Network Neutrality has for more than a decade been all the rage on the Left. Emphasis - as is always the case with the Left - on rage. Especially so now, as the Donald Trump Administration’s Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is in the process of rolling back said power grab - along with the equally ridiculous imposition on the Web of 1934 Title II landline telephone law. All imposed just two years ago by the Barack Obama Administration’s FCC.
Net Neutrality is the titanically stupid insistence that Internet Service Providers (ISPs) treat each and every thing on the Internet exactly the same. For instance, emails from Nigerian princes - deserve equal access to you as does a doctor performing your remote, online Lasik eye surgery. If that causes your surgeon’s connection to buffer and stall - well that’s just too bad. You didn’t want to read those Nigerian prince emails anyway.
We less government types find Net Neutrality and Title II to be titanically stupid for at least two reasons. It is antithetical to the Constitution and to even a rudimentary understanding of economics. Constitution: Net Neutrality is a blatant assault on at least the First and Fourth Amendments. First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” Fourth Amendment: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” The ISPs have spent more than $1 trillion building their networks. They are thus their networks. They can assemble said networks any way they wish (First Amendment) - completely free from government interference or imposition.
>>62167434
Net Neutrality is the government mandating how ISPs will assemble people upon their networks. A First Amendment no bueno. And certainly with the Title II imposition, the government is executing a massive, unreasonable, unwarranted seizure of ISPs $1+ trillion worth of private property. A Fourth Amendment no bueno. Economics: Net Neutrality bans all sorts of normal business practices in which every other business on the planet engages all the time. The government Post Office charges you different prices for different speeds of delivery. But Net Neutrality is the government - prohibiting ISPs from charging different prices for different speeds of delivery. No hypocrisy there.
And, of course, businesses everywhere charge different prices for differentiated levels of service. And, of course, you would very much like your eye surgeon to be able to purchase a faster, dedicated, uninterruptible Web connection in preparation for his taking a laser to your optical orbs. Net Neutrality is simply bizarre, anti-Reality policy. And, of course, every single Net Neutrality advocate engages in exactly the sort of business practices and avails himself of the exact same Constitutional freedoms - which he wants to have the government ban for ISPs.
>>62167449
Online retail titan Amazon is a huge Net Neutrality proponent. Let’s leave aside the crony fact that they use a ton of bandwidth - and Net Neutrality prohibits ISPs from charging them for it. When you order products from Amazon you can choose at least three different delivery speeds, which the Net Neutrality they champion prohibits ISPs from doing. Web domain giant GoDaddy is a huge Net Neutrality proponent. They cancelled the domain name of a white supremacist website. I.e., GoDaddy is assembling their private business exactly the way they wish - completely free from government interference or imposition, which the Net Neutrality they champion prohibits ISPs from doing. Google is the king of the Internet. They are a nearly $1 trillion business - all by their onesies. Three-quarters of all U.S. Internet searches are conducted through Google. Like Amazon, Google too crony benefits from Net Neutrality’s ban on ISPs charging them for their massive bandwidth consumption. Like GoDaddy, Google banned the same white supremacist domain name when it was registered with Google. This is Google, like GoDaddy, assembling their private business any way they wish - completely free from government interference or imposition, which the Net Neutrality they champion prohibits ISPs from doing.
>>62167460
Google also recently fired engineer James Damore after Damore’s private memo about Google’s diversity (or lack thereof) was leaked to the public. Google is perfectly within their rights to do this. As they continue to work to assemble their private business any way they wish - completely free from government interference or imposition. But the Net Neutrality they champion prohibits ISPs from doing exactly the same thing. Net Neutrality is titanically stupid policy. In no small part because it clearly violates the Constitution - and the very basic laws of very basic economics. All of which explains why the Left are such huge fans thereof.
https://web.archive.org/web/20170829040249/https://townhall.com/columnists/setonmotley/2017/08/28/net-neutrality-proven-titanically-stupid-by-net-neutralitys-proponents-n2374192
>>62167427
I don't need someone deciding for me what connections are important, you authoritarian cunt. Go join Antifa.
>>62167570
PSA for the dummies: NN is just a push from content providers for a socialist price regulation framework to protect their profit line, nothing more nothing less
All you need to know: http://www.realclearpolicy.com/articles/2017/05/18/the_ugly_truth_about_obamas_net_neutrality_110247.html
>>62167625
As opposed to the push from ISPs to turn the Internet into a cable package and protect *their* profit line.
>>62167427
I'm not reading that shit just to spite your reddit fueled argument
>>62167427
>Net Neutrality is the titanically stupid insistence that Internet Service Providers (ISPs) treat each and every thing on the Internet exactly the same. For instance, emails from Nigerian princes - deserve equal access to you as does a doctor performing your remote, online Lasik eye surgery. If that causes your surgeon’s connection to buffer and stall - well that’s just too bad. You didn’t want to read those Nigerian prince emails anyway.
Hilariously idiotic and clueless.
>>62167625
>Won't somebody think of those poor ISPs and their freedom to monopolistic, anti-consumer practices ;_;
Piss off kike.
>>62167434
>The ISPs have spent more than $1 trillion building their networks. They are thus their networks. They can assemble said networks any way they wish (First Amendment) - completely free from government interference or imposition.
that's the stupidest thing ive ever read
>>62167760
If anything this shows that any regulation is fucking retarded. With ISPs heavily regulated, tech monoliths like Google and Cloudflare are doing a lot more harm to the internet than good. I'm not saying I like the idea of an ISP charging me for different web sites. But if ISPs could charge Google more money for using more bandwidth, it would put the two into a cold war state with both trying to appease the consumer rather than do gay political rights activism shit.
>>62167427
The net should remain neutral because otherwise the ISPs will be able to take advantage of their monopoly power.
If there was low barrier to entry for the ISP industry there would only be benefits from more freedom.
But in the world we live that is not the case, so policy to remove the net's neutrality is simply policy to redistribute wealth from every citizen to the ISP.
So every non-ISP citizen who acts in their own interest or in the interest of other members of society should be against abolishing net neutrality.
>>62167826
They do (already) charge google for using more bandwidth.
But they don't charge google more just for being google.
>>62167860
As opposed to Netflix, which consumes 50% of the network traffic abuse it's monopoly on streaming?
>>62167906
This >>62167904 but with netflix.
The reason netflix has massive market power in the streaming market is not a result of internet laws. It is a result of contract and licensing laws between them and show producers.
>>62167956
Not contracting laws. Just contracts.
>>62167434
This paragraph on its own discredits the entire article. The person who wrote this article is a moron objectively.
>>62167793
>supporting far-leftist, pro-censorship Google
I want the ISPs to tear the leftist companies in Silicon Valley a new asshole.
>>62167906
Netflix pays for their bandwidth. I pay for my bandwidth.
Fuck off.
>>62167982
this is what it comes down to
fuck antitrust, fuck "an even playing field", fuck regulating against crony capitalism, it's all about just doing as much damage to the left as possible, even though they already lost
you people are insane
>>62167860
The net is already not neutral when domain providers can ban anyone they want for any reason they want. Everything should be neutral or nothing at all. Companies like Google can't have it only their way and I'd argue it's more harmful to the public to empower the likes of Google than it is to lift net neutrality
>>62168010
They are censoring right-of-center thought all over the internet. They're clearly abusing their power. You clearly don't mind since they're on your side, but I say that they have it coming.
>>62168010
No regulation IS an even playing field you retard
>>62168088
No, it isn't. Either go back to fairy tale land or learn basic economics and politics
>>62167449
>1 trillion in infrastructure spending
>still have shit Internet
>>62168010
>crony capitalism
This has nothing to do with crony capitalism, you moron. And why are you so opposed to that anyway? You leftists usually love that stuff.
>>62168170
>ISP funds x retard to government position
>retard proposes new laws for ISPs
>calls in ISP lawyers to write laws
>signs laws that ISP wrote that only benefit ISPs
>nothing to do with crony capitalism
How come Yuro countries manages to have net neutrality, traffic management, good service and a competitive ISP market while America seems to fail on them all?
>>62167486
Google probably broke several laws when they fired James Damore. I doubt that any suit would win, but they might not be "well within their rights" in firing him.
>>62168195
Because America lacks the competitive ISP market bit.
>>62168134
10th fastest in the world.
Half of all LTE connections in the world.
>>62168195
because europeans believe that a regulated market that allows newcomers and fair competition is freer than a market where the large companies are allowed to shut competition out entirely
>>62168195
too much freedumbs
also, America is real big. though that's not a good excuse when we don't even have good competition on the state level.
>>62168195
At least I can't be arrested for saying 'nigger' on a cantonese basket weaving forum.
>>62168195
Contrary to popular belief, the EU has pretty good antitrust laws limiting the possibility for cable companies to also be ISPs and content providers at the same time.
>>62168221
Europe has 3rd world internet though.
>>62168191
Proof of this happening.
>>62168215
Getting 10th place in a race you pioneered is not very flattering.
>>62167794
im not an american so im not too sure,
but didnt the government pay for it all,
and didnt they pay them to upgrade infrastructure but the ISPs just pocketed most of it.
>>62168263
Ajit Pai, you retarded ape.
Everything involving google fiber vs at&t.
>>62168270
>nation of 310million
>massive country
How about we stop including flyover states.
Oh that's right.
>>62168119
Yes, it is. ISPs are businesses too and should be free to control how their infrastructure is used and what content is delivered through it, the same as Google is allowed to do with theirs. Net neutrality on its premise discriminates AGAINST an industry in favor of the net content provider giants and mostly the giants
>>62168273
p much. municipalities put out an offer for contracts for fiber service, companies bid for those contracts. in lots of places the companies throw enough money around to get laws passed so that they have basically a monopoly in that market
>>62168312
Not when they take my tax money and promise to upgrade infrastructure and then pocket the money and raise prices too. Don't try to have the benefits of being a utility and then not have the constraints and requirements placed on utilities too.
And stop fucking suing competition.
the USPS is a business too and should be free to control how their transfer channels are used and who gets to mail a letter
>>62168311
>delaware
What
>>62168312
>ISPs are businesses too and should be free to control how their infrastructure is used
only if they reject government subsidies, or in general anything that costs the taxpayer money
>>62167826
Yeah, because ISP's are freedom of speech champions, right you galatically stupid?
>>62167427
Doctors really shouldn't be performing surgery via internet. God forbid WW3 broke out and an emp knocked out power
>>62168211
There are over 450 isps, hon
Can we please ban Americans from the Internet?
There's only so much insanity i can take.
>>62168312
>Net neutrality on its premise discriminates AGAINST an industry
nothing about theories of government requires them to guarantee that businesses survive
>>62168332
All companies take tax payer money you retard
https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.mic.com/articles/amp/85101/10-corporations-receiving-massive-public-subsidies-from-taxpayers
WOW LOOK AT THAT GOOGLE GETTING BIG BUS FROM BIG DADDY GOVERNMENT
Google wouldn't even exist without government funding you retard, it's basically a government startup and you're acting like the ISPs are bad guys who're stealing MUH MONEY FROM TAXES. Neck yourself
>>62168379
>implying the assassins of tomorrow won't be script kiddies using loic on the servers of the hospitals
Google etc will pay whatever peering charges they need to, it's really the small startups and personal servers that will be hurt by network prioritization.
Here about 10 years back a local ISP wanted to build out fiber my city with their own funds. The city turned them down and somehow used the whole situation to send Comcast a tax break to improve their network, which they of course didn't do. Fuck ISPs, anything telecoms don't want is good for people.
Normal market principal doesn't really apply to telecoms. See: bell breakup.
>>62168396
They're not fucking me over like ISPs though just like USPS isn't fucking me over. ISPs steal my money, make promises, and then fuck me and fuck google.
>>62168396
>All companies take tax payer money you retard
then no company has a right to disregard the population cause muh private company
>>62168396
way to misunderstand his point, which is that taking government money means you don't get to claim you get to be entirely free from government influence
>>62168380
Hello ISP shill
>>62168364
>only if they reject government subsidies, or in general anything that costs the taxpayer money
Tech companies do the same. Why aren't they subject to the same regulations?
>>62168380
How many of those are satellite? How many are wireless? These are completely unacceptable in 2017.
>>62168451
because the government hasn't decided to crack down on them yet
>>62168451
What regulations apply to them that they aren't subject to?
>>62168409
>get proven wrong
>spout lies
the average redditor, go back
>>62168495
>google isn't fucking me over
>USPS isn't fucking me over
>ISP took money
>ISP didn't do the things they should have
>any of these are lies
Go to fucking bed, Ajit Pai.
>>62168478
Treating all bandwidth equally for one thing.
They are constantly blocking websites/apps that they don't like.
Why are they allowed to do that but then demand ISP's no do the same?
>>62168409
Yea, and Google fucks over other taxpayers, what's your point other than WAAAAAHHH MEMEMEMEME?
>>62168422
Yeah? I don't disagree. I'm arguing in favor of fair treatment of companies. If Google and time Warner are both taking money, they should be treated the same whether they're regulated in who they provide their services to and to what degree, or if they're not regulated at all.
>>62168530
Nice try Scholomo, ISP's are as evil as Google has become. ISP's SHALL REMAIN TITLE II. FUCK YOU
>>62168528
>all these lies
>no sources
You're an idiot.
You can easily be proven wrong though.
US has 10th fastest internet in the world. Fact.
Half of all LTE connections in the world are in the US. Fact
Most cable ISP's now provide DOCSIS 3.0 and many are upgrading to 3.1.. Fact
ATT and Verizon now provide millions of homes with Gigabit internet. Fact
Those aren't in any way the same.
>>62168588
>US has 10th fastest internet in the world. Fact.
Source?
>>62168588
https://www.ntia.doc.gov/legacy/broadbandgrants/comments/61BF.pdf
eat shit
>>62168610
https://www.akamai.com/us/en/multimedia/documents/state-of-the-internet/q1-2017-state-of-the-internet-connectivity-report.pdf
Whether or not you agree with NN, going back to a 1934 law, enacted by a bureaucrat is fucking retarded.
>>62168708
Allowing tech companies to block whatever websites they want but then demand ISP's no do that is even more retarded.
>>62168708
Did no one tell Obama that bowing is modeled after dog behavior and is an expression of deference? It's fine if you bow the same but he looks like he's going down to suck his own dick
k
Net neutrality is just putting a bandage over the real problem. The real problem is the government issued regional ISP monopolies. Each municipality decides which ISPs are allowed in which area, even in cases where a new ISP has been willing to pay to lay new cable and set up shop, they have been denied. Even if you are out in the country with no internet and the designated ISP doesn't want to give you internet, but some other ISP is willing to, they can't because of the government enforced monopoly.
I think a good solution would be to force the ISPs to rent out their cable to an unlimited number of ISPs which would allow any currently existing ISP and any new ones in the future to set up shop in any area they want thus increasing speeds and lowering the price. But to push for innovation, if an ISP lays new cable/fiber, they should have exclusive access to that for a set number of years before they have to rent it out.
No reason shit holes like South Korea and Europe should have much faster and much cheaper internet than in the US.
The internet was always bound to end up at a point where a fork in the road decided which gigantic shadowy corporations get to control it in its entirety.
From the very bottom all the way to the top, through hosts, DNS, domain registers, etc. it seems almost designed to accumulate power to those corporations.
Compare to the freedom granted by the hobbyist networks like FidoNet, and you'll see what I mean. We can talk about IPFS and distributed hosting, but these same problems arise.
>>62168215
>>62168253
>>62168311
>>62167982
I'm gonna guess this has more to do with your anger towards the democratic party than anything else.
Stay mad kid. The future will soon overthrow your backwards /pol ideology.
>>62167427
Why should we care about those corporations when they actively censor people they disagree with. If they want faster speeds for their service then they can create new infrastructure
>>62168915
>history is predetermined; you're on the wrong side of history
>wow
Didn't realize that you millennial retards still used this stupid fallacy. And from my vantage, it seems that you are the ones that are really upset. The next 8 years are going to be great, nu-male.
>>62168915
just to be clear, you lost that argument
>google can censor/throttle data because muh reasons but not muh ISPs! thats not fair!
>>62168915
CURRENT YEAR
U
R
R
E
N
T
Y
E
A
R
Google and rest of Silicon Valley can go fuck themselves, tbqh.
>>62168072
You're nuts if you think removal of ISP neutrality is good for the right. Remember how time warner supported HRC in the last election? Do you really think that giving them more power over what you can publish online is a win for free speech?
>>62169100
Right, so we should just force all companies to not censor anyone
>>62169356
Soros is pro-NN.
>>62167434
>$1 trillion building their networks
I still have DSL, sounds like half of that got laundered into foreign bank accounts.
>>62169622
Zip?
>>62169872 78
At least bring 2 cookies or something if you stop by 63
>>62168405
>Here about 10 years back a local ISP wanted to build out fiber my city with their own funds. The city turned them down and somehow used the whole situation to send Comcast a tax break to improve their network, which they of course didn't do.
Towns & states shouldn't have to power to turn down new ISPs like that. I'm skeptical of Net Neutrality laws as a whole but we need some form of them to stop local and federal govt from becoming too overbearing & controlling on the free market.
>>62167427
Equality across the board, for each entity, no matter how large or small. That is what Net Neutrality is at its core, regardless of all the inherit flaws that follow. Go back to /r/edit.
>>62169007
At this point, if you aren't a millennial you're either underaged or too old to know what a computer is.
>>62168386
Can we ban Europeans--I mean Muslims--from the planet?
There are only so many rapefugees one can take.
>>62170085
But that's already the current situation...
>>62167427
This is goddamn stupid.
>>62170374
>But that's already the current situation...
What is? Local governments having too much power? That's why I said we need some form of Net Neutrality laws.
>>62170398
Local governments already have too much power BECAUSE of regulation.
See: >>62168822
If we implement net neutrality, aka more regulation, we will just fuck over the average American consumer. For fuck's sake, Chicago only has symmetric gigabit fiber in some parts of the city rather than in every fucking home because of Rahm Emanuel and the other Crook County Democrats' retarded asses.
>When you order products from Amazon you can choose at least three different delivery speeds, which the Net Neutrality they champion prohibits ISPs from doing.
>>62167427
the left didn't care at all about NN until king nigger opened his big mouth and made it political
>>62167570
>Go join Antifa.
literally kys
>>62168275
>google fucks up yet another beta product
>this is somehow the fault of the FCC
>>62168332
>Don't try to have the benefits of being a utility and then not have the constraints and requirements placed on utilities too.
You mean like Google and Facebook?
>>62170434
True, I agree with you. I think anyone who argues for Net Neutrality before they consider changing the laws which allow local governments to ban competition is pretty dumb.
I feel the same way about socialized health care. Bernie Sanders was retarded as fuck. He argued free health care, but still supports socialist animal agriculture subsidies which cause a salad at mcdonalds to cost 4x as much as a burger. When in reality 90% of the burger was hidden costs paid for by our tax dollars. We finance diabetes and cancer causing burgers with our tax dollars. It's stupid to direct our tax dollars to both causing and curing diseases. Get to the root of the problem.
>>62168409
So tell your parents to stop giving them money
>>62170941
Faster delivery of physical goods costs money. Bandwidth is virtually free.
>>62171190
>Bandwidth is virtually free
Couldn't be more wrong if you tried
>>62171219
>Couldn't be more wrong if you tried
data caps are neccessary evil, Linux has a bright future ahead in desktop market, AMD drivers just work, black lives DO matter
>>62171219
DELAY DELAY DELAY
>>62169062
It's not Google or other big tech companies which are going to suffer most. It will be small companies, start-ups. Who can't compete anymore because they don't have enough money to pay the ISPs to offer just as much bandwidth and just as good a service as the big ones.
>>62167625
americans are so fucking dumb
>For instance, emails from Nigerian princes - deserve equal access to you as does a doctor performing your remote, online Lasik eye surgery. If that causes your surgeon’s connection to buffer and stall - well that’s just too bad.
If the surgeon's connection is buffering and stalling, it's because someone hasn't implemented or updated the technology from the stone age into the modern age, and that didn't happen because a chucklefuck who made this example created an excuse for the telecommunications technology not being updated and instead pinned blame on policy rather than infrastructure that should always be advancing yet isn't under Cable companies and ISP's.
In the very start of this whole thing, the author has proven themselves retarded and ignorant.
>>62171303
>because they don't have enough money to pay the ISPs to offer just as much bandwidth
You make no sense at all. None.
Actually you are retarded desu.
And your post is ironic.
>>62167460
>When you order products from Amazon you can choose at least three different delivery speeds, which the Net Neutrality they champion prohibits ISPs from doing.
>>62167826
>But if ISPs could charge Google more money for using more bandwidth
Here's the problem with your entire argument: the consumer is paying for the bandwidth already. In the analogy with Amazon's delivery speeds, the consumer is freely choosing to pay for a particular delivery speed and Amazon is simply complying with that. In reference to Google, again, consumers are accessing Google's network through an internet connection that they're paying for. To make a better analogy, what you are suggesting is that if I buy a phone line from you that includes long distance calling and I decide to call someone on the other side of the planet, you should be able to charge the person on the other side of the planet because your long distance lines are in use. No, sorry; your services have already been paid for.
>>62167570
>what is qos
You need to go back
>>62171362
Imagine a big streaming service like Netflix
>have enough money to pay a lot of ISPs so that your data doesn't count towards data caps
>have enough money to pay a lot of ISPs to give users higher bandwidth when using your service
Now imagine a new start-up tries to compete with Netflix
>don't have enough money to buy higher bandwith for users for that many ISPs
>don't have enough money to buy your data not counting towards data cap
How big of a chance do yo have? Even if you have a better service otherwise, since it is slow and people can't view as much you will have little chance to actually compete.
Doesn't even have to be because you don't have enough money. Maybe the big company pays the ISPs to be the only one with those benefits in its area of service.
>>62171329
Yep, and I'm so enjoying seeing them shoot themselves in the foot.
>>62167434
Lolbertarian here
You are attempting to dismantle government oppression by removing what is basically the locks on the door of a building and claiming "it's simpler"
Net neutrality is only important because people refuse to dismantle all the other laws preventing competition. If that goes, net neutrality would no longer be necessary. You can champion smaller government but still be realistic on what is necessary in the rigged government FYI. Unrig the government. Then the free market will decide it.
>>62170941
>When you order products from Amazon you can choose at least three different delivery speeds, which the Net Neutrality they champion prohibits ISPs from doing.
That's not true at all.
You can pay for better data plans.
You could, in theory, even pay a one time fee for a short burst of speed to download a specific file.
The only thing ISP's can't do under NN is tell you what you can or can't download at increased speed.
That would be like the postal service accepting speed orders from Amazon but not from eBay even if eBay customers are willing to pay.
>>62171507
Once the start up begins consuming bandwidth anywhere near Netflix levels they will have ample resources to do the same, but please come up with more hypothetical bullshit that will never happen
>>62171730
>please come up with more hypothetical bullshit that will never happen
I don't need to, people defending abolishing NN already are.
>>62171607
>muh free market
It implies having to lay down not one, but several FTTH networks.
At least 3 or 4 for healthy competition.
Although theoretically possible the cost would be several times higher and every street would have to be dug open several times.
It's much simpler, cheaper and less obstructive to just have one government regulated network which all ISP's can share.
>>62171507
Netflix and streaming services are fucked because some ISPs (Comcast) are also cable TV providers and they compete with TV. Comcast doesn't want you using streaming services in lieu of their products.
I mean, if I were Comcast, I'd throttle the fuck out of Netflix traffic. To get decent Netflix speeds, I'd make the consumer basically the same price as getting my cheapest cable TV package.
>>62171757
>abolish something that never went into effect
>OMG THE WORLD IS GONNA END
(you)
>>62171815
Enjoy your class action lawsuit and consumer outrage
>>62171815
This is exactly what's going to happen.
Mobile providers are already starting to throttle video content.
Makes sense for cable internet to do the same.
>>62171865
>Mobile providers are already starting to throttle video content.
only on certain plans that specify as much
>Makes sense for cable internet to do the same.
antitrust legislation says otherwise
>>62167427
>ITT Trumpfag rationalizing his being cucked on turbo
>>62171865
mobile providers are cheap with traffic because it's pretty difficult to provide sufficient capacity at every spot
>>62171861
They will sell it as an improvement over their current service.
The Goyim is stupid like that.
>>62171902
more like retard liberals feign outrage over a literal nothing, again
>>62171815
I mean yeah in the case of Netflix. Comcast would need to INVEST into their infrastructure to enable internet TV. They would pay for bolstering their competitor.
So they figured - they'll not make it easier for them than they have to. There isn't even specific throttling - however- Netflix wasn't allowed to partner with them in datacentres, cheap connectivity, either.
if you're against NN, please go back to your containment board
>>62172001
If you're for NN stop living in the past
>>62168379
doctors will be performing surgery through the same routers the kids in the waiting room use to stream their tv shows :)
this is the future you wanted!
>>62171894
>only on certain plans that specify as much
One provider, but all plans.
>>62171894
>antitrust legislation says otherwise
Specify where exactly it says ISP's can't do this?
>>62171908
>it's pretty difficult to provide sufficient capacity at every spot
No it isn't.
Just put up more towers.
Been to any big events like music festival lately?
Tens or even hundreds of thousands of people all packed together, all sharing dozens of megabytes of stupid pictures and videos on social media yet everyone still has decent internet.
>>62171934
Did you mean to illustrate the post you are reacting to?
>>62172055
t. Someone who's never been to a live sporting event
>>62167427
>For instance, emails from Nigerian princes - deserve equal access to you as does a doctor performing your remote, online Lasik eye surgery. If that causes your surgeon’s connection to buffer and stall - well that’s just too bad. You didn’t want to read those Nigerian prince
what the hell
>>62168588
Most of these improvements came within the last 2 presidential terms. Fact.
>>62171784
Then why have laws that prevent competition from popping up? If the government can offer a cheaper alternative then i guess it doesn't hurt them to have company's free to start their own ISP in a state
>>62172080
What big sporting event didn't have proper 4G?
The audience would sperg out.
>>62172205
My country doesn't have such laws.
But then we're not "capitalist" enough I guess.
>>62167460
> When you order products from Amazon you can choose at least three different delivery speeds, which the Net Neutrality they champion prohibits ISPs from doing.
You can choose different transfer speeds too when you buy internet service.
For instance, emails from Nigerian princes - deserve equal access to you as does a doctor performing your remote, online Lasik eye surgery. If that causes your surgeon’s connection to buffer and stall - well that’s just too bad
its weird how accidentally correct the article is and has no self awareness about it
>>62167625
Why is it always Americans that come up with and spout such retarded shit?
>>62172300
You sound as dumb as Ted Cruz.
>>62172158
*All
>>62172310
Their TV network companies (who also happen to be their ISP's) have brainwashed them.
>>62172326
and your argument is a toddlers argument, deal wit it. its only HALF correct, however, because its not the nigerian prince getting the right to YOU, its YOU choosing what email you open. when they start charging different rates do you think the doctor is going to be free and the nigerian prince just a bit more? yeah, fuck off. its going to be double the rate for the doctor because its a serious service and they KNOW your gonna pay and absolutely nothing for the nigerian prince. just 5 bucks a month extra and you wont get the nigerian prince either! cheap filtering direct from your isp!
>>62167826
>Cloudflare
Cloudflare is used to protect websites from DDOS attacks.
How is that harming anyone?
>>62168088
>look everyone I don't know what neoliberalism is
>>62167826
...or the reality will be that link at the bottom of the video that didnt load that loaded yesterday saying "experiencing issues? click here for more info..."
>>62168312
>this guy unironically wants to walk into a library and find the most popular books with rental fees
>>62167427
>pay for 30mbps connection
>electrorabbi is now allowed to cuck your connection arbitrarily until you get a Multimedia Package™
>56k speeds at certain sites
But it would be alright because ISPs would implement QoS systems that magically read through all passing emails for nigerian prince spams, right? It's obvious that this joke of an article was written by a mouthbreather who probably calls monitors "the computer".
>>62171438
Except QoS is not about making more money, whereas rolling back net neutrality's only purpose is so that big telecoms can charge you more money. The US already has insanely dysfunctional internet. This would make it even worse.
If they truly do roll back net neutrality in the US and this is kept up for a decade or two, then the US will become a shithole.
>>62172645
>QoS is not about making more money
ha
HA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
Oh wow
>>62168072
>net neutrality isn't a thing anymore
>ISPs that were in bed with Shillary are now allowed to throttle any connection to sites that they don't like
>>62172205
>Then why have laws that prevent competition from popping up? If the government can offer a cheaper alternative then i guess it doesn't hurt them to have company's free to start their own ISP in a state
This is what you retards don't seem to understand: these laws exist because of the big telecoms. They were the ones that lobbied for it, they're the ones that benefit from it. Removing net neutrality is giving them a way to screw the people over even harder.
You are aware that these same telecoms took over $200 billion from the taxpayer to fund new infrastructure development, but never actually delivered? These are the same people that benefit from rolling back net neutrality. Literally everybody else will get fucked in this process.
The reason Trump is in favor of rolling back net neutrality is that he is all about keeping his corporate friends happy.
>>62167427
>>62167434
>>62167449
>>62167460
>>62167486
Try harder in trying to conceal a blatant shill post, faggot.
>yfw almost all of spain and shitholes like panama have had internet access, free and equal as a right since 2005
>"1st worlds" are still arguing around this over money
Why do you read from websites like these? Clearly written by people who are frustrated, "titanically stupid", what kind of serious journalist would use that? As if there was some sort of "self-evident" truth that only the stupid could not see.
>and the very basic laws of very basic economics
Economy at its basic did not have AntiTrust, that is a relatively fresh one, the first one in America was in 1890, in Italy for instance it was exactly 100 years later, Net Neutrality is an obstacle to that practice too, otherwise Comcast could just go to Netflix and hold a ransom and tell them if they don't pay up X per month they will slow their service.
People like this, probably think that our is a capitalistic economy, but is been around 88 years since we began to shift toward NeoLiberalism, whereas there is free trade but the Government is also in charge to check on the
WAIT A SECOND
>seton motley
>heartland institute
The place with such executives as ExxonMobil and Philip Morris.
The place that promotes disinformation by spreading the idea that global warming is a conspiracy by scientists and that once made a list of 500 hundred scientists who supposedly said that there was no such thing as global warming and it turned out that many of those actually though the opposite, or were dead, or in a case it was not even their field.
I wish people lurked more.
>>62173045
>The place that promotes disinformation by spreading the idea that global warming is a conspiracy by scientists and that once made a list of 500 hundred scientists who supposedly said that there was no such thing as global warming and it turned out that many of those actually though the opposite, or were dead, or in a case it was not even their field.
ah yeah, and since they're Philip Morris partners, they also post stuff about healthy cigarettes.
In the current year.
>>62172452
>>62172884
It's only Anglo countries that argue over this.
>>62172452
Cloudflare breaks SSL. They also see all the data you send through Cloudflare.
>>62173294
>>62172884
I don't get this. We've had 100 Mbps down, 100 Mbps up Internet for 10 years at 15€ per month already without any data caps. What the fuck is wrong with the US?
>>62167793
Its like that fucking xkcd cartoon you mong. Its their property so they have the right to do what they want with it.
Nobody is forcing you to use the internet. If you don't like it just create your own internet xdd.
But seriously fuckong create a fucking cryptonet instead of perpetuating this nonsense.
>>62173324
>Its like that fucking xkcd cartoon you mong. Its their property so they have the right to do what they want with it.
>Nobody is forcing you to use the internet. If you don't like it just create your own internet xdd.
It's not their property though, and even some of the bits that are were only possible because of the state giving them privileges to do so.
>>62173113
>Cloudflare and Tor Users
I agree with that one, is a rather annoying problem that affects especially those that live in a country where internet probably has enough blocks already.
>2)
Well that seems a case of slippery slope
3) Well that's a bold claim and I would like some serious sources on that
And the last point is a conjecture.
>>62167427
yusss the toll troll likes gettin his dik succd
>>62167860
Why not just make he industry more competitive by forcing leasing/peering to competitors at regulated rates?
But IMO worse is better and the sooner the internet is turned into a dead corporate walled garden this sooner a decentralized cryptonet can take its place.
Also lmao at the audacity of you USAfags who think your third world american internet is the worlds problem. Sincerely, fuck off.
>>62171190
The second bit of data delivered to your house is nearly free. The first bit is astronomically expensive.
>amerifats are unironically against something that prevents them from being jewed by ISPs
Holy shit, you faggots are dumber every year.
>>62167427
lmao, you couldn't possibly make it anymore obvious that an isp has a hand your pocket
>net neutrality is a power grab! we the goyim WANT to be abused by anti-consumer practices!
>>62173448
>this post stored and served courtesy of a server in the USA
>>62173312
>What the fuck is wrong with the US?
Capitalism
>>62173312
>I don't get this. We've had 100 Mbps down, 100 Mbps up Internet for 10 years at 15€ per month already without any data caps. What the fuck is wrong with the US?
most americans don't live in the city
>>62173294
It's americans.
>>62173535
Personally, I stopped caring when the companies pushing it stopped acting neutral themselves. I trust my local ISP, which has legit competition, more than I trust YouTube, which has none.
>>62173535
>i WANT to pay more for the same service and allow them to arbitrarily restrict my speeds!
>>62173324
>Nobody is forcing you to use the internet.
that's like creating toll roads and then telling people they don't have to drive.
>>62173559
this. we should have internet like cuba where they have to sneakernet everything.
>>62173573
and? panama and places like spain can pull this off and not all of them live in the city
get your shit together
>>62173559
But this clearly is not the case. The other countries that have reasonable internet are capitalist just the same. The government operates slightly differently, but the countries are still capitalist.
>>62173573
>most americans don't live in the city
But even the ones that do live in a city seem to have the same problems.
>>62173581
>I trust my local ISP, which has legit competition, more than I trust YouTube, which has none.
Youtube doesn't have competition, because it's prohibitively expensive to actually run. There are no laws or anything that blocks competition for Youtube popping up, it's just too expensive to try.
>>62173599
>and?
those outside of the city don't get 100mbps for 15€.
>>62173549
A US server that is notorious for slowdowns and even complete denials of service any time it experiences higher than average traffic.
Remind me....why hasn't 4chan been moved to a decent site yet?
>>62173586
>who needs to access websites other than youtube at first world speed anyway? it's probably just pirates who want to pirate at high speed!
>everyone else will be fine with 30kb/s for everything (except for YT videos, of course)
>>62173599
And how big is Spain in comparison to the US?
You know that in places like western Kansas, and Northern Nebraska, the population is <1 per square km, right?
>>62173607
>But even the ones that do live in a city seem to have the same problems.
yeah true, that kind of policy leaks over into cities where it shouldn't be a thing. Another thing is that if you have acceptable infrastructure already, it can deincentivize the building of something better. In this way, having nothing can actually be a good thing.
>>62173573
>It's americans.
I thought it was also Australians?
>>62173609
and in spain and panama they do. fuck, how many times do i need to repeat this
>>62173607
>The other countries that have reasonable internet are capitalist just the same.
Not Moldova.
>>62173634
its bigger. and? its also got a gdp about 15 times bigger and cant pull off what some puny hole can
>>62173448
>Third world internet
That's not Europe >>62168253
>>62173609
>those outside of the city don't get 100mbps for 15€.
Yeah, and people in America IN THE CITY don't get 100 mbps for 150€ that's uncapped. That's the entire point.
I picked a random town with 5000 inhabitants gets 100 Mbps up and down with no data caps for 25€ a month. 300/300 for 33€ a month.
>>62173651
Yeah, and in Panema, you can't drive 180 miles in a straight line without seeing another human life. Yet people still live in those areas, and internet has to reach them. This means using satellite, or paying for cell towers than less than 100 people would use per year, or paying for internet infrastructure over half a state that less than 10000 people would use per year.
did anyone else leave a comment in support of /ourpajeet/?
https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/10712548329644
>>62173667
Explain to me how to get those kinds of speeds over half a state when farmers are only willing to pay 50 dollars per month, and there are fewer than 1000 homes spread over that half of a state.
You are an ISP. How do you cover your costs of laying the cable?
>>62173727
ask me how i know you didnt even check if that was true, secondly, you just listed ways to do it, and...those places do, while america, bigger, badder, richer, cant.
>>62173621
>Remind me....why hasn't 4chan been moved to a decent site yet?
Because bandwidth, hardware and migration work isn't free.
>>62173792
>Because bandwidth, hardware and migration work isn't free.
It's cheaper in Eemshaven than it is in some crappy American data center.
All big American tech companies are moving their servers to Europe, why not 4chan?
>>62173775
>Explain to me how to get those kinds of speeds over half a state when farmers are only willing to pay 50 dollars per month, and there are fewer than 1000 homes spread over that half of a state.
>You are an ISP. How do you cover your costs of laying the cable?
You don't. The problem isn't the farmers, the problem is that you can't get decent internet even in cities in the US.
If you live in a city with a million people in it then there is no excuse for there not to be a 100/100 unlimited connection for $100 or less a month.
If Estonia can offer 100/100 for €25 a month in a town with a few thousand people the US better be able to do the same in big cities.
>>62173830
>All big American tech companies are moving their servers to Europe, why not 4chan?
Again, because the work isn't free. How many people do you think are there in the world that understand how to migrate something like 4chan? You would have to get those people to do it, the current maintainers might not be sure they know how to do it.
>>62173775
you think the farmers in panama pay anything? did you read it? its considered a right.
>>62173775
This. But it isn't just one state. You have North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Montana, and Iowa at minimum.
As a European who has visited and explored the US, most people don't realize how big the US is, and how empty it is outside of the metropolitan areas you can list off the top of your head. You can drive the same Interstate highway for 200 miles without a petro station.
America is fucking MASSIVE.
>>62173842
Except you have to. Because government is pushing you to do so, or will give favorable treatment to someone else.
So how do you do it? You HAVE to, or you risk losing everything.
>>62173886
and someone who produces literally a 1/15th of what america does, manages to pull it off in some shithole. somewhere where lawyers and engineers get paid 25 k a year and the average wage is 250 bucks a month
>>62173886
>Our cities and suburbs have shit internet because of farmers living innawoods.
Alrightythen.
One reason is local governments want to maintain the beauty of their cities. Other cultures don't mind constant rutting of the ground for fiber and stringing it along like japan south korea.
>>62173943
They produce 1/15 in a land that is 1/100 of the size.
>>62173952
Yes. Because the government will push you out if you don't cover them, and you need to cover your costs somehow.
It's the same reason the US interstate highways aren't getting maintained. Too much of it isn't getting used enough to justify the costs of maintaining all of it.
>>62173967
It would pretty if you remove the roads as well.
>>62173983
>by size panama is fucking kicking the shit outta americas ass
okay, how is this any less embarrassing
>>62173943
that's a good point though even if it wasn't intended, if the average wage is lower, so will be the wage for the technicians, and for the service fee.
>>62168373
What does it matter at this point? Free speech is over.
>>62173915
>Except you have to. Because government is pushing you to do so, or will give favorable treatment to someone else.
>So how do you do it? You HAVE to, or you risk losing everything.
In that case I'll use some of that $200 billion dollars I took in tax breaks from the government to build the infrastructure.
>>62173995
yeah, im sure lots of people in panama are educated and capable of installing and creating major nation wide infrastructure
no, they bring in people to do that,
>>62173993
Farming takes up a lot of space, and the US is one of the world's main food producers. Wanna cram the us population into the west coast, and they could produce a lot more, none of it food.
>>62174010
You are about halfway there. For Kansas. You still have Nebraska, North and South Dakota, and Montana.
>>62173597
Unironically this.
>>62173595
No one is forcing you to drive you disgustingly fat amerilard. What's wrong with walking or your motorized wheelchair?
>>62173535
>the goyim want to be abused
True. Tyrant is made possible only by the passive assent of the thralls, which we see in our acceptance and enthusiastic support for all kinds of authoritarianism and technological slavery.
A savage servility slides by on grease; we ale all watched over by machines of loving grace.
>>62174047
and cellular towers take fuck all, and satellite, yeah, that takes up a lot of ground
>>62174103
Satellite is slow. Cell towers are expensive to build and maintain, and the people who allow it on their land don't have to pay for service (in the country, that will be the only person regularly using the tower).
>>62174070
>You are about halfway there. For Kansas. You still have Nebraska, North and South Dakota, and Montana.
None of these cost $200 billion though.
>>62174145
great, so do it, other places can do it and they are shitholes
>>62174161
To lay that kind of line over half the state, and to maintain and upgrade it? Yes, it would.
>>62171101
I can choose not to use Google and Facebook. I can't choose my regional ISP monopoly.
>>62174195
except you are lying
>>62167427
Fuck off shill. Nobody wants to live in your corporate dystopia where ISPs throttle websites and the Internet is reduced to a handful of big players controlling the flow of information. It's none of your business what sites I'm using. I pay you, you give me my data, and I use it however I damn well please.
>>62174189
s-a-t-a-l-i-e-t-t-e
>>62174195
I live in a town of less than 8k, and I have 7 options, not counting satellite.
Too slow. Drags down the average speed.
People need to vote with their money. Corporations are first and foremost into making money so if a company gives a service that everyone buys, it is in their best interest to only expand the service in a way that keeps the current client base and brings in new clients.
I do not agree with government oversight and if that means no net neutrality then so be it.
If a company wants to lose money, that's also up to them.
>>62174213
Satellite is shit you retard. Enjoy your 300ms latency and shit connection if so much as it's cloudy. Broadband or nothing
>>62167427
>For instance, emails from Nigerian princes - deserve equal access to you as does a doctor performing your remote, online Lasik eye surgery. If that causes your surgeon’s connection to buffer and stall - well that’s just too bad. You didn’t want to read those Nigerian prince emails anyway.
so they can censor whatever they want, including any politics they dont like.
neat.
>let's give the ISPs that wanted Shillary the ability to discriminate what data their consumers can see
Props to telecoms, the true master manipulators. I have to admit though the silver lining is that hipster tech faggots will have to get real jobs instead of making some pointless internet startup.
>>62174313
It's not censorship! The ISPs pay money into their networks!
It's only censorship when right-winged opinions are removed!
>>62174320
They'll just move, m8.
>>62173713
>Yeah, and people in America IN THE CITY don't get 100 mbps for 150€ that's uncapped. That's the entire point.
Where are you getting these numbers from? Most people in cities pay no where near that number for 100mbps unless they're also paying for an overpriced TV bundle with a bunch of premium movies channels in it.
Just like in many European countries, what type of service you get depends on what location you're in. Pic related are the prices my ISP charges for their internet and there's no cap. Most ISPs in the northeast, like the majority of states in this pic >>62168311 don't really have any data caps at all.
>>62167427
Kys corporative totalitarian swine. Either keep net neutrality, or completely remove ISPs from the picture and let people access internet directly. Anything else is a stupid decision.
>>62174305
and? this is about everyone having access to it, which thirdworld shitholes have. step it up america
>>62167427
What is the source for the retard who wrote that?
>>62174340
>implying your waste of venture capital will go anywhere without burgers using it first.
Kek, good one faggot. Better buy a suit while you still have money because your proficiency at tapping on a keyboard will only have market value at places of respectable tech employment that value tradition like IBM.
>>62167625
t. a fellow dummy
>>62174405
I'm not even a startupfag but your butthurt is really telling.
The writer posted like 20 different tweets with like 100 difference hash tags to try and get exposure.
>>62174356
>Let people access internet directly
Uh... You don't know how it works do you?
>>62174078
The argument that you don't have to use something that is a major structural faculty is not wrong but it also is an impractical thought.
>>62174471
He's either trying really hard to be relevant or is an actual shill.
Honestly, it would be better if he was paid for it. Then he'd have an excuse to be this fucking pathetic.
Those who are going to benefit from regulation of the internet aren't necessarily responsible for creating of the infrastructure.
The initial creation of the infrastructure was not based around making money but having a mutually beneficial infrastructure of connectivity that they could then make money on by usage.
The Internet really doesn't belong to anyone.
>>62167978
>20 takes and that was the best one
>>62167793
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-08-28/how-cia-made-google
Daily reminder that for all Silicon Valley's techno-libertarian posturing, when it comes to the Internet, there's no such thing as a free market. Mega sites like Google and Facebook were in bed with US intelligence from the start. These sites are surveillance programmes and tools to manipulate public opinion. The '''privste sector''' is not neutral, it has a political agenda to push. Losing NN will only strengthen the position of major sites which ISPs can't or won't block, while smaller alternatives websites will be throttled.
>nu-/pol/ is genuinely supporting jewish kikery just because m-muh leftist butthurt
Praise kek!
>>62167449
>>62167460
>>62167486
>>62167427
>>62167434
Why should i care about corporate niggers who ruined the internet in the first place?
>>62167625
>NN is just a push from content providers for a socialist price regulation framework to protect their profit line, nothing more nothing less
Anti-NN is just a push from IPSs for a capitalist price regulation framework to increase their profit, nothing more nothing less.
>>62173113
This cloudflare is a cancer.
>>62173361
>Well that seems a case of slippery slope
The point is that they can and they are known to ban some people. There is no reason to think that they won't do the same to others.
>3) Well that's a bold claim and I would like some serious sources on that
Anyone who knows how CF works? You can try it by yourself, set up a site that uses CF and check the public key fingerprints.
>>62174228
I live in NY and my two choices are on my street are FIOS and Spectrum becuase they are the only ones who managed to get rights to lay lines here.
>>62174335
>It's not censorship becuase my 'correct' left leaning opinions aren't removed!
>>62168010
this is a fairly common "divide and conquer" tactic. some rich think tank people figure out how to politicize an issue that is "outside" current american politics in order to muddy the debate so that they can get what they want admits the chaos.
who benefits from the removal of NN? comcast? at&t? why do i give a shit about those guys? not only have they had record profits for years, but they never provided that promised fiber, nor do i even get the internet speed i am paying for! as far as i can tell, these ISP giants are the problem, not NN.
The death of net neutrality will mean the death of the internet.
God I hate right wing scum.
Fucking boomers at it again
>THE INTERNET IS A SERIES OF TOOBS
>>62175646
corporate stooges
please do it, i want america's internet to be ruined so faggots who visit this website wont get a job and we can cleanse the boards.
>>62167625
>www.realclearpolicy.com
>>62167427
>>62167434
>>62167449
>>62167460
>>62167486
My man's, I'm right-leaning but I do not enjoy having to tunnel through a VPN in order to watch some of my YouTube HowTos because Verizon is throttling my access to it.
It's kinda silly to pay for internet, but not be able to decide what to do with it. It's like paying for a bucket to go collect water, but the bucket provider has a geolocation tracker that opens up a hole in the bottom of said bucket if I go to an "unapproved" water source.
M8, I paid for my bucket. Step off.
P.S I already have to spoof my IP to not get terrible speeds on 4chan and YouTube.
>>62167570
>capitalist shilling
>"go join anti-capitalists"
>>62167625
>NN is just a push from content providers for a socialist price regulation
>Prices have risen across the board
>>62167978
>large capitalist corporation
>far leftist for exercising its private property rights
this is your brain on /pol/
>>62176724
This is your brain on cuckoldry. Being able to visit whatever website you want is not a right, if I own a highway I get to decide where the off ramps are, not you.
Quit arguing with the remnants of share blue. They lost so they want to shut us up. NN is a tool they would use to do so.
>>62176838
Yeah, but I'm paying the toll to use your highway. That's like you stopping me from using the off-ramps.
>>62176838
>if I own a highway I get to decide where the off ramps are, not you.
until your put against the wall and shot
>shills for free those at the top
>y-your the cuck not me!
>>62176887
>thinking limpwristed commie academia-dwelling beetle-men are going to be putting anyone up against a wall.
>>62176879
Not him, but it's more like the price you pay depends on the ramp you get off at, as well as how heavy your vehicle is (based on the number of tires). Which is typical.
>>62176925
>limpwristed commie academia-dwelling beetle-men
keep thinking that, please
>>62176750
slaaaayyy comrade
>>62176750
ooga booga conformity bad dont produce white children ooga be individual booga consumerist ooga good goy booga
Net Neutrality will be killed by the left and the right. The left is doing it by having tech companies censoring wrongthink and it makes the right wingers nervous they would do that at the government level. The right wingers are getting rid of it because muh regulations and freedums. Blame the normalfags.
>>62168744
Bowing is a sign of respect something you wouldnt understand
NN is stupid and only Eurofags would think internet is a right. Just like being raped by brownskins amirite? That's a right too.
>>62176838
>if I own a highway I get to decide where the off ramps are, not you.
Yes, the internet, after all, is like a truck.
Ted Stevens, is that you back from the dead?
>>62177193
ooga booga ethic nationalism ooga booga shill for isreal
since /pol/tards have a lack of mental capacity let me put to some thing together for you
if jews control the economy and the government why would you support authoritarian ideologies that currently and histrionically sold you out to them
>>62176750
>anti-capitalists
Yeah, until they retreat to their parents' second mansions that is.
>>62177522
>antifa is made up of rich kids
nice narrative, real original
>>62177583
>defending antifa
It's okay anon, I already knew your opinion was trash. You didn't need to heap "I'm also an extremist punk who throws molotov cocktails at granny" on top of it. You've got your bases covered already.
>>62176750
>>62177583
>media is attacking antifa
>leeches like pelosi are distancing themselves from antifa
>this is his way of lashing out
keep crying faggot
>>62177653
>everyone is extremist but me
>>62177711
>capitalist media is attacking antifa
>Nancy "We're capitalists, and that's just the way it is" Pelosi
well no shit but in your world antifa is the "armed wing of the democratic party"
>>62177787
>everyone is extremist but me
No, but you are. I mean you're defending them, so you might as well be. Buying into this "you have to pick an extremist side" propaganda is the sign of a weak mind.
copy pasting someone else's words does not make you well informed
>>62167427
Rather than forcing net neutrality and keeping the networking monopoly why not force a breakup of the monopoly
>>62177801
"people who pick side are lame"
actually that's south park logic, getting you political beliefs from a cartoon instead of books is the sign of a weak mind
>>62177787
oh so you're just a bunch of larping communists like I suspected
figures
>>62177855
why are you referencing pop culture out of nowhere
>>62177855
>"people who kill other people for identity politics are lame"
ftfy. I hope you get run over by a redditor, faggot cunt.
>>62177872
>"if you're not as extreme/passionate about an issue as me then you're just an apathetic neckbeard who watches south park"
it's how reddit leftists argue
>>62177902
you're the only person talking about it
who exactly are you quoting?
>>62177907
paraphrasing what he >>62177855 said
sorry if I didn't make that clear
>>62177895
>I hope you get run over by a redditor, faggot cunt.
are you still in high school?
>>62177872
Making pop culture analogies is the only way communists can make it sound reasonable to senselessly attack citizens who are exercising their free speech and assembly. "sUpErMaN pUnChEs NaZiS XD".
>>62177928
Are you coming on to me, comrade?
>>62177951
"Okay friend, let me explain something to you since you seem to be new here. Hebephilia is NOT the same thing as pedophilIa. I'm sick and tired of you trolls popping up everywhere and spreading BLATANT misinformation. In many countries hebephilia is considered normal and healthy . Human beings have a natural attraction to girls who are going through puberty. Being attracted to girls who are pre-pubescent is fucking sick and disgusting, but only in the US does there seem to be an unwarranted taboo around a healthy and normal condition. My head hurts. I'm just trying to get my real life back."
What caused the hyper-political culture our society has fallen into? Why does politics have to infect literally everything today?
>>62177977
>noone should interest themselves in things that directly effect them
>>62177964
I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as hebephilia is in fact pedophilia/hebephilia, or pedophilia plus hebephilia as I've recently taken to calling it.
>>62177982
When did I say that? But you used to be able to have interests without the shadow of politics being cast over it.
I've gone from someone who used to post on /pol/ to someone that is just exhaused by politics. If you can't vote or sign a petition, there's nothing worth talking about, as you have no real power. So why talk about it nonstop?
>>62178001
Not him, but
Some people feel the need to take their opinion out of the ballot box and into the streets. Violently. Granted, I don't live in a nigger shithole, so it doesn't really affect me personally, but most people don't have that luxury.
>>62177982
Unlike you I'm able to keep politics confined to one area of my life (rather than let it completely take over my life)
There's a time and place for politics. Sports, vidya, gym, dinner, etc. isn't for that shit.
>the very same people who shill for small government and think that cable TV packages are an expression of the 4th amendment will vehemently defend the NSA spying on every citizen and indefinite detention without trial
>>62178019
Ok. But that doesn't mean that it needs to be injected into every single thing. The people who want to be left alone, and have little interest talking about politics in every conversation tend to be vilified by both sides.
>>62178036
That sounds like quite a strawman, my costanza. It's crazy how normalized that kind of shitty "argument" is on 4chan. Quit greentexting people who don't exist, k?
>>62177977
>Why does politics have to infect literally everything today?
it doesn't, normal discussions with people are not political
here it's just offboarder migrants trying to make everything political for attention
>>62167449
ISP s do have levels of service... It's priced differently. Dumbass
>>62167486
>Net Neutrality is titanically stupid policy
Sounds like a lot of tired bullshit used as an excuse to rip me off even more.
>>62178055
>Seton Motley, the president of Less Government argued that the Patriot Act serves a specific purpose. That purpose is to target suspected terrorists and foreign nationals – not Americans. Since the target is foreigners the measure is not un-constitutional and should remain to target terrorism.
https://www.rt.com/usa/privacy-patriot-act-renewal-looms/
>>62171437
Could you please use food analogies for this? I find them easier to digest.
>NN is the big bad boogeyman
>Pay no attention to how Amazon and Google are the kings of the net and if either denies service to you, your site is basically dead
NN is the same shit that rich people pulls with the middle class to get them to go after the lower class.
At the end of the day it is a power grab or denying ISP a power grab.
Google doesn't give a shit about NN for the regular consumer anymore than ISP do. They simply want the power to censor to remain theirs alone.
NN remaining is good and I support it but all the big companies are supporting it for all the wrong reasons.
Regulations of ISP is a must.
But regulations of mass service providers on the net must come next.
>>62174620
>is an actual shill
The guy works for the heartland institute, which is, no joke, no irony, no memes, a real shill corporation for tobacco and Oil, I guess internet providers too now.
>>62175313
>The point is that they can and they are known to ban some people
Well they are a private company, it is within their right to deny service to a website. Is not like they are kicking people out of public spaces, they are not even host, so you don't need them to be online.
>>62175313
>set up a site that uses CF and check the public key fingerprints.
Well then I guess until I do that I won't take these claims for true, but neither deny them.
>>62176724
which VPN service do you use? My ISP is throttling me for MEGA, Steam and maybe torrents too now.