Net Neutrality

>>61441544
He knows exactly what he is doing

Nothing will change at all, but stay scared retards

>>61441580
>"Anon, your used all of your 100MB data plan for "4chan.org", we automatically recharged your data for $20, have a nice day"

As a previous Associate General Counsel to Verizon, there's no doubt he "knows what he's doing".

He's going to make Verizon millions.

>>61441659
Data caps are already legal

Nothing Obama did made them illegal

No, I don't believe he does.

He is a capitalist idealist, I really doubt anything will shake his fundamental belief that the free market will solve all our problems.
ISPs could take all the tax breaks, provider shit service still and he will either say that 1) Everything he did worked or 2) There are still too many regulations

>>61441706
Hold on are there really data caps for normal household broadband internet in america?

Ajit Pai does not understand anything, because he is the living definition of a Chinese Room. A homunculus birthed out of a corporate personage.

>>61441730
Yes really.

This is what happens when media companies are also your ISP.

There is a vested interest in making sure cord-cutting is as painful as possible.

>>61441659
Even most poorfag plans provide way more data than that

>>61441730
Not on my provider, but in the cities yeah. Rurals usually dont, but we dont usually have Comcast or TimeWarner, we have local providers.

Strangely I have no mobile cap on verizon either

>>61441679
You fail to mention who the previous administrator worked for.

>>61441580
Check em
Also
/thead

>>61441814
Tell me pls, inform me.

>>61441822
impressive

>>61441854
A literal new who was President of the National Cable & Telecommunications Association (NCTA) and CEO of the Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association (CTIA).

>>61441903
*jew

File: jew.jpg (87KB, 497x593px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 497x593px

>>61441903
>new
<- ?

>>61441790
Our small city is 2 hours from Chicago and Comcast/att decided that caps work be a good idea for us.

>>61441903
Are you supposed to be referring to Michael Copps?
He was the COS to Fritz Hollings prior to his tenure. And he came out strongly against corporate consolidation.
What the actual fuck are you talking about?

Hello in China . In country we do not have net neutrality , but all popular websites run by Chinese government . Government give us the best sites but citizens cannot get other web sites from the west . We use VPN here for access , but now government make more restrict on it . In China website , have ads by government that consumer cannot pass. Company that make video pay to remove ad for the person watch video . Net neutrality stop government from this , but China website good so , not need . For America , net neutrality not important because do government do not this ?

>>61441992
Wheeler, you ignorant mong

>>61441967
I said those of us without big companies.

How small? My area pop is 400 deep in central applachia

>>61441995
Take a pic with timestamp of the outside

>>61441742
Here in german back in 2013 the Telekom, the biggest ISP, tried to introduce data caps but thankfully the EU court kindly told them to fuck off

At least they're good for something

>>61441995
Wow that sounds truly horrible and I feel sorry for everyone of you guys in China

It's sad that most people are unaware that the final goal of all of this going on right now is having a China-like censored internet

>>61442076
Do you still have the highest electric rates in Europe?

File: chrome_2017-07-18_22-15-51.png (18KB, 384x604px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 384x604px

>>61442129
technically not, but fuck come on it's still high

>>61442170
My monthly electric bill would be $600. Egads.

>>61442212
Christ are you running a factory off your wall socket or what?

>>61442170
Is that an average price ? and does it include delivery/maintaince fees ?

In Ontario the price varies according to time use usage its nearly 7am to 5pm is the most expensive.
Plus there is a fee called a delivery fee as well, but its stupidly worded it should really be called maintance fee that pays for the upkeep of all the transmission lines and such.

>>61442212
Do you spend 300/month on electricity right now ?

>>61442170
Holy shit.

My electric rate is $0.06/kWh or 0.05Euro/kWh

>>61442242
I have a house, people live in it and like ac.
>>61442245
$180ish

>>61442170
>Denmark and Germany highest

Its all taxes isn't it? Gotta pay for those unwilling to work somehow.

>>61442283
I know germany has very high prices as a way to subsidize the solar/wind industry.
I feel like germans are willing to pay those prices as a way to get away from Nuclear which they don't have a good opinion of.

>>61442245
There aren't additional fees in terms of delivery or anything, also no varying prices depending on time

For example you pay €500 per year for 2000kw/h, where you save a bit if you use around 2000 per year and not beyond that

>>61441730
It depends, when I lived out in the boonies the internet was fucking awful and capped to hell but in the city it's great.

>>61442283
Well at least everyone has healthcare and won't be in debt for life if they break their leg

>>61442312
I knew it. Many US citizens despise taxes as such. We don't tend to believe in subsidizing business (even though our government constantly fucking does.)

If your business can't survive on its own, it should fail. WindSolar will never work. You guys have it fucking made with Nuclear -- Love it.

Captcha: frei :^)

>>61442354
They'll just get blown up by some sand niggers

>>61442354
I broke my knee 4 years ago. $500 deductible (for whole year) and insurance payed rest. I also received care with a 5m wait.

File: Zaregoto 01 - The Beheading Cycle 06 (00:20:38.779) 0002.jpg (119KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 1280x720px

>>61441544
>netflix users use way more data than normal users
>ISPs want to charge more for nextflix instead of just raising the price for everyone
>this is somehow bad
Explain how is this good and why netflix users deserve internet welfare

>>61442394
And what's stopping the ISPs from just slowing down all streaming services except their own expensive one then?

Many ISPs already tried to do this

>>61442320
I see, so then Ontario would likely be very close when it comes to kWh costs then.

The amount that can be charged for actual electricity is regulated.
So then we then pay a seperate fee for the maintaince of the lines.
It is entirely possible that a person who used 0 kWh still has to pay the "delivery fee" because those lines need to be maintained just in case they decided to flip the light switch in the house or not.
People in rural areas get hit hard with the delivery fees since there are fewer people to spread the cost of the maintenance among.

>>61442370
its what the german people want.
>If your business can't survive on its own,
I could make the same point about businesses only being viable if they pay their employees min wage.

>>61442434
because it's already illegal under FTC antitrust regulations

>>61442382
They wouldn't if you chosen ones would stop funding the sand niggers, Shlomo.

>>61442460
If a business is only viable by paying minimum wage, then its employees are worth minimum wage (to the business). If employees refuse to work for such wage (their skill is better than min) then the business fails. Sounds good to me.

Business that CAN NOT survive, SHOULD NOT.

>>61442460
>I could make the same point about businesses only being viable if they pay their employees min wage.
Because that's how you retain quality employees

>>61442481
You think those multi billion ISPs don't have a cartel and lobby to circumvent that?

If you had anything to do with ISPs in the last 20 years, you know they are the evil of the internet and try to squeeze every penny out of you and exploit their power at any change given

>>61442481
>implying it's all hunky-dory if isps make (((strategic partnerships))) with some ridiculous social networking site and prefer them whether I think they should all die in a fire or not

>>61442503
>then the business fails. Sounds good to me.
You've perfectly illustrated the point that not every provision of service or goods should be constrained by the customs and morals of business, and don't even pretend that you're not talking morality here.

>>61442544
Google and Facebook are already exponentially worse. kys retard

>>61442394
There is hardly any extra cost incurred for extra bandwidth consumed.

>>61442551
It is absolutely moral. Independent agencies (business and people) are free to exchange (money and labor) provided they can reach a mutually beneficial agreement. If two such agents can not reach an agreement, it should not occur. The reason people make more than minimum is a marketable skill (Programming, engineer) that is worth more money than say flipping burgers, which a robot could do for free.

Doctors make good money, because a business is willing to pay more for their skill, and the consumer is willing to pay the business for the provision of skill.

No good or service is mandatory which cannot be produced. If a good or service is truly mandatory, workers consumers and business will freely work together to provide it.

>>61442563
Then Netflix can pick up the bill and kit me since I don't even use that shit

>>61442563
As a network engineer, I disagree. Most of our edge carrier grade routers consume 2 to 5 more times more power under load then idle. They're never truly idle, but when a surge of network use occurs, we geniunely use more power in a noticeable amount.

>>61442625
Then why didn't the African slaves muh freely band together and produce muh truly mandatory services, corporatist evangelitard?
Ayncraps need to be physically removed.

>>61442650
and thats just power. Fiber is crazy expensive (50000/mile) and having to lay more lines because more customers use more has to be paid for somehow.

>>61442668
They did. heard of Haiti? In america, a non market force prevented that: violence.

>>61442650
>ost of our edge carrier grade routers consume 2 to 5 more times more power under load then idle
Electricity is cheap.

>>61442628
The point is the ISP provides you a service. How you use that service shouldn't affect your bill.

>>61442684
They are paid for with higher prices on faster speeds.
You want those gigabit speeds, you need to pay more for that.

I “like” how the whole public story of net neutrality is centered on clients' disadvantages, and no one digs deeper to learn there's a second side to this that is concerned with regulatory effects on ISP peering market.

Also, you burgers would benefit a thousand times more from anti-trust regulations against your monopolies and their lobbying of acts that prevent small scale ISPs from forming.

>>61442702
Yeah, for one router. Now how about or small datacenter which can fluctuate between 20kW and 100kW easily. and thats a small one.

i might concede the second one. But 100 people with 5Mbps can be 0-500Mbps, depending on what theyre doing. As such theyre actual cost can vary wildly. and if a service comes along that they all use driving to the top (500) we will increase their cost, since we now have to build more lines to accommadate.

File: 1500216900178.jpg (63KB, 840x720px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 840x720px

hell no , he is a face a facade.
no one will ever know the true existent of what has ben wrote this day.
other than infamy.

>>61442696
>implying that corporations do not engage in violence, directly or indirectly, when they protect their assertions of exclusivity over muh market property
>implying that mercenaries do not exist
Argue from first principles why muh commies should be physically removed but not ayncraps, against the informed will of the people.

>>61442764
Rabid animals have to be taken down before they can be killed.

>>61442771
>buying intel
>not knowing about erlangs, the unit

>>61442796
>erlangs
Im not bringing those up in casual 4chan conversation. Not that its some crazy difficult concept, but its mildy difficult to type out explain that we have only actually 300 mbps capacity for 500mbps sales because not everyone will use simultaneous.

>>61442702
But it will effect my bill the moment I'm forced to subsidize services I don't even use aka Netflix. Fuck off

>>61442771
>costing jumps from $2.4/hour to $12/hour
Seriously, electricity is cheap like I said
Even if the place was running at full tilt 24/7 it would only cost ~9K/month

Now how many people does that data center service ? How much are they each paying on average ?

Companies like comcast make money over fist on this shit, lets stop pretend like they are poor as dirt, doing *us* a favor offering high speed internet.

>>61442848
what you are arguing is pay per usage (megabytes)
What we are talking about is making sure all packets that get routed through your ISPs network get treated equally.
Instead of your ISP picking the choosing winners, it should be the consumers that get to decide.

>>61442979
about 11k
that doesnt include a/c
or lighting

do you run a business? I don't have exact numbers, but that small out probably runs 150-200 thou a year in JUST ELECTRICITY. There are so many factors. Profit margin is fucking thinner than you think.

>>61442764
BTW, if you want to look into that, you should learn financial basics of providing (selling upstream connectivity vs. exchanging client cones in peering, etc.) and search for well-written posts about peering wars of the past. The roots of net neutrality quarrel are business interests of market actors. The Content wants to turn its popularity (number of Netflix viewers) into money (lower traffic prices, no prices, or even payments for free pering with Netflix), the Tube wants to turn its popularity (number of clients) into money (viewers can leave for a different service if Netflix lags often, which happens quite naturally in a busy network if you don't take measures to prioritize streaming video), they clash.

Did you think Google cares about your poor ass getting unequal service?

>>61443254
Stop whining about Netflix. They paid their ISP. Do your job or finally agree that the Internet should be a public good without private interests.

>>61443054
>Profit margin is fucking thinner than you think
we can look up earnings from Comcast easily

For q1 2017 they had 25.13M broadband subs
Their revenue for that segment was 3.6B

Of course that doesn't take into account the many people that have some triple play bundle and pay money for those other features as well.

Comcast's 2.6B profit for that quarter doesn't scream razor thing margins..

>>61443318
Isn't it fun when comcast employees larp as the small ISP engineers they're trying to drive out of business?

>>61441544

You just hate him because you're a racist.

File: SHO NUFF.png (595KB, 937x788px) Image search: [Google]

595KB, 937x788px

>>61443318
comcast has a fiduciary duty to make as much profit as possible within the regulations the government places on them.
Logically, it follows that if they have a certain margin they must maintain it. The leadership will literally be replaced if they don't do everything in their power to do this. Such is the pain of capitalism. Many gains are made, but the ever increasing expectations of shareholders push companies into arguably unethical practices.

In short, FUCK comcast.

>>61443318
$103/sub in revenue? or Profit? Your numbers are jumbled.

Not joking: please advise.

>>61442170
>tfw live in Denmark

>>61443293
It was an example, I don't even know what Netflix wants this time, as I don't follow the case. My point is that “muh freedumz” rhetoric is just a smoke screen for someone's private interests, and I am amazed how all participants keep silence about the real deal.

>>61443467
http://www.cmcsa.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=1023210
its in revenue.

What is hard to seperate is people who say have both TV and internet with comcast, because not everyone will have both, so who knows how much overlap there is, but looking at their TV subs, its is very close to the number of internet subs they have, so likely the overlap is 90% or more.


the profit amount is for Comcast as a whole though.

>>61443318
3.6B revenue. Okay. Last year the rev was 80.4B, net profit 8.69B

So their margin is about 10%

So at 3.6B rev for broadband, thats about 140/sub in revenue. 10% is 14. So they make $14 a sub.

Seems pretty reasonable to me.

Pai Ajit just wants to please his Verishit overlords for that Verishit bucks to pad his street shitting ways

>>61443592
Look at their marginal costs as well.

They increased their internet subs by 429,000 and their revenue went up 10% (3,275B to 3,606B ) 331 million.

331m / 429K = $771 per new sub in revenue.

In a way the ISP is like a gym, after you cover your fixed costs , every new member/sub is almost pure profit.
Which is what we see here going on, Comcast is making a healthy amount of money already.

>>61443546
Well, this much is true, but politics is about lying to get people to do what you want, so I'm not particularly surprised about it.

>>61443728
All the more reason to nationalize the industry if they don't want to shut up and deliver what we pay them for.

>>61443728
It's not up to you to decide which businesses are making enough money.

>>61441706
Except without net neutrality, your data usage on different websites can count for different amounts toward you data cap (all the way down to zero for some sites). Facebook could pay off ISPs to zero rate data related to Facebook while ISPs could make data related to 4chan or other sites/services they don't like cost their customers twice as much.

>>61443979
Are you OK with lying, or being lied to? Either way, you come out as immoral person.

>>61444280
I'm not okay with it, actually. I maintain a seething rage underneath my jaded exterior which, I hope, is shared by my compatriots and fellows, anon or no, and which, I hope, will unleash itself one glorious day in a frenzy of synchronized beheading and socialist expropriation.

>>61444268
In a democracy, it actually somewhat is up to you and your representatives.

Decisions if they make too much money for too little service because they are just too monopolistic or even if they can continue to exist at all are really basically a voters choice.

File: 1470058739444.png (245KB, 825x1100px) Image search: [Google]

245KB, 825x1100px

>>61444456
>In a democracy, it actually somewhat is up to you and your representatives.
>le representative democracy really isn't an aristocracy meme

>>61441544
Yes

Telecoms refuse to invest in infrastructure because they can't double dip on profits from them.
They paid him off saying they can't build infrastructure because of current regulation.
He is removing regulation so they can double dip and invest in infrastructure again.

One of the issues that I have noticed about this debate is that the people who are "pro net-neutrality" are not really pro net-neutrality at all, and only care about fucking over comcast or time warner. They do not really know what they are fighting for, but are very dedicated to the pro net-neutrality side because of their disdain for their ISP. They completely ignore the fact that by classifying the web as a telecommunications service, they are giving the FCC unprecedented control over the internet under their guidelines.

>>61441544
>does <person in management position> have any sense of how the real world 99% of people live in works or have any technical understanding whatsoever of the thing they're in charge of
the answer is ALWAYS a resounding NO

>>61442979
you're wrong. streaming video and VOIP services should be allowed priority for quality purposes.

>>61441706
Not on a per-site basis, have fun getting your speed to non-affiliated websites slowed to 16kb/s.

>>61444814
and before someone pipes in with some Comcast bullshit, there are many rural areas that rely on mobile and don't have the bandwidth anywhere close to that. enforcing net neutrality on those networks is handicapping their potential

>>61444822
already illegal retard. anyone with 2 brain cells can circumvent too

>>61441706
>this is about Republican vs. Democrat
stay cucked, dumb fuck

>>61444835
>enforcing net neutrality on those networks is handicapping their potential
net neutrality can co-exist with QoS packet prioritization, anon. Learn the fucking difference already.

>>61444865
learn what the FTC is responsible for before you believe any of this hyperbolic bullshit

>>61442764
yeah, but our government is pro-monopoly, there's no chance of regulation happening unless it states more taxpayer money goes into some CEO's pocket.

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

117KB, 449x1099px

Remember when this was just a meme?
wetriedtowarnyoubutyouwouldntlisten.json

>>61444911
it still is a retarded meme

>>61444745
>He is removing regulation so they can double dip and invest in infrastructure again.
You don't understand how blackmail works. It does not follow that, because they can invest in infrastructure, they will invest in infrastructure.

>>61444835
>there are many rural areas that rely on mobile
>handicapping their potential
Mobile networks are already exempted from net neutrality policy and would remain so.
Is it still murder to kill shills?

>>61444919
>net neutrality policy
you mean policy that was never implemented and wasn't set to be until this winter? everything will be the same as before aka just fine

File: 1461973178192.png (24KB, 800x384px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 800x384px

>>61444918
And soon to be your retarded future. Meme magic is real, remember?

>>61444851
the only reason it's illegal is because of NN, retard. thanks for trying to justify the consumer having to pay for another service on top of what they're already paying just to access the internet unimpeded.

>>61444944
Fuck off back to /pol/.

>>61444939
>hell be fine

>>61441659
It's not about data caps.

>ISPs injecting ads in your webpages
>ISPs throttling traffic of companies who didn't pay the racket

>>61444959
kek
/pol/ is the exact reason we have a meme president and soon a memeternet

>>61444944
never gonna happen
>>61444957
NN via Title II under the FCC has never ever been enforced. thanks for shilling for Netflix though, I'm sure they appreciated it
>>61444966
even if these ridiculous scenarios happen, proxy services, VPNs, or other various workarounds will be impossible to stop. unless you're dumbfuck Joe Public which apparently everyone here is

>>61444919
>because they can invest in infrastructure, they will invest in infrastructure.

They build out infrastructure now, but they can't make double profits off it so they don't

File: ctr.jpg (647KB, 1608x1920px) Image search: [Google]

647KB, 1608x1920px

sorry /g/ we didn't think you would end up caught in the crossfire.

>>61444939
>doesn't understand that traffic shapers to implement non-neutrality cost money to install
>doesn't understand that businesses aren't going to buy equipment that there is a good chance they may be legally forbidden to use

>>61445002
How does it follow that they would invest in infrastructure if they got more profits from it?
And how much of that infrastructure is just traffic shaping and logging crap that does the customer zero good?

>>61444745
They were already subsidized with tax dollars to upgrade infrastructure to support "broadband speeds", instead they redefined broadband to the current speed and pocketed the money. Why should we trust them to upgrade anything after that?

>>61444957
>hanks for trying to justify the consumer having to pay for another service on top of what they're already paying just to access the internet unimpeded
are you retarded? Netflix is the one being billed extra here, not the consumers. under strict NN enforcement that gets passed onto you and me

>>61444997
Someone screencap this. So 4 years from now we c... oh, sorry, your ISP won't authorize you access to this site by then. Maybe you'll stumble across it on archive.org from a Canadian library. Either way, told you so.

>>61445030
So they're just doing this to double dip? What about the websites that can't afford to pay to be on the whitelist? That kills any competition.

>>61445021
ctr shills are in this thread full force trying to kill nn

>>61445164
>killing something that never lived
>>61445121
double dipping would be passing those costs directly onto the consumer and not the streaming services currently accountable for the vast majority of overall bandwidth use. all competition will be using the exact same infrastructure

>>61444939
>you mean policy that was never implemented and wasn't set to be until this winter?
That wasn't net neutrality you dipshit. That was the FCC reimplementing FTC rules that courts ruled the FTC no longer had the authority to enforce.

>>61445030
they're already double dipping by charging people who go over their data cap more money, now they also want to charge the website the user is accessing.

>>61444997
>haha just pay for a VPN on top of your internet bill just to maintain current levels of access
thanks

>>61445310
you won't need to because literally nothing is going to change for consumers

>>61441544

Literally Pajeet.

>>61445349
>let's change regulations by removing them so nothing changes :^)

>>61445269
>data cap
>being this cucked

All these brainwashed, reactionary brainlets
>gubment is the boogey man
>regulashun is bad for free markit
Government isn't the enemy, a corrupt government is. Corporations have no incentive to not be currupt, other than, you know, REGULATIONS, ffs. But, surely, without regulations no company would do business unfairly and unethically. I mean, what kind of company would disregard the health and safety of the public, even destroying the environment to no end, if it meant higher profits for them, and their shareholders, amirite? It's not like there isn't a long and extensive history of this throughout. But mommy free market will fix everything, right?
How can you be so against government, yet be such a naive corporate cuckshill? You think either gives a fuck about your white nationalism and male sufferings? One wants your dollar, the other wants your vote. And the same people are getting both while you continue to wallow in your desperation and stupidity.

>>61445408
That's Americans for you.

>>61445403
>removing something that wasn't set to be official until December will change anything

>>61445408
>eurocucks thinking theirs won't follow suit
Haven't you toothless fucks learned anything yet? Whatever we do, you're sure to follow. That goes for Britney Spears, Justin Timberlake, and datacaps as well.

>>61445602
1/10

>>61445583
>ISPs haven't adopted cable television's business model of providing services yet simply out of the goodness of their hearts
>if I keep parroting this meme it will become true

>>61445686
t. retard who has no idea how the cable television model works outside of retarded outdated memes

If we stop replying to shill threads maybe they will go away?

Friendly reminder that paying for a carry on on an airplane wasn't a thing a long time ago. In fact, so long people don't even remember that they didn't have to pay for it once.
>free market
Yeah, all those competitors offering free carryons sure did BTFO, kek.
Either you're overestimating the average norm or crucially underestimating telecoms.

>>61445602
>American
>calling anyone else cuck
laffin

>>61445786
don't forget to update your porn license, Ahmed

File: 1484795064883.jpg (14KB, 269x187px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 269x187px

>>61445716
Well, go on, enlighten me. Are you not paying your television provider extra for your ESPN, FOX NEWS, BRAVO, and HERE channels?
>while still getting shilled at for 6 minutes, every 12 minutes, at maximum volume
Sounds just like double dipping to me. But then again, I'm not as educated as you on how cable television works, apparently.

>>61445931
>paying for television

>>61445969
>paying for internet

>>61445979
nobody is forcing you to

>>61442046
bullshit you have any kind of fast internet

>>61445991
No, no one is forcing me. But do you deny that the internet, the world wide web, and accessibility to information is becoming less of an amenity and more and more of a necessity, not just for the well being of the individual but for society as a whole? This is why net neutrality is important. Because having fair access to things like clean water, housing, and information are all just as important for the well being of any society.

>>61446190
not a necessary utility despite your entitlement, is also easily accessible outside of personal subscriptions (hot spots, libraries, offices, mobile)

>>61446232
>not a necessary utility
Sure, innawoods and some third world shithole, perhaps. Which one are you living in? Gimmie a break, anon, you can't have a decent life anymore without even having a fucking facebook practically, let alone an internet connection. It's not a necessity like water, of course not. But neither is electricity, and people survived without that for millennia, not so long ago, in fact. Now it's considered a necessary utility. Or might you still call that entitlement? Is having a toilet also an entitlement, or should I just poo in the street to disavow any white privilege?

>>61446433
>being this shallow

>>61446532
>being this delusional

>>61446532
how is that shallow?

>>61446232
>entitlement

not an argument. It's not even intelligent banter, it's just SJW-tier emotional reeeing.

>>61445349
thank you for parroting this meme. 0.02 rubles have been deposited in your account. thank you for doing business with verizon.

>>61442394
Netflix doesn't use any data. The web is a pull medium, the ones using data are the users.

And where the traffic is coming from doesn't matter for the infrastructure. Big ISPs are just looking for a way to charge more (be it from you, or forcing Netflix to pay them or face throttles and eventual lose of user base).

>>61447857
How much did you just pay to post that?

>>61441544
The lack of net neutrality is literally a non-issue if you have enough local competition. I have two major and several minor ISPs to choose from. Last year I bought a 50/50 Mb/s down/up plan. Several months in I got a letter in the mail saying they were bumping me up to 75/75 for no extra cost and I'm actually getting 82/90. The point being that companies will suck your dick if you have a legitimate choice other than them. You shouldn't be shilling for net neutrality, you should be petitioning your corrupt local governments for institutions/supporting local ISP monopolies that lead to bad practices in the first place.

>>61448381
for instituting/supporting*

>>61441544
>chairman pajit streetshiter

>>61448381
why not both?

>>61446232
You can't even get a job at Applebee's without a browser.

>>61447898
Americans have this pathological Calvinist need to suffer for pleasure.

>>61448381
You may live in an area that can support all that muh competition. Typical Democrat city slicker telling the simple folk what to do.
>the best competition is non-profit

>>61441544
GUYS

GUYS

WE HAVE TO WRITE LEGISLATION TO STOP WINDOWS FROM MAKING THEIR OPERATING SYSTEMS COST $5,0000,0000,00000,0000 PER LICENSE OTHERWISE THEY'LL KILL COMPUTING FOREVER

THE WORLDS GONNA END IF WE DONT PUT THIS LEGIDLATION IN TODAY. ITLL FUCKING END BECAUSE MICROSOFT WILL TOTALLY DO THIS TO MAKE MONEY

>>61450106
How many crore is that, pajeet?

>>61442170
Bulgaria, tell me your secrets.

Yes. Trump hasn't done anything wrong so far. I trust him for the time being.

File: 1330954412767.jpg (45KB, 576x432px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 576x432px

>never met someone irl against NN
>not even old people

>come to /g/
>every other person is telling me the NN is the devil and should be cast out

>>61450106
>Microsoft is suddenly the only operating system that you can possibly get for computers.
>Genuinely believing that they wouldn't increase the price.

>>61451596
>I've never worked in the communications industry but think I know how it works
>I've never met anyone in the communications industry either

ok bud.

>>61451596
No one outside the internet knows what NN even means. Ask someone what it means and they'll likely tell you the wrong answer.

>>61451635
I think I could ask that here and get the same response...

>>61451596
Explain Network Neutrality.

>>61451641
Exactly. Most of you faggots are uneducated af. What the current FCC is doing won't bring any doomsday shit. It's just liberal propaganda again.

>>61451596
First of all, normal people are generally idiots.
Secondly, at least half of people on 4chan are also idiots, furthermore we know that there's people occasionally shilling for companies on here.

>What's that? You want water in your house? That'll be 5 bucks.
>Wait you also want water for you SHOWER? The shower+ pack is a 10$ addon.

>>61451657
Did that ever happen before Network Neutrality?
I've never seen that happen before ever...

Can you please point to a real world example of that happening?

>>61451657
No one is shilling for shit. The very fact that the isps are the sane sounding ones right now compared to one vocal group should already set alarms in your head that maybe the real shilling is on the side of the other fence.

>Internet goes back to Dial-Up speed days
>Normals throw shit fits that they can't facebook at the speed of light anymore
>Normals drop the net
>The internet goes back to how it was in '02

He's saving the internet guys.

>>61441544
I'm nostalgic for the realplayer days boi

lets be honest, the internet is fucked anyway. since normies discovered it the government and corporate complex is doing anything to screw everyone over and noboddy is going to do anything about it. Most ppl are sheep, they care only about their personal interest and wont think about consequences. Net neutrality is already gone. Most people dont even know what that means

File: 1471508980700.jpg (142KB, 682x768px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 682x768px

>>61451675
>isps
>sane
Man, these NN threads.

>>61451672
>>61451675
How come countries that don't enforce net neutrality legislation are repeatedly found to have worse internet alternatives than those that do?

>Literally putting your trust in the Corporations which regularly pull shit and collude with each other to form local monopolies.
You people are dumber than stumps.

>>61451843
Nah, they're just paid, or students working on projects.

>>61451843
We call those countries, likely euroland and brazil, third world.

one thing I don't get is how does he justify it? is there any reason anyone other than cable companies (or people who get monetary compensation for it) would think this is a good idea?

then again, judging from the senator map, the same states who support this voted for Trump, so maybe there's no point in searching for logic and reason.

>>61451895
The actual reason is because the 2015 enactment was literally just the groundwork for the democratic speaking platform using Google. That was literally the reason. In fact, the bill was not even a true NN bill. It was just a rephrasing to allow services like Google to get governmental rights indirectly through having a bulking information network, and they wanted to infringe on isp private rights for the sole sake of it. Hell, not even the old FCC wanted that, but Obama is a globalist shill.

>>61451877
Except pretty much every European country has some form of net neutrality legislation and data caps are quite rare, I personally have limitless data for about 12$ a month.
You sods are far closer to third world with your crime rate and shit connection, water, general infrastructure.

>>61451959
Euroland is a cucked set of nations that with a little sense of individuality or nationalism. Except for Poland. Based Poland.

>>61451992
>Implying

>It's okay to live in a third world country because those first world countries aren't nationalist enough.
>European immigration is out of control and a bigger issue even though we're minority white and still have a far larger crime rate.

>>61451930
sorry, not from burgerland so i'm not familiar with the 2015 enactment. if i understand correctly, google/internet acts as a democrat platform, while ISPs/cable is a republican one. so now that the republicans are in charge, they're giving power to ISPs/cable to choke the fuck out of google/internet. sounds like you guys are about to get China's level of censorship, except worse, because you're even gonna have to pay money for it.

>infringe on isp private rights
what do you mean, specifically?

>>61452105
>while ISPs/cable is a republican one
Not at all. isps only care about one thing: getting more people on their service. All the non democratic parties just want to keep the isps from being tampered with by the government. Cause as you saw, shit like the NSA and google censoring was going to only get bigger if Hilary was elected. The only people who were actually going to censor any of us was going to be the democratic party. Though to a lot of people on the left, it wouldnt be seen as that since it'll be their views being protected.

>>61452138
>keep the isps from being tampered with by the government
which results in them doing whatever the fuck they want, such as racketeering, censoring, throttling, etc. is that somehow supposed to be a good thing?

>to a lot of people on the left, it wouldnt be seen as that since it'll be their views being protected
so the preferred option is to dealing with censorship is an even more extreme form of censorship that doesn't let anyone other than those who can pay the racket express their views at all?

>>61452226
You're not understanding the problem here.

Why should we defend services like Google and Netflix?

>>61452237
Why the fuck then are you defending the ISPs?
There's far more services than Google and Netflix at stake too, services such as 4chan, 4chan is after all quite an inconvenient political platform.

>>61452255
Despite whatever leftist website you're following is telling you, 4chan or any site for that nature, is not going to be censored. This isn't communist China. Btw, if the democratic party kept on the rod with another elected president and had congress, too, you would be seeing an internet as a government utility, and thus would have a network no different from China's. So that communist china nightmare you're thinking of would have actually happened beneath the democrats.

A capitalist internet has not nor have any incentive to do those things.

>>61452237
no I am not understanding the problem. Google and Netflix are services that people choose to use. I haven't used Netflix and nobody is going to force me to. when it comes to ISPs, however, it doesn't seem like burgerland has much choice; in fact it's effectively a monopoly/duopoly. in this case i am either forced to use it or to go back to the 70s and not have internet at all. why would you give even more power to ISPs who already have a tight grip on your wallet and your online life?

>>61441544
>Do you think the FCC Chairman knows what he's doing regarding Net Neutrality?
Considering that he's a former Comcast and Verizon lobbyist, yes.

>>61452293
Google and Netflix want a greater strangle on isps to bend to their will. In order to exert their power, guess who was in their favor? The infrastructure to support the massive bandwidth requirement for thousands of people trying to stream (this includes mobile), is absurd, and yet due to the current rules, neither of the cable companies can complain about it because the a rephrase was added to make it bad to be prejudice to these services who want, no NEED, more bandwidth. Guess who has to pay to manage the infrastructure and downtimes caused by this congestion? Not Google. Not Netflix. It's the isp right to keep the internet working for everyone. And if it means lowering the connection power through these services, then I'm all for it. If Netflix, for instance, wants a premium service, they should start their own television network.

>>61441790
Verizon doesn't ever cut off data with its unlimited plan. It just throttles it after a certain threshold

>>61452337
i get your point. but do you not see the problem that makes this whole thing a slippery slope? who's going to decide what a premium service is? the ISPs, of course. it's like, "oh hey there, you seem to have VIDEOS on your site. that's classed as PREMIUM CONTENT under our rules. hope you have deep pockets like all those other big corporations we're milking, otherwise your site is gonna be a big BUFFERING sign"

>If Netflix, for instance, wants a premium service, they should start their own television network.
again, how will they do that with comcast/verizon having a chokehold on the market?

>>61452424
You do know that Comcast and Verizon aren't the only internet providers around right? I know how a lot of fa/g/gots like to parrot that there's no competition in the internet market, but there does exist competition. The only reason we havent seen many providers grow around us is not because of the meme about the cable companies making it hard for newcomers. It's because everyone was afraid of the public utility changes that were on the horizon from the government. But now that we're back to a little government faction, the smaller companies (including Google, funny how that works huh) are going to be pushing hard to get into the game.

I'm expecting my bill to go down and my download speeds to go up by the end of the year. Ironically, I just got a couple of new mails from internet companies I never heard of, so you can already see the NN removal making changes through the industry.

>>61452459
the problem is that comcast and verizon own so much of the market it would be suicidal for any company to boycott their "premium content" rules and not pay the racket. by doing so, the more money flows towards vericast, the less likely are the competing ISPs to survive without the "premium content fees" from corporations, even if they claim they play by the old NN rules. especially since most of the general public doesn't seem to give two shits about the issue.

ITT: tech illiterates who think bandwidth is a finite resource

>>61452579
All the general public cares about is making sure their pornhub, facebook, netflix, etc is still up and running. Even in the worst case scenario of muh tier packages, most people would enjoy it cause it won't change their browsing habits. Your connection to every site will still be the same in this world where those packages exists (btw, they will never exist, but just humoring the imagination). All it will do is make it so that if you want access to high bandwidth services like netflix, you will have to pay extra, which is perfect.

Btw you already have tier packages: it's called price per speed package. The higher your internet speed, the faster you can download/ upload data. The only reason we hardly see those speeds is because most people live in congested areas, which is why suburban or colleges tend to have faster internet (though the faster internet is normally sectioned or in dorms due to the same problem of high congestion rates).

>>61452604
Not finite, but there's only so much you can do per second. It's the same illiteracy, but misinformed.

>>61442503
the idea only works in a utopia with enough alternative job choices to be able to afford it.

you're probably that same guy who yells at jobless people to stop being picky fucks and take any job they can get

>>61442394
Both Netflix and its users are already paying for their bandwidth.

>>61452707
Most people are not paying for their bandwidth. I'm most likely paying for their bandwidth, and I dont even use netflix.

File: 7589243.jpg (18KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 300x300px

>>61441659
>Americans still have data caps
Thanks I nearly forgot

>>61452636
>you will have to pay extra
really now? you, as in the customer, will pay add on fees to the ISP for what the ISP itself decides is a "premium content service"? pornhub and netflix fees added onto your bill? you call this perfect? sounds like a bullshit deal to me.

perhaps you mean the customer will pay the service more so that the service can pay off the ISP so they don't throttle them as much? again, what's to stop them from throttling even if they do pay? what's to stop ISP from asking for even more money from the service? the service will keep getting extorted while the ISPs throttle when they feel like it. oh, but at least your internet bill will stay low. once again, that's racketeering.

>>61442394
No, the ISPs want to charge Netflix, not their customers. They're already jewing their 'customers' at max speed already. They want to get Netflix to pay them to not throttle user connections.
Or google, or facebook, or whatever. Without Net neutrality, the ISPs are going to ransom billions of dollars out of silicon valley.
And if your website can't afford the ransom? Kek enjoy the slow lane

>>61452770
Netflix is not a normal internet service. It is a television tier streaming service that thrives on giving a tv-tier experience through a connection like the internet. The worst part is that it's not even part of the cable service of the internet companies, making it an unregulated and hog of a beast.

What you're misunderstanding here is that you think the internet provided by these isps are your right. They're not. They're your privilege. Which is why, once NN is gone, I already know what the first powerplay from Google is going to be.

They're going to try hard to get their isp going, make Netflix their premium service, and will use that specifically to steal customers from everyone else. The interesting thing is that it will create a free market race to see if the other companies comply with netflix. So in the end, forget government intervention. You may get what you want if you let the market work itself out.

>>61452808
>Kek enjoy the slow lane
The slow lane isnt slow these days. Most websites can load instantly on even the lowest modern internet speeds. If anything, I want overbloated asp sites to go away.

>>61452817
>Google [as an ISP is to] make Netflix their premium service, and will use that specifically to steal customers from everyone else

so you actually do think companies like Netflix will refuse to pay the Vericast ransom and will sit there hoping that another competing ISP who doesn't want to take money from them, will one day come save the day? risking the 97% or whatever the fuck of their customer base that is on Vericast to be throttled to shit and start hating Netflix for being a slow piece of shit that's not worth paying for?

>>61452896
That's the beauty of the free market. The intricacies off all decisions are now back on the businesses themselves. All the 2015 bill did was give companies like Netflix a government leverage. Without it, they now have to compete on the same level. My business senses tell me Netflix is about to make a big compromise come next year or they'll die. Either way, they are about to become someone's bitch. I'm most interested to see what happens to Google.

Could anyone give me a link to a site that shows the data caps for american ISPs?

>>61452989
Most data caps are 1 TB, but no one realistically ever reaches them. And they are usually just given in high density areas.

File: 6467529670[1].png (32KB, 300x135px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 300x135px

>>61453000
even if they're only in high density areas, 1TB isn't that much
even with my slow connection there are months where i stream and download way more than a terabyte, for example an entire tv show in 1080p

>>61442394
A new Zaregoto episode?

>>61453046
A lot of people who try to stream HD either has to wait for it to download, or they stream it at less quality. The datacap is more of a way of telling customers "this is how much we'll allow but we really hate all this bandwidth this service is hogging." It really sucks for the isp cause you'll have one neighborhood go down and then they have to send someone out to reboot everything. Pro NN people would say this is a bad thing on the fault of the isp, but in reality, it's a more complicated problem involving the streaming services. The thing about downloading is that at least it's an activity that can be placed at a constant speed and stay there until done. Streaming is basically torrenting 24/7. And we all knw how much isps hated torrenting.

>>61452952
that is a masochistic way of putting it. the only way any of this can play out well is another ISP suddenly appearing, ignoring the delicious ransom AND gaining enough momentum to compete with vericast, who not only have practically all of the market in their pocket, in the meantime will be getting shit rich from companies paying their ransom while keeping the Internet bills lower than anyone who doesn't take the ransom. as you can see, expecting all this to happen is naive to say the least.

>>61453086
You're more naive to not know how business works. I said all I needed to say really. I'm only going to watch now to see the results. The thing about this all, is that it's a win win for me, and it's also for you. Again, if this imaginative worse case scenario happens with tier packages, absolutely nothing will change for the end user. They may complain that netflix is slower, but thats something they have to take up with netflix. And we know what happened when they complained: subscribers dropped.

>>61452952
The beauty of the free market is buying out your competition and then murdering them.
The competition is making less profit on each sale, so you buy them up quick and then just put prices up again.
Free market!

>>61453132
that rarely happens in practice, especially with utilities. often the cost of entering a new market outweighs the competitiveness benefits.

This is maximized with the tendency for these companies to do gigantic mergers instead of competing.

>>61453078
but it is the fault of the isp, you pay a huge amount of money for your internet connection and they can't even get some 10Gbit fiber connections to fix the overloading?

>>61453132
Exactly. Until another disruption happens. Most monopolies that happens are normally just businesses with competition that doesn't feel like coming in to compete.

>>61453149
They cant because the infrastructure cost to build a massive datacenter to handle that is being eaten by customer service, maintenance, and government regulations oversight to make any new pushes in internet-related developments.

>>61452817
>You may get what you want if you let the market work itself out
This is one of the most naive statements I keep hearing and it has to stop. The market already proved it can't work itself out, not in this case. This whole mess became such because ISPs were given too much freedom and allowed to place as much redtape as they wanted to in order to keep competition away.

>>61453202
>keep the competition away

Why should I, the consumer, care about competition? And what competition? It's the isp's internet. They can do what they want with it. I'm paying for the right to use it. That's what all of us are doing. The sad part of being pro NN is that you don't even realize that you don't have any real stakes in this.

You say it denies competition but what company allows competition ever on their services? You're a naive little kid or a brainwashed liberal.

File: ADM04EW.png (2MB, 1400x1618px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1400x1618px

>>61453078
>"this is how much we'll allow but we really hate all this bandwidth this service is hogging."
Netflix/Youtube uses like 3-5Mbit for 1080p, and most people are sold many times 3-5Mbit.

>It really sucks for the isp cause you'll have one neighborhood go down and then they have to send someone out to reboot everything.
This has nothing to do with bandwidth usage. If this happens then it's pretty much the isp's problem, and would happen whether or not people use none or all the bandwidth. Did your ISP feed you this BS.

>Streaming is basically torrenting 24/7.
Do you watch TV 24/7?

>>61453240
>Why should I, the consumer, care about competition?
Competition = low prices and high quality service

>>61453240
wow, now i really want to be an ISP in the US if the majority of people are this stupid

>>61453248
Then you're using competition in the wrong way. If someone wants to compete with a company, they are doing it in the market. If a competition cant beat them, then they fail. Thats how the market works. Not cry to the government to ammend a clause so that they have a special privilege to the isp's internet.

File: bruce-head.jpg (23KB, 160x160px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 160x160px

>>61453256
>it's stupid to say that the internet is a privilege not a right

>>61445410
Are you perhaps an idiot? You're viewing the government according to different expectations than a corporation, which to me tells that you're forgetting what a government is.
A corporation is a group of people.
A government is a group of people.
People are self serving.
Corporations are self serving.
Governments are not.
Do you see the problem yet? You're implying that 1 group of people who have vested interest in being self-serving are exactly that, and another group of people who have way more power and considerably less accountability for their actions are not.

Any government can get away with shit that would destroy a corporation overnight for years, yet here you are implying that the people who make up the government are benevolent and cannot possibly be interested in increasing their own wealth at the expense of others.

It's called regulatory capture. The government sells its services in regulation to the highest bidder in order to snuff out any competition for the people with money. I can't believe that thousands of years of government corruption hasn't taught the average retard that they are not trustworthy nor are they capable of regulating in the interest of the people.

>>61453278
it's stupid to say that you don't care about competition
in poland we cared about that and now we have cheap 100-1000mbit connections and mobile plans with unlimited calling, unlimited sms and unlimited internet for under $10 (the cheapest is exactly 5.45 USD)

>>61453240
>what company allows competition ever on their services?
None, which is exactly my point. If any business is allowed to run completely rampant, this is what the result looks like. This is why some government regulation is a good thing, because it keeps companies from establishing monopolies so competition can still flourish and have the customer be the one who benefits first and foremost. Which brings me to my second point:

>Why should I, the consumer, care about competition?
Are you being serious right now? I find it funny how your "let the market work itself out" implies you are a believer of the free market, yet at the same time don't believe in the benefits of competition in the market.

You care about competition because it is what makes businesses want to catch you as their customer. You, as the customer, have the power of choice if there are different businesses to choose from who offer the same service, so they will engage in tactics like lowering their prices. Instead, no competition gives a single monopoly the freedom to fuck you in the ass as much as they want because they know you can't do shit about it.

Ah, the Pajeet Pai. He don't know anything about net

>>61445716
My ISP is also my cable provider. Both internet and cable travel over the same lines using the same channel system. They come out at the same headend. The infrastructure design and greed of this company have me worried.

Not him

>>61450498
cheap nuclear and hydro power, mainly

File: cheapo.png (24KB, 243x746px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 243x746px

>>61453711
we also have some of the cheapest internet around

File: Screen Shot 2016-09-30 at 3.33.59 PM.png (772KB, 1034x588px) Image search: [Google]

772KB, 1034x588px

>>61441659
>data caps
proof that americans are being cucked already and complain about being cucked more.

Wait has net neutrality lost?

>>61454418
America has lost.

In the end it was their stupidity that necked them.

>>61454570
So America doesn't have net neutrality anymore? Will this affect all the American websites I visit?

>>61452830
What about sites with a large amount of traffic and not much revenue?
Like Wikipedia or 4chan

What about streaming movies/shows from any website that's not part of a multibillion dollar business?

Why should Facebook users get priority over 4chan or Wikipedia users?

To allow the freedom of expression it's best to give everyone an equal voice. The Internet made this possible. Now they want to take it all away.

File: Capture.png (82KB, 712x800px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 712x800px

>>61453787
lel you call that cheap

1000/500@9eur

>>61441580
Yes, nothing is going to change in the upcoming months because they want to make it seem like you guys worried about nothing. But in a year or two they're going full raw dog on your tight cunt.

>>61442170
holy shit

i have $0.06/kwh

>>61442544
If you agree that lobbying is an already established force in the government, why would you support legislation that goes in favor of more government intervention?

Libertarians in this board are against NN by principle. The debate is more about whether government is better than competition to solve the ISP fuckery problem. By acknowledging the rampant lobbying in government, you are killing the pro-NN argument that more intervention is needed.

>>61453364
Learn how individual channel contracts work then realize that will never be applicable to the internet

File: IMG_0641.png (661KB, 411x411px) Image search: [Google]

661KB, 411x411px

>>61451841
ISPs are literally Hitler and Google is the greatest thing since sliced bread... hmmm I wonder

>>61452226
>which results in them doing whatever the fuck they want, such as racketeering, censoring, throttling, etc. is that somehow supposed to be a good thing?
already illegal retard, nothing changes

>>61454907
It never had it

File: plovdid_net.png (16KB, 459x452px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 459x452px

>>61455161
>not symmetric

pic related is 1000/1000 but in a different region of Bulgaria

still, I'll concede that Romania does still have the cheapest internet in Europe on average

>>61444746
I'm dedicated to nn because I don't want the internet to end up like cable. Cable providers are also ISPs so there's literally no reason they wouldn't do this.
Most people outside this board who know the issue and are pro nn think along these lines.

>>61457388
Except for the fact that it's a technical nightmare and implementing such a system will be extremely costly. Also current regulations are already in place to prevent such collusion

>>61455994
Net neutrality was de facto untill ISPs started getting bold and greedy.
That's why it's important to make net neutrality de jure.

>>61451596
my dad was against it for free market reasons, and because he thought "neutral" meant forcing sites to only host ideologically neutral content. Once I explained, he at least understood why someone would want net neutrality, especially considering his ISP is already fucking him by constantly increasing his price despite him not being a heavy internet user.
If not for the oligopoly we're stuck in I wouldn't give a shit, but this is the situation we're stuck in. I just don't want it exacerbated.

>>61448381
>competition
>United States
pick 1

>>61457603
because every time the government gets involved everything magically gets better. Worked for education, healthcare, and housing


Oh wait

>>61452271
rich, ideologically motivated plutocrats have EVERY reason to do these things, though.

>>61450106
You can choose a different OS than Windows, you don't have a choice of a different ISP in America.

>>61457688
t. phoneposter

>>61457448
this sounds like a handwave. What regulations? How strong are they, do they have more power than telco lobbyists?

>>61457868
FTC antitrust and it's worked well enough so far. Title II regulation under FCC oversight wasn't set to happen until this fall.

inb4 someone post articles from 4 years ago about the big bad ISPs

>>61453256
If you're an ISP in America you get your share of 200 billion dollars from taxpayers directly into your pocket, it's extremely lucrative.

>>61457671
And le Free Market has worked out so well for me, with an ogligopoly that lets me choose between 2 or 3 big price-gouging ISPs, or moving to a town that actually has any local ISPs that are somehow even worse.
I would LIKE to let a couple dozen companies fight for my dollar, so I'm just as open to something that will create that scenario instead of what I have now, but just leaving the industry to its own devices has fucked me so far.

ISPs/Cable Providers have bought so many legislators I don't understand how people defend them as being under the thumb of Big Government.

>>61458115
>give every broke nigger a student loan and mortgage
>free market
pick only one retard

File: huh.png (173KB, 324x351px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 324x351px

>>61441659
>Americans still have data caps in 2017

File: fc1.jpg (69KB, 680x665px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 680x665px

>>61458115

>>61458140
I would pick the free market, if we had such a thing here.

An oligopoly (from Ancient Greek ὀλίγος (olígos), meaning 'few', and πωλεῖν (polein), meaning 'to sell') is a market form wherein a market or industry is dominated by a small number of sellers (oligopolists). Oligopolies can result from various forms of collusion which reduce competition and lead to higher prices for consumers. Oligopoly has its own market structure.

>understanding this is the state of the ISP industry
>not understanding
pick one, tough guy

>>61458140
>>61458567
this
>>61458521
I'm a capitalist, but I'm also not an idealist like some people ITT

>>61455925
Is guilt by association all you got in that little book of yours?
It just so happens that Google's interest align more with mine than major ISP's interests do.
You fucking sportball infants, I swear.

>>61458679
so go cut your dick off then and leave me alone

>>61458679
>>61458679
I love this interaction. "you're a stupid conspiritard and all you can do is call people who disagree with you jews" "hurrrrrrrr mutilate yourself"
And you wonder why /g/ is shit.