favor of keeping the internet open.

All net neutrality does is protect the users of american ISPs, it's not affecting everyone

>>61344698
>If the government changes their law they'd be violating the law
I'm not sure you understand how laws work. When a law is changed, the old version of the law stops being enforced.

If the federal government under a future administration redefines the standards enforced by the FCC, the old standards no longer apply.

>>61344811
>only people not in support of NN are the ISPs
Comcast and Time Warner are two of the biggest public supporters for this whole Day of Action thing.

That right there should tell you everything you need to know. It's about as trustworthy as a pedophile announcing "penis inspection day" at a local kindergarten.

>>61340208
for fucks sake 4chan (and everyone else on the internet) used to oppose the fuck out of this shit.
it wasn't until "muh free markets" and "muh trump" /pol/ faggots came along that people started to actually give people shit about supporting net neutrality.

>>61340994
>Google, Netflix, Rackspace, and other supercorporations
As opposed to the poor mom & pop cable companies, amirite? Fuck Netflix for thinking they can get equal treatment, greedy megacorp.

>>61344881
>Comcast and Time Warner are two of the biggest public supporters for this whole Day of Action thing.
Hahaha no they're not. They're saying they support "open and free internet" while opposing the law that makes the internet open and free. They're concern trolls and doing it for publicity.
>>61344898
>for fucks sake 4chan (and everyone else on the internet) used to oppose the fuck out of this shit.
This is a troll post, right? Or do you honestly live in your own little bubble, thinking that this is just something anyone with more than two braincells is doing to spite trump? This doesn't even involve trump, this boils down to a simple debate; should ISPs be allowed to throttle traffic at will without oversight?

>>61340352
companies do whatever they have an incentive to do my dude
hate the game devs , not the player

>>61340254
It's amazing how propaganda works. These elites have got you against regulation to keep net neutrality in tact just because the nigger president's party was the one that claim victory to protecting customers.

>>61340254
>>61345227
That's exactly why they called the bill Net Neutrality. It makes it easier to mislead people on what's being debated.

Banned for how long?

File: 1472877626114.jpg (116KB, 331x319px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 331x319px

so much for your freedom
get cucked muricunts

left wing fear mongering:
>you'll get banned from 4chan

right wing fear mongering:
>you're literally trapped on 4chan forever

wonder which one is more effective

>>61345418
left

>>61345458
don't you wish lol

>>61345383
Laugh now until your country does the same shit. You won't be laughing when it comes.

>>61342704
God I miss kids on the street kids on the beat beat kids beat kids

>>61344044
America will burn the world before they fall. If America or China falls they're going to take the rest of the world down with them.

God I can't wait until NN is stripped and 4chan is banned via DNS and prevents all you fucking braindead /pol/tards who can barely boot their computer, much less form an opinion that wasn't forged in the asshole of a mongolian cartoon factory, from accessing this website.

>>61345645
nice fear mongering anon heres your UPBOAT

It doesn't matter, America is not a real democracy so no amount of whining will do anything.

>armchair politic enthusiasts on the internet think they can fight the FCC and all of congress
lmao

>>61344538
Two wrongs don't make a right. If Net Neutrality is dealt with then the issues with how the internet is handled in this country can be addressed directly. Otherwise it's just another layer of bullshit that needs to be addressed.

Furthermore removing net neutrality would force internet corporations like Netflix to compete against ISPs, which could have interesting results on its own.

There aren't amazing reasons to oppose NN, but I have yet to see any reason to actually support it, probably in no small part because the people shrieking about it are just randoms that facebook, twitter, and reddit (all of whom have endorsed NN) have stirred into a panic.

File: :3.jpg (142KB, 488x452px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 488x452px

>>61342892
Does anybody else want this to happen?
>the year is 2020
>AT&T offers continues to offer tiered, capped DSL at a price greater than equalibrium
>Krazy Bob's ISP begins to offer unlimited, non-tiered DSL at $8 monthly
>AT&T declares bankruptcy citing loss of customers
>Krazy Bob achieves 90% market share. Merges with IBM. Shareholders make millions

>>61346202
Didn't ibm have links to Nazi Germany? If so then yes absolutely

>>61342111
I'm inclined to disagree.
Not having NN doesn't inherently make ISPs start competing more.
>"Hey, 'competitor' CEO, you hear that neutrality thing's dead?"
>"Oh, yeah. I'm gonna set up some speed fees for everyone I'm not directly in business with. You?"
>"Haha, same! Think we should change our coverage borders any time soon?"
>"Nah, who's gonna notice people've only got one choice?"
>"Consumers?"
>"Well yeah, but I meant people who actually matter."
>"Oh. No-one, of course."
>*rich laughter*

>land of the freeeeeeeeee

>>61340454
its honestly bad, the jews know that if we're allowed to come together and form a hivemind it will destroy theirs.

we cant have that now can we goyim?

>>61343807
>free market
Would be great. Too bad we don't have one.

PRO GOVERNMENT NEETS WHO REQUIRE NEETBUX TO LIVE CAN DIE
t.tax payer

>>61340208
Because it effects you

>>61342056
Underrated

I don't know shit, but I know two things about it
>MSM attention to the issue is somewhat strange, considering that last year they didn't run news about it as the rate that we see now
>america needs a way to give more freedom to anyone that wants to run a ISP
>google wants to keep his monopoly on internet ads

>>61340208
All of this seems so pointless. If the big companies that want to keep the net neutral (aka Google) can't beat the likes of Verizon, Comcast, Time Warner, just what the fuck are we supposed to do?

I care but honestly there's not a damn thing I can do

>>61346442
Competent government that would be great too bad we don't have one

File: 1491942017553.jpg (564KB, 800x1200px) Image search: [Google]

564KB, 800x1200px

>>61346202
>the year is 2020
>AT&T offers continues to offer tiered, capped DSL at a price greater than equalibrium
>Krazy Bob's ISP begins to offer unlimited, non-tiered DSL at $8 monthly
>AT&T contact his favorite government lobbist and presses bogus charges against Krazy Bob
>Krazy Bob has to declare bankruptcy after getting a sentence that forbids them of conducting regular business anywhere on this hemisphere
>No news of it will be ever posted because those media outlets aren't part of your data plan

File: 1469413088269.jpg (16KB, 500x326px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 500x326px

>or else we may all end up banned from 4chan

I really want nothing more to be honest.

>>61347403
Main stream media is probably only giving it attention because Trump and things related to him and his staff gets big ratings. Otherwise they wouldn't as they are owned by the same companies that run ISPs.

>>61347688
This is what would actually happen.

>>61340208
Thankfully I'm not from a 3rd world country, so I don't have to deal with corporations restricting my freedom.

We would be fine without many of Net Neutrality's rules if state laws were changed that promoted more competition so more ISP companies can pop up to just easily screw over these major ISPs who will end up throtting certain sites.

>>61345383
>EU
>ban porn
>ban racist words
>ban protests

>>61340208
Basically anyone who is against net neutrality is misinformed because internet dominant companies want proprietary over the internet and are spewing out propaganda to keep control.

Net Neutrality:
-Protects the Users
-Gives everyone Equal treatment of Packets allows for freedom on the web
-Speeds up the internet for small sites

The internet is essential for businesses and is becoming essential for individuals. If it is not treated like a utility, large corporations, who can afford to pay more for their internet service, will suck up all the bandwidth. The recently adopted rules still allow ISPs to block illegal content, so that is not an issue. It seems that most people opposed to net neutrality are opposed to merely it because they think the idea came out of the Obama administration. The idea is decades old, and it came from internet users!

>>61340208
You should not.

The free market will sort this out.

>>61349126
Problem is that American politics is so deeply, heavily corrupted that the legislation itself will be 50 pages of bullshit with a few 'extra' pages stapled onto the end, put there by the politicians that comcast et al furnished with refrigerators stuffed with money, which basically nullify the whole thing for comcast et al, but leave it whole for any new competitors.

>>61340208
because overlord soros says you should.

>>61349282
It's interesting how there's corporate interest on both sides. Actually, this wouldn't have even existed if there wasn't corporate interest on both sides. In cases where corporations all agree on something, the issue never sees the light of day.

>>61349126
People who are for net neutrality are also misinformed.
Both sides are heavily misinformed, since in europe they just saw net neutrality as a self-evident good idea. But in the US you need to pay politicians to think it's a good idea.

US politicians all need to die.

I think that way too many people only focus on the cableification of the Internet by ISPs without caring enough about the other part of the problem: ISPs charging companies to use their networks. If this was allowed then the current state of the consolidation of the web would get even worse as new players couldn't possibly deal with that new barrier to enter the market, a really bad thing for competition and innovation.

>>61347688
this.

>>61349369
>ISPs charging companies to use their networks
That isn't even the worst of it. The most important part of net neutrality is that it doesn't allow ISPs to censor things. Everything must be given equal treatment.

>>61349126
This is what infuriates me. The only opposition is from people that know nothing about the topic just spouting a simplified version of their political ideology. This wasn't happening a few years ago.

File: 1329416748012.png (152KB, 500x282px) Image search: [Google]

152KB, 500x282px

>ISP's have your interests at heart
>ISP's won't take advantage of net neutrality being repealed it to make the market even less competitive

You know how some cellular providers say "X service gets free data usage on our service" They have a deal in place to prioritize their traffic over others. They also fuck anyone else trying to build a new stream service.

Now I know the 90% of the users wanting net neutrality repealed are just trolls from T_D and /pol/ but really; do you want to have the ISP be able to say "You have to pay $20/mo an additional for pornhub and 4chan"

The internet was built and designed for free and open sharing of traffic, let's keep it that way.

"BUT GOVERNMENT REGULATIONS ARRR BADD!!!!"

Oversight as Title II prevents any fuckups or issues. Anytime something has been deregulated, companies took advantage of that to grow the wage gap and make the rich richer and the poor suffer. Or cause disaster in the market.

You gain nothing by keeping net neutrality, but you can risk losing everything if you lose it.

>>61349126
This, A thousand times this.

>>61344811
You're also a fucking idiot. IBM, Cisco, Juniper, Broadcom, Qualcomm, Nokia, and Panasonic are all against net neutrality.

If you had to trust a group of megacorps, which ones would you side with: the ones who actually do shit and make things happen, or a bunch of media companies that contribute very little, and what contributions they do make generally fucking suck?

>>61344436
They profit from net neutrality by not having their bottom line cut into when negotiating their high traffic usage with ISPs. Google, Netflix, Facebook, and the like would be in hot water if it became more expensive for them to force feed you autistic shit over their social networks/media, so they're making a preemptive strike to hamstring ISPs ability to negotiate.

It *is* effectively more expensive to route data for Netflix or Facebook than some schmuck's backwater conspiracy site. These large media corporations have unfathomably large infrastructure surrounding them and there are people whose whole lives revolve around integrating things you may never understand into an ISPs network.

The only reason net neutrality is a concern for consumers is because other draconic regulations (namely pole attach rules) allow some ISPs to run what boils down to a zoning-enforced monopoly. The fix isn't net neutrality, but fixing or removing the regulations that allow ISPs to lock down markets.

>>61343250
>>61343289
Wrong, but I guess I can't expect /g/ consumerists to expend the two minutes of thinking to realize why.

Go ahead and imagine how much more work it is to handle the traffic being generated by a fuckhuge site like Netflix versus routing general traffic to small destinations. One pushes more volume in a day than you may use in your entire life, requires a fleet of autists to maintain, requires purpose-built load balancing and quality of service, and all of this happens at a few points in the network. The other occurs in such low volume with such a topological spread that special considerations are generally never required.

Guess which is more expensive.

>>61340994
Because everyone except ISPs get fucked over, and that includes businesses that own websites. If your ISP is going to throttle you for visiting Netflix of course Netflix is going to be concerned. If the way you approach issues is "hurr durr this side has these people supporting it, and that side has those people supporting it" instead of actually trying to understand how something affects you then you're retarded.

>>61350524
Scalping consumers that could leave if your zoned monopoly ever fails is retarded when you have a proverbial Fountain of Youth available to you.

Net neutrality wasn't a twinkle in FAANG's eye before 2015, but how often were those services throttled on your end before then?

I understand how this affects me. I lived without "net neutrality" from the early 2000s to 2015, and nothing was different. You're making these kneejerk reactions to thin fucking air, and you're being used by generally worthless social, media, and advertising companies in a power play.

>>61350508
>This guy wants to pay an additional $50/mo to stream video

>>61350592
See
>>61350588

Question: is the market currently regulated by the businesses? Regardless, nothing should change the way it is now, especially my access to 4chan which I have paid for.

Remove NN. It didn't help anyone. It's only there to help Google.

>>61342892
>thinking this will happen

I can tell how many of you are following left media thinking this shit is real

Why the fuck do I care about Netflix and Google again? NN only supports them.

>>61350647
Like it or not >>61349126 is right you know, this site would be killed without it

>>61350696
4chan or 99% of the websites on the free web are not going away.

Honestly, how could you not support Net Neutrality in its current state. Most everyone opposing it that i've seen is just memeing.

>>61350696
And how exactly would 4chan die?

Before you answer, please remember that net neutrality wasn't a thing before 2015, and that according to your previous statement, it should have died a long time ago.

>>61340208
You shouldn't

>>61350721
>>61350696
getting rid of Net Neutrality won't kill 4chan or other websites that are notorious. ISPs aren't getting into censorship.

However, if they have the financial incentive to throttle users connecting to TPB, they're free to do it.

But besides all the potential shit for end users, this is fucking terrible for the tech industry. ISPs will become the gatekeepers for the cloud services industry and other stuff. It's rubbish what ISPs could do.

>>61350784
The tech industry and muh cloud services havent done anything beneficial for the industry to begin with. Until there's some actual incentive in making them valuable, the majority of the world can care less.

>>61350756
>net neutrality wasn't a thing before 2015
It has been in the works since at least 2010 and the implied principals were set to become law eventually since then, so no ISPs have not even really had the chance to try to monetize data usage for example.

Just being factual here, not that guy.

>>61350801
>The tech industry and muh cloud services havent done anything beneficial for the industry to begin with.
I'm sorry but I doubt you know what you're talking about. Visualization is everywhere.

>>61340208
Because you're a consumer, duh.

>>61340208
Americans don't deserve net neutrality, they are too regarded to browse the Internet as evident by their desire to be raped by their ISPs.
>MUH
>INVISIBLE
>HAND
Customer protection is enforced for every other business, why not for the Internet?

>>61350824
*virtualization
autocorrect

>>61340254
I am unironically what you just described

>>61350828
Because NN isnt the right away to protect the customer. It's literally a corporate protection scheme. Has NN stopped cable companies from provided different speed tiers now? No.

>>61350850
Different speeds make sense - they are trading THEIR bandwidth. Without NN they can charge you for the stuff they don't own.

>>61350850
who is feeding you this bullshit? Honestly. /pol/?

>>61350870
Except that wont happen because it never has happened and never will. You're just fearmongering at that point.

>>61350878
My experience and the fact that I know more about networking than most of /g/.

>>61340399
megyn kelly?

>>61350886
>Except that wont happen because it never has happened and never will.
Traffic shaping suddenly doesn't exist anymore, eh?

>>61350905
>Without NN they can charge you for the stuff they don't own.

never happened and never will happen.

this thread is proof that 4chan is a nothing-burger

>>61350886
>Something hasn't happened so it never could

The worst way you could choose to ask people to sign this petition is by calling them stupid and forcing them really. I'm for net neutrality but you're not asking for help, you're telling people to do it like you have some sort of authority. "Do it faggot" is sometimes the best way of having someone not do it.

If there's an actual good cause your duty is to educate people on it proper and to ask nicely.

>>61350910
Traffic discrimination is happening right now, you're just not being charged for it yet.

>>61350784
The companies in the tech industry that actually matter are working against net neutrality.

>>61350804
Except for the fifteen years of commercially selling internet access they had before 2010? You're kidding yourself.

>>61350870
Not all bandwidth has the same cost to route.

>>61350878
/pol/ is the new Jews, I guess.

>>61350905
Applying QoS to torrents and other activity that causes absurdly high bandwidth usage on a network balanced for consumer usage fucking sucks, but imagine trying to route hundreds of Johnny Asswipes with a 10TB a month torrent habit using consumer lines. They do it for a reason; quit making your local network engineer's job needlessly hard and use a seedbox, for everyone's convenience.

>>61350925
>>61350951
There's no reason tiered internet will happen. It costs significantly more to do the complex routing needed to limit consumers. The money is in charging high-traffic corporations.

>>61350951
So with NN gone, I'm going to be charged for whats essentially Google's/ Netflix's bill now that the government says isps are free to discriminate against their traffic again? Yeah fat chance.

>>61350966
>Applying QoS to torrents and other activity that causes absurdly high bandwidth
I'm paying for defined bandwidth and should get it no matter what. If they can't simultaneously maintain it for everyone then they are false advertising.
>There's no reason tiered internet will happen
If they can make money out of something, they will. They haven't coordinated yet and the backlash is going to be big, so that's why it hasn't happened yet.
>complex routing
They already employ DPI, simple redirect if you haven't paid for the access is nothing for them.

>>61350966
>The companies in the tech industry that actually matter are working against net neutrality.
>google, uber, and SV in general are tech companies that matter

kek

>>61350994
Not immediately obviously. But it will be legal. Once they are out of other options that's what you're going to get.

>>61351014
>Google does not matter
Whether you may hate Google or not, they matter perhaps a little bit too much. More than you can grasp for sure.

>>61347688
>>61346202
>2020
>Murica still on shitty DSL

Sounds about right

>>61340208
it'll cost you more money

>>61340859
it'll hurt you more you 3rd world peasant

>>61351099
3rd world countries have better Internet than murrica.

>>61344436
without NN they'd have to payout to the ISPs
and so would we.
>>61340954
even google had to spend billions to be allowed to run wire on the fucking lines, it's really sad
if we were more free and people could run data lines just payign for the fucking lines.. instead of lawyers to fight off jews, we'd have much better cable / fiber

>>61351007
I don't think you understand how much it would cost to guarantee 100% of your bandwidth with all users on the network segment running at max load. It's something that would never happen under a normal use case.

Tiered internet doesnt make sense. It costs the corporation routing complexity and a segment of their customer base and loses them money. Charging web services at the gate is an infinitely better move.

Wasting clock cycles on even more DPI all along the network just to eventually drop the packet is disgustingly wasteful when you could just charge Google at the gate.

>>61351014
Google is a glorified advertising company. Uber is poised for implosion. Silicon Valley is a flash in the pan.

IBM has been a leader in hardware and software for over 50 years. Cisco and Juniper account for a huge majority of networking equipment. Qualcomm and Broadcom are responsible for the technologies you're using to connect to the internet. These are the people getting shit done, and they're against it.

This isn't a blind appeal to authority, but think about whose technologies will still matter in 50 years.

>>61351064
>>61351106
You retards don't seem to understand that America is on par. We have a ridiculously low population density. We can fit multiple European countries into a single state; it's easy when your entire country is smaller than Texas.

If you seriously cannot understand these concepts, quit posting here and take a remedial math class.

>>61350966
>It costs significantly more to do the complex routing needed to limit consumers.

You don't need complex routing. You just make a low data cap with large extra fees for going over it, but exclude paying corporations from this cap. This already happens on mobile, no reason why it can't happen on cable.
This essentially guarantees that a Netflix competitor can never happen, unless it gets massive investment to start paying for uncapped bandwidth right away (that's assuming Netflix doesn't covertly pay cable companies to deny uncapped access for any competing companies).

Note how Netflix was fervently in favor NN when it was small, but does not give a fuck anymore now that it's big enough to push cable companies around.

>>61351133
>You retards don't seem to understand that America is on par.

No you fucking aren't. I live in Russia and I currently have a choice of 4 providers, with Ethernet or fiber connection, and prices on the order of $10/month for uncapped 50+ megabits.

NN is monkey-patching. The actual problem is the existing Internet laws and the oligopoly of ISPs. It's not free market, so neither NN nor lack of NN is going to fix anything. Here's an example of free market at work:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_in_Romania

>scans thru thread
>zero sources listed

seems legit

>>61351181
>>61351182
goddammit

>>61351106
what the fuck can you do if you're not an American? nothing.

>>61351219
>what the fuck can you do if you're not an American
Have uncapped Internet.

>>61351181
>NN is monkey-patching.
Sure, but it is better than no NN and allowing the oligopoly to do whatever it wants.

>The actual problem is the existing Internet laws and the oligopoly of ISPs.
Yeah, the core problem is that 50% of America has literally no choice of ISP, but if the government tries to solve it by cutting up AT&T and Comcast and artificially introducing competition, you'll get an even worse mess, not to mention that the very same people who complain about being raped by ISP monopoly will go COMMUNISM REEEEEEE

>>61340694
Die shill

>>61346404
uh... internet forums?

If you're not intelligent enough to realize why NN is important, you shouldn't be on the internet.

>>61351133
>This isn't a blind appeal to authority
Sure sounds like one. You keep mentioning these companies without mentioning why they may be for or against it.

>>61344881
>Comcast and Time Warner
Both literally sued to try and force NN to be removed a month ago you dumb shit.

>>61344175
>tripfag

>>61343313
i thought NN was law back in like 14 or 15, why is it getting brought up again?
unrelated to that but why isnt internet treated as a utility? im pretty shaky with how everything works but internet and phone use the same radio spectrum and the frequencies are just divided up for different uses right? theyre the same thing just used in a different manner no?

>>61351641
>i thought NN was law back in like 14 or 15, why is it getting brought up again?

Because Comcast/AT&T/TW paid off FCC to repeal it in the wake of Trump's promised corporate deregulation.

>>61340208
because removing net neutrality not only creates the power to differentiate between types of traffic and destination but gives it straight to corporations, and while corporations arent necessarily good or bad they will act in self interest and removing NN will allow them to block start ups that threaten their market shares

people may want government out of the internet, but in actual fact the government not only not exercising any power right now but are actually preventing power being exercised. the creation of power where will was none and giving it straight to the corporations will just let them the ability to further their profits even if it damages the user experience

>>61351683
Thanks man. its too bad everything good gets clouted up with people trying to make money. any thoughts on my second question?

>>61351219
I pay $18,50 for 250Mbit uncapped internet. In a shit eastern-european country.

>>61340208
Removing net neutrality is artificially worsening the service and then making you pay more to have normal service again.
This is not innovation, this is wrong.
ISPs profit greatly from public subsidies, so they also should be regulated to not fuck the customer over.

>>61340694
>other than Comcast throttling torrents which they still do to this day because it is impossible to prove that they do

They don't. They got a class action over BitTorrent throttling and paid $16 million to settle it.

Their throttling mechanism today is protocol-agnostic and is based on congestion. It's also perfectly allowed based on current FCC guidelines, both pre and post-Title II.

https://www.xfinity.com/support/internet/network-management-information/

>>61351839
why do europeans use a comma for decimals instead of a period? ive always wondered that. like if i were to write one thousand out to 2 decimals i would go 1,000.00 how would you do it.

>>61351942
im not saying this wont happen but is it garunteed? its kike all the queers saying theyre going to be hunted down when trump wins and nothings changed for them.

>>61340208
[Dismiss]

File: file.png (382KB, 454x600px) Image search: [Google]

382KB, 454x600px

The thing is, the people against net neutrality KNOW that it's in their self interest, but they're against it because of these spooky ideological reasons. They think it's NN and market regulations in general are immoral because they think property rights, even for huge megacorps, are final and sacred. They know that it will be a huge pain in the ass, but it's the ethical thing to do. I know all this because I used to be a libertarian before I got off my high horse.
America extremely ideologically brainwashed to believe this sort of shit. It's disgusting.

>>61351169
>Literally proving his point

https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/6myafw/here_is_a_real_warning_to_rconspiracy_net/

Fuck Reddit, but this is sadly true.

>>61343181
If the consumer is paying for it, absolutely.

>"Oops, looks like this website isn't available in your plan. You can pay 3.99$ to access it for 24 hours or you can easily add it in your plan for an additional 9.99$ a month"
Do you seriously want this to happen?

>>61352180
VPN

>>61351997
>1,000.00
1000,00
1.000,00

>>61349101
>ban porn
>ban racist words
???

>>61349101
UK ≠ EU

>>61351997
EU 1000,00
US 1.000,00

but I've never seen 1,000.00, where did you get that from?

File: 1244131056951.jpg (41KB, 600x750px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 600x750px

>>61343313
Why the fuck does every retard use the road analogy without realizing we have fucking toll roads? The exact opposite of what they are arguing for?

Do Eurofags/Aussies not have tolls?

>>61351181
Yeah but making American ISPs follow the free market and not be everything-but-name monopolies is pinko communism, you dirty bread-lining russki. That means that oligopolies are the free market, because the alternative is literally Stalin style death camp sovietism. LAND OF THE BRAVE, HOME OF THE FREE

>>61340208
The passive messaging that most sites used - not even amounting to real traffic reduction to make their point - proves how little they actually care.

Also, dropping title 2 != Anti net neutrality. Comcast made it clear today.

>>61345227
Eat shit lib.

>>61352635
>>61352432
really? thats how i was taught since elementary school. every 3 decimal places to the left is a comma. i.e.1,000.00 thousand 100,000.00 hundred thousand 1,000,000.00 million. periods starts decimals so 0.1 tenth 0.01 hundreth 0.001 thousandth
all were brought out to at least 2 decimal places for consistency. ive never seen a comma start decimals in the us though, what part of the country are you from?

>>61352799
this difference between comma and period as decimal mark, aggravates me like fuck, because you can't remap it on european keyboards

>>61344538
>Step 1:Migrate all relevant data to Sealand and all relevant people (politicians and celebs do not count) to Iceland /Greenland
>Step 2: Carpet bomb burgerlandia
>Step 3:???
>Step 4: profit

The worst part of being on the same planet with the US is that I you guys crap yourselves the rest of the world has to wipe your shit stains too and listen to all your whining...

Quite literally no one except large corporations benefit from no net neutrality

LITERALLY

>>61353023
BUT DADDY TRUMP
uh
DRAIN SWAMP
BUILD WALL
MURGA
LEFTYPOL REEEEEE

>>61352681
Australia only has them in 3 cities.

>>61340208
Unironical sabotage that'll be completely legal if this new law it's approved, or so I've heard.
ISPs will have the green light to nerf your connection and offer premium packs if you want to "fix it" and that kinda bullshit.
If that's how it goes, I'm very sorry for the North Americans.

Even if there is "competition", it's only between 2 or 3 ISP's. Some areas only have 1.

This is an oligopoly. They will conspire to jack up prices and censor content.
The scenario of "perfect competition" doesn't work in practice. It only works when there is an infinite number of suppliers, which there never is. For most products and services, there's maybe 5 or 6 major suppliers.

So the libertarian argument about competition really is in bad faith

You're ficked either way. A bit more if NN is removed though.

File: australia-roadmap.gif (75KB, 800x687px)

75KB, 800x687px

>>61352681
>>61353061
Traveling in australia must be a bitch, I bet they fly more than they drive.

>>61353739
Australia has road tolls yes. But we use an electronic e-tag system which just reads a device and charges you that way.
We have them in sydney, melbourne and brisbane.
We just dont complain about it. Normally it's very affordable and unless you are using more than one toll each day each way people will use it reguardless.

>>61353904
What's it like in those really long highways in the outback where there is nothing for miles upon miles, I've heard people have fallen asleep at the wheel.

>>61353954

Lots of dumb animals cross the desolate road when your car happens to be driving by.

>>61353954
People fall asleep behind the wheel everywhere.
But i am not sure about others. I have done a 15 hour trip with only 4 hours of sleep, and boy was i fucked.
I got to 15min outside canberra coming back, and had a microsleep and almost went off the side of the road. From there on in i sat on a coke bottle to keep myself up just being uncomforable. But yes 90% of the roads are just barren wastelands of nothing.
There is an infamous area between the NSW and QLD border that is NOTHING for 50km and that takes up almost 60% of all the states crashes in that area alone.

>>61340694
>other than Comcast throttling torrents which they still do to this day
wrong

I hope this will go through

>>61353036
/leftypol/ is against net neutrality like the /pol/

>>61350886
>Except that wont happen because it never has happened and never will. You're just fearmongering at that point.
It already happened. One of those big corps already got caught. They have every reason to do it once they're allowed to.

>>61343807
Internet access is infrastructure. It cannot be subject of a free market.

>>61358065
Wrong, the free market is not a free market if things are constrained, like roads, or water, or electricity. The free market will put down roads and teach children proper moral values like coca cola and macdonalds.

I just have a question that never gets answered in these threads.
>Why should I trust the government to not fuck me over with regulating the internet?
Also
>Why should I trust the ISPs to not fuck me over with regulating the internet?
This Net Neutrality business, from the start always seemed like a fight between two sides to see who gets to fuck the end user over

>>61359423
Net neutrality literary states that no one can fuck with your internet.

The gov't can't tell ISPs to throttle certain sites or protocols through Net Neutrality because Net Neutrality states that all internet must be treated equally.

>>61359506
This is assuming that you can trust the governments of the world to stay where they are, and not impede further. Which the last century and a quarter should've taught you will not happen. You give someone an inch, and they'll take a mile, without exception.

>>61359531
At least with net neutrality you have a legal precedent to sue with.

>>61359585
Mind linking me to the case where a national government was sued for violating internet practices, and the government lost?

>>61352245
Unmetered VPN and other non-plaintext traffic to non-peered addresses are part of the business and secure access tier, an additional $500 a month. Better pay up!

>>61360209
I'll go with an obscure VPS, they'll never know.

>>61344619
it's even easier to do so for big corporations

>>61343181
if i want to download 10 highly seeded torrent files at the same time and watch Netflix i'm well within my right to do that, if your shitty animu espanol subs streaming buffers for 2 hours because of it, it's not my fault, it's the fault of greedy ISP companies who have 90% profit margins and little to not reinvestment of revenue back into the business, which means they aren't spending nearly enough on upkeep, maintenance, customer service, management and improvement of their infrastructure

Explain to me how NN isn't already dead when every ISP blocks direct access to sites like TPB and KAT. That seems pretty non-neutral to me.

Dammit. I'm tired of everything my government is trying to do is fucking me over. 90% of the stuff trump rallied for is stuff I don't care about, Pai Aijeet is trying to fuck over my only source of knowledge and happiness and people are calling me a faggot for having ever so slightly left views.

>>61353954
Having driven from SA to QLD it's fine - there are places to stop along the way where you can park and sleep for free (there are bathrooms).

We have a large amount of grey nomads in Australia, so we are set up for long distance travel.

>>61344538
It's simple; we kill the Batman

>>61362130
We're just knee jerk reacting to the flaming faggots that scream at us for disagree

>>61361384
why, what are you offering to participate in this discussion with

>>61351839
That is half your income though.

File: nothing wrong.jpg (60KB, 480x800px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 480x800px

>>61350588
>I lived without "net neutrality" from the early 2000s to 2015, and nothing was different.
You're either a 17 year old or Ajit Pai

>>61346202
you forgot the part where AT&T lobbies the local and state governments in their markets to make it illegal for crazy bob to setup shop.

Literally what happened in my county.

>>61340208
suck it up amerifats

File: adwd.png (337KB, 379x426px) Image search: [Google]

337KB, 379x426px

>>61365423
Shit you got us there

>>61340352
Do you honestly believe you can control a big government? Net neutrality is a step towards government control of the internet.

Government control of the net or corporate control of the net.

The thing is, they are the same entity.

>>61365495
You can vote out a president or senator or congressman who supports a bill you don't like. You can't vote out a greedy CEO who wants to fuck you over at any cost to fill their pockets. No matter how big the government is you still have that power. The only way they can get rid of your ability to do that is if the military is with them. I doubt the entire military would be like "sure ok let's oppress the entire nation 1984 style."

>>61343181
Since ISP's shouldn't know in the first place where your traffic is going, yes.

>>61344436

ISP's would have the power to hold the big internet corps hostage via throttling, unless they pay their dues for more/faster traffic. They basicallt fuck over the user with more fees and the internet sites in one move.

Allowing ISP's to determine what a user should browse also requires that they heavily monitor traffic; with that comes person data collection which is invaluable to advertisers. Google and Facebook make a large chunk of profit from harvesting user ad data, so if ISP's cut in on that, they'd be losing a lot of profit.

>>61345645
Just because my motherboard is lacking most power button pins doesn't mean that I can't turn on my computer, fuckboy.

File: 1478914556996.jpg (732KB, 1920x1434px) Image search: [Google]

732KB, 1920x1434px

>/g/ before /pol/
net neutrality is good, I mean who would want ISPs to be able to pull more bullshit than they already do? corporations and governments should always be prevented from harming an open internet, it's not a left or right issue, it's a people like us on the internet issue.

>/g/ after /pol/
THA BIG GUBBAMINT is literally the worst thing in the world and anything related to government policy in any way is THA BIG GUBBAMINT, except for when our meme president or other (((our))) politicians do fucked up things that literally invade individual's life and liberty, that's not THA BIG GUBBAMINT, that's MUH JOBS GETTIN THINGS DUN LAW AND ORDER HURP DERP

>>61351133
>America is on par. We have a ridiculously low population density
Then why can't I get super fast cheap internet? I live in one of the biggest high-density cities

>>61344263
now you can still visit sites even if Google doesn't bring them up. Then the Internet won't bring them up anymore.

>>61345645
The main problem imo is that all these backwater poltards will have nothing to do but listen to propaganda radio talk shows so they'll become more radicalized.

But hey, maybe they just kill themselves, who knows.

>>61351133
America is the richest country on the fucking planet and 'low population density' is the problem?

>>61359531
The last quarter of a century has taught us that liberalism is what can hold us together. It'd be unthinkable for the US to go to war with China, or for European to go to war with each other again. Trade makes peace between countries, because the rich stakeholders don't want to lose profit over conflict.

>>61344201
Shut up idiot.

Do you want to pay 400$ just to access 4chan and 600$ to download chink cartoons? If not that's why you should care, fucking dumbass, free market my ass there is a monopoly waiting to be fully unleashed.

File: 1496952128607.png (110KB, 500x358px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 500x358px

>>61352038
americans have been getting steadily stupider, but their level of information intake has increased at the same time. not a great combination when 99% of that information is worthless and intellectually degrading at best, downright brainwashing at worst. they believe loosely in "IDEOLOGICAL POSITION", why? because the political party of "THEIR SIDE" said so. do they analyze such ideas as individuals? do they use critical thinking? do they sift the information to find a more nuanced truth that may not align with any side? no. but let's say they make an attempt, that's fine because it can all be explained away with "IT'S A CONSPIRACY OF THE OTHER SIDE".

>>61346404
>come together
>form a hivemind
Had me rolling on the floor

>>61342892
>again an argument conveniently assuming that I have no other option but this specific ISP

>>61368189
Yes, that's correct. In a majority of places in the US the ISPs have formed monopolies, or de-facto monopolies with behind the scenes agreements not to compete.

File: 1471559045643.jpg (50KB, 640x640px)

50KB, 640x640px

>>61340254
>.t

Totally unrelated to NN, but I am currently in training for a major ISP as a technician (lowly cable goy) and my instructor told us about their DRM and how it protects the consumer etc. He seemed so proud that we had this shitty technology implemented. I brought up a couple of cases where it was a pain in the ass to a regular customer trying to do something cool with the service they pay for (which was also not against TOS), then brought up a way to completely bypass it (which only someone violating TOS and who would want to knowingly fuck the company would want to do) to show that DRM is garbage. He basically said the bad guys are only .1% of the userbase so don't worry about them but if there werent DRM it would be more like 10% etc.

The mindset for these guys is money and they can justify things however they need to in order to protect their share of the company (stock purchase option which almost everyone takes part in).

>>61365546
I trust the dollar vote more than the democratic vote.

CEOs have a vested interest in keeping profits flowing. Politicians just need to confuse the ignorant masses every 2-4 years to keep their lobbyist paychecks coming.