The Senate just voted to undo landmark rules covering your Internet

>Industry groups welcomed the vote.

>“Our industry remains committed to offering services that protect the privacy and security of the personal information of our customers,” said NCTA — The Internet and Television Association, a trade group representing major cable providers. “We support this step toward reversing the FCC’s misguided approach and look forward to restoring a consistent approach to online privacy protection that consumers want and deserve.”

>Consumer and privacy groups condemned the resolution.

>“It is extremely disappointing that the Senate voted today to sacrifice the privacy rights of Americans in the interest of protecting the profits of major Internet companies, including Comcast, AT&T, and Verizon,” Neema Singh Giuliani, legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union, said in a statement.

>The FCC didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.

>The agency's rules are being debated as Internet providers — no longer satisfied with simply offering Web access — race to become online advertising giants as large as Google and Facebook. To deliver consumers from one website to another, Internet providers must see and understand which online destinations their customers wish to visit, whether that's Netflix, WebMD or PornHub.

>With that data, Internet providers would like to sell targeted advertising or even share that information with third-party marketers. But the FCC's regulations place certain limits on the type of data Internet providers can share and under what circumstances. Under the rules, consumers may forbid their providers from sharing what the FCC deems “sensitive” information, such as app usage history and mobile location data.

>Opponents of the regulation argue the FCC's definition of sensitive information is far too broad and that it creates an imbalance between what's expected of Internet providers and what's allowed for Web companies such as Google. Separately from Congress, critics of the measure have petitioned the FCC to reconsider letting the rules go into effect, and the agency's new Republican leadership has partly complied. In February, President Trump's FCC chairman, Ajit Pai, put a hold on a slice of the rules that would have forced Internet providers to better safeguard their customer data from hackers.

>The congressional resolution could render unnecessary any further action by the FCC to review the rules; Flake's measure aims to nullify the FCC's privacy rules altogether. Republicans argue that even if the FCC's power to make rules on Internet privacy is curtailed, state attorneys general and the Federal Trade Commission could still hold Internet providers accountable for future privacy abuses.

>But Democrats say that preemptive rules are necessary to protect consumers before their information gets out against their will.

>“At a time when our personal data is more vulnerable than ever, it’s baffling that Senate Republicans would eliminate the few privacy protections Americans have today,” said Rep. Frank Pallone Jr. (N.J.), the ranking Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Pallone added in a statement Thursday that he hoped his House Republican colleagues “will exercise better judgment” when it becomes their turn to vote on the resolution.

>On Wednesday, Senate Democrats challenged the idea that the FTC could take responsibility for regulating Internet providers' privacy practices.

>“The Federal Trade Commission does not have the rulemaking authority in data security, even though commissioners at the FTC have asked Congress for such authority in the past,” said Sen. Bill Nelson (Fla.), the top Democrat on the Senate Commerce Committee.

>>124694
since it was in the states im assuming it only applies to them, right?

>>124702
That is probably an accurate assessment

>>124704
okay so, for example, rogers wireless is a canadian telecom company that's owned by AT&T, which is an american telecom company.

this shit should not apply to those who use rogers, right?

what can we do to protect ourselves?

>>124707
Could you at least care a little bit about some of our collective privacy problems?
>https://consumerist.com/2017/03/23/senate-votes-to-roll-back-privacy-protections-for-internet-users/

>http://www.pcworld.com/article/3184410/security/senate-votes-to-kill-fccs-broadband-privacy-rules.html

>http://www.recode.net/2017/3/23/15040666/senate-vote-kills-fcc-privacy-rules-congress-telecom

They're the ones largely voting for it, so for the moment, yes, republicans bad.

>>124706
I don't think so because that falls outside the jurisdiction of American law. I mean you'd have to have something similar in place there first. I believe.

>>124714
thanks

>>124694
Facebook already does this.

>>124717
I don't think Facebook knows my Gelbooru history

>>124718
not yet

>>124714
thanks for correcting the record liberal

>republicans are always ranting about privacy and freedom
>happy to give away their privacy and freedoms


I don't understand this. Wouldn't net neutrality be a pretty good republican platform? Wouldn't surveillance be more left leaning?

Holy shit the double-think is unfathomable.

>>124732
The double space poster strikes again.

I was surprised this wasn't covered by pretty much any news organizations prior to this.
The biggest coverage I saw of this prior to today was on Reddit. It was that and a few small news sites that came back in google searches.

If this got widespread coverage I doubt it would've passed due to outrage. Maybe it will be stopped now due to outrage.
>80 year olds don't understand the Internet

>>124728
>Wouldn't net neutrality be a pretty good republican platform?
No, because it's government getting involved between the private relationship between people and their ISP. Only liberals look to the government to solve nonexistent problems.

Every one of the 50 votes to pass was from a republican.
>MAKE MUHMERICA GREAT AGAN

>>124749
So you're okay with people spying on you?

>I'm fine being fucked over as long as the corporations are the ones doing it
This is cuck behavior guys, not a good look.

>>124749
>private relationship
kek, definitely not anymore.

>>124694
THIS WILL STOP THE TERRORISTS AND EVIL-DOERS. ONLY CRIMINALS ARE WORRIED ABOUT THIS.

>>124749
That just points to the GOP being either malicious or ignorant. Your argument is basically "taking away your privacy and freedoms is only bad when the government does it!" Quite simply, if you value "muh (corporate) freedumbs" over privacy and net neutrality, you're not a supporter of citizens' freedom and privacy. And you could just as easily say that the GOP solves non-existent problems. Look at the anti-trans bathroom laws they passed in the last year or so, everyone was perfectly fine working it out between individuals, but then the GOP stepped in and decided to make a ridiculous law that helps no one.

>>124694

Implying they weren't doing this already. This just avoids any potential massive lawsuits if it was leaked.

>>124694
Don't most places already spy on us though.
Won't this just move it from under the table to on the table.
I'm agaisnt btw, but Apple already track movements with their phones, Windows10 does Skynet, Google watches you surf.

>>124767
It's like how every public place has cameras on you and you are being watched.
But now your car also has a camera.
So companies could always see where you were, but now they could potentially have access to see everywhere you go.
That analogy sounded good in my head at least.

>>124732
>fake news
Any evidence to back up your claim?

>>124694
This is the last straw, from full blown Alex Jones type Trump supporter this time last year, I'm now completely against trump's presidency and even more so republicans (not that I ever liked them anyway). He's pushed my patience too far, done almost none of the things I wanted and gone ahead to allow shit like this. I can't support him anymore, that doesn't mean I'm changing my political views or becoming more liberal, but I can't fucking identify with this shithead anymore.

>>124782
Its almost like you reactionaries have been manipulated for the gain of the super-rich at your own expense! One might almost think that most of the things they said to appeal to you were borderline non-issues that they blew out of proportion to appeal to your emotions! What a crazy notion that would be!

>>124782
What are the things you wanted?

>>124749
...Did you gloss over every single article screaming about how ISPs can now whore your data to anyone for the right price? How much indoctrination does it take to believe 'independence' tastes like corporate dick?

Face it, you've been sold down shit-creek by the party you cheered for. Time to stop lashing out at the people trying to throw you a paddle.

>>124782
>3 shekels have been transferred to your account

>>124799
Good to know you're willing to shill for free.

>>124782
But anon, Trump is the embodiment of hardcore Republican ideals, which is why he's risen so far. Hate him, and you hate the vast majority of the party backing him up, which makes you a moderate at the very least (definitely so if you dislike his healthcare plan).

>>124694
>Republicans are so brainwashed, they will defend anything on "their side"

How far can you guys backpedal before you fall and bust your ass? No matter what rash the decisions these money driven idiots, you will jump to the defense.

>But democrats
>But it already happened before
>But Obama
>But CTR Shareblue Boogeyman

All deflection. On one side, we're getting a reality TV show trainwreck of nonstop drama with Trump and his administration, featuring Fox News. On the other side, the actual republican politicians are doing their usual push to maximize profits in all areas with no regard to the general population or rights, while they slide something on Trump's desk and he signs it without hesitation.

Not to mention Trump, Spicer, and all the other goons lie nearly every time they are in front of a camera. It's time you guys admit you made a mistake, this isn't a fucking ball game of red's and blue's. And doubling down every time a story breaks just because you like watching liberals cry or whatever doesn't make your life any better, and certainly isn't going to make our country great again.

>>124816
Honestly, I doubt they'll really care about this sort of thing, as it most likely won't have a direct effect on them- making it easier for corporations to get info on them will have an indirect effect of making them easier to manipulate, but the /pol/ types don't seem to have a problem with that.
Its more likely that they wont regret their mistake until they're affected directly somehow- increased pollution, losing their health insurance, elimination of net neutrality, higher prices on consumer goods... these are the sorts of things that are liable to get them to pull their heads out of their collective asses, but it will be a while before they feel their effects.

>>124805

This is really terrific sarcasm.

But the scary thing about these times is that I can't quite be sure whether or not you intend it to be that way.

>>124816
>>124818
Do you honestly think voting for Hillary Clinton would have made things better for people who wanted Trumps policies? I never understood this rhetoric that Trump voters were being duped. Perhaps it wasn't that they were just hopeful for positive change, but so desperate for someone to help them or their issues that they were willing to vote for a celebrity businessman with almost no political experience.

Also
>This isn't a game of reds and blues
>strawmans one entire side

>>124868
He hasn't delivered on half the shit he said he was going to do. Sorry friendo, you were duped.

>>124868
>I never understood this rhetoric that Trump voters were being duped. Perhaps it wasn't that they were just hopeful for positive change, but so desperate for someone to help them or their issues that they were willing to vote for a celebrity businessman with almost no political experience.

Such reasonable opinions aren't allowed on /news/. You're either "with us" and you dutifully repost and repeat what you read in the obviously biased articles from mainstream news like a good patriot, or you're a duped ignorant rural trumpkin putin-shill with something to hide.

>>124871
It's true. As an independent, I despise both sides here on 4chan for essentially wrecking the place. The moment Trump stepped into the White House, the local autism levels went through the roof.

>>124869
>been in office for 2 months
>"He hasn't done everything he promised to do"

Ajit Pai of the FCC is low life scum. He wants to take internet access away from poor people.

He already stopped permission for nine broadband providers to participate in a federal subsidy plan for low-income consumers. Next on his list is he wants to kill net neutrality. The man is evil. I allege he is corrupt and as head of the FCC he is not representing the interests of the people, he is just finding ways to line his own pockets.

Typical blood sucking india h1b

>>124914
His name is so close to pajeet you just knew he was going to be trouble before he even let a pen touch paper.

>>124732
google had to keep track of you somehow by their search engines and affiliates.

ISP's like comcast can now track ALL of your browsing data and sell that data to companies like google to target you even harder. They see what you click, they can tell how conservative or liberal you are, whether you are neurotic or logical, and hundreds of other categories to try and exploit your weaknesses, influence your opinions. We have already seen rich donors use this type of info to target people on facebook with political ads.

Maybe you outsmart them, maybe youre a fucking boy genius, but their are millions of sheep out there buying shit from popups.

>>124944
>I'll just leave this shit reply right here

You should be ashamed to call yourself a (You)

yes trumped fucked us again. Do I have to explain this to all you fucking noobs. Trump was put into power by our vote because we know he is going to be the worst president ever. In America we need change because under the covers most politicians and 1% globalists have been selling out the American people for decades. How do you get corrupt people to change? You give them terrible pain...Donald Trump is that very visible pain and that pain will inspire real change. It all part of the plan of people that really love this country and love ALL the people in it. Would you rather have blatant disgusting Trump or sneaky Hilary? Choose the one who is mostly likely to inspire real change after 4 years...and that would be the in your face Trump, a man with a supersized ego who feels no need to cover his tracks. Trumps Tweets or a private e-mail server you decide which is worse. They are both bad.

>>124694

Requires House vote & President to sign off on it.
It won't make it out of the House.

>>124951
>Factual Reporting: HIGH
>https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/washington-post/

You can read fox news or the washington post, the headlines and the framing will be different, but the facts are the same if you read the article. We are not talking about how the article framed the issue, or the criticisms the article offered, we are talking about the facts that this law will have if it passes.

Tell me the source you trust, and we can work off their article, the facts are the same, this is a legislative bill, there are no alternative facts or anonymous sources here, its a fucking bill in writing.

>>124706
Only if Canadian law offers you any protection from this behaviour.
If you don't have laws already expect AT&T to roll out the technology into their subsidiaries.

>>124732
>Google and others are already selling my data.
And the GOP heartily approve it would seem.
Time for your internet providers to get in on the game.
Will any of them go against the market trend and offer a spying free service?

>>124953
What makes you say this? I've been watching TV news all day and have not heard one peep about this, its been healthcare for days now. I'm sure theres are some fat checks being pushed into the pockets of the house and no public outcry over this.

>>124959
tell me the source you trust then, work with me. I look forward to owning you brutally and intelectually.

>>124958

Because in order to pass a law you're required to have approval of house, senate, and president.

>>124962
If the government can't protect consumers from the profit motives of the free market then who will? The free market?

>>124963
He's just another guy who doesnt know the numbers. Comcast posted pure profits of 8 billion in one quarter, at 97% profit margins. It's insane, and we're going to give them more power over information, less protections (oh no regulation!) of our privacy for god knows what reason to help continue the endless stream of hacking that has continued in our lives, allowing ISP's to instead sit on their ass and do nothing to improve our infrastructure. FCC also rolled back them having to lay down faster lines. The ISP's are the only ones winning under Trump.

Not one single policy has been for us so far, it is ALWAYS about the fatcats and their super-yachts and ferrari buying funds.

>>124972
Get a load of this faggot. Why don't you roll over so they step on the other side of your face?

>>124952
This is hilariously correct.

For example one representative from Illinois was on the house floor trying to speak about how horrible DT's plans have been. One of the responses he spoke about included how more illegals were trying to figure out how to become legit citizens, more people volunteering to teach them how in classes, expanded operation hours of legal centers to handle the applications flooding in, and an overall growth of community togetherness. All things that would not have occurred under Clinton.

If it wasn't on C-Span, you'd swear it was satarie.

>>124973
He's clearly a billionaire, this is where I would be if I had billions of dollars. Do you dare suggest that he's not acting in his own self interest? What kind of idiot would deliberately sabotage themselves for someone else's gain?

>>124983
>when the troll is so stupid he doesn't see the post is pro Trump.

Where did the liberal touch you anon?

>>124868
No, I don't think Hillary would be a better option in any sense.

>Strawmans one entire side

Literally fuck off. You can't even separate the two for a few moments, I don't even take a "side". This isn't about dems or republicans. It's one thing to say "well he's the better option, but shit this is bad and as Americans we should speak up" vs "GLORIOUS LEADER DOING GREAT THINGS EVERY DAY LIBERAL TEARS MAGA". That's absolute delusion, potentially beyond repair.

It's not strawmanning shit, you know it's the truth.

>>124965
Wow not that anon but you are actually, factually, unambiguously retarded
You're the kind of person who would think the conditions in The Jungle were fine and nothing was wrong

>>125014
Haven't read it since high school but it's a good example
I liked Oil! more, been meaning to re-read The Jungle again though

The main point of this thread is still terrible and most people supporting it are big retarded

>>125016
It's easy to be a knee jerk liberal when Republicans regularly vote against the interests of the citizenry in actively negative ways

All/most politicians are all in the pockets of special interests, I can concede that but with the house and senate being majority Republican and the president being pretty Republican(even if he's a "political outsider"), yes most of the stupid shit our government is doing now can be blamed on Republicans
Nice try big pussy

>>125019
Hey man at least I wasn't saying more invasions of privacy were good because it would be "less regulations"

>>125019
you like that your activity online is about to be tossed around for pennys like a pokemon card? And security on your browsing data has been lessened too? You fucking like that?

How does that benefit you at all? We are heading to a future where the internet will be unique and tailored to each one of us. Search engines already give me and you different results, now that trend will continue and be amplified across many other services as data becomes easy to get and extremely accurate. Imagine going to your favorite newsite, where you are served conservative articles, and when I go there, I get articles with liberal leanings. Google and other companies have gotten extremely good at targted advertising, but it's not just about making sales, you can easily use these tools to spread disinformation. Like imagine seeing an article that shows the FCC in a positive light after visiting this thread. What if someone paid to try and change minds, and without you knowing who was paying? They can give the whole internet a bias, push things they want you to see into the limelight and bury the stuff they dont want you to see.

>>124694
At this point it really doesn't matter since every major Internet company collects your information and gives it around to advertisers.

>>125027
you think comcast isnt going to sell your information?

You just want to throw them the keys and tell them to go crazy? Thats not waiting for facts, thats being an idiot.

Nuking london will probably cause ww3, but I'm not going to support a bill for nuking london because we wont know until we actually nuke them for "the facts." Your style of politics is centered on futility and the unknown, and it's unsustainable because companies know exactly what theyre going to do with your information, this is not some esoteric subject. We dont need to try everything to figure out if it wont work, our politics should be driven by intelligent arguments. Fuck your facts meme, youre just dodging the very real issues with this move.

>>125032
But they have to own that company and it creates a diverse and limited market of information. This just makes comcast and time warner kings with no match, your one stop shop for everything. And sites that dont data farm you? All gone, and for sale against their will.

>>125036
Literally what happens everytime something is brought up

>The media is just sensationalizing it!
>It's not that bad!
>Sure, they have that power now, but it's not like they're going to do anything with it!
>You're just fear mongering!

>>125019
>HAHA YOU LOST XD GET OVER IT

The reason why our country will burn for a few years.

>>125040
>story is nothing
>republicans overturning rule with no intent on returning our privacy

Go fuck yournothingburger.

>>125041
>Saying shit that sounds good = positive action
>America (big business) first
>Let's get rid of our country's laws that prohibit the last bits of privacy we have from being breached for the sake of MORE MONEY like normal amirite

Just come out and say you love the campaign and slogans more than you love our country.

It's all about profits for the big boys, and the sooner you come to terms with that, the sooner you can get back to reality.

>>125046
>He doesn't see this as a problem.

They see a potential bottleneck on money that was put in to place, and they are scrapping it. Do you not get it? I don't know why I even bother, you people deflect everything or say "it's not even bad bro lol"

>>125053
Yes, corporations are our friends, give your power to them, dont trust power to elected officials, they're corrupt and evil. Corporations gooood, guvernent baaaaaad. You dont need rights, you need other people to make more money.

>>124732
backfire effect strikes again

>>124696
>“We support this step toward reversing the FCC’s misguided approach and look forward to restoring a consistent approach to online privacy protection that consumers want and deserve.”

It would be less creepy if they just said what they actually mean. "I can't wait to make more money off your personal data!"

>>124868
>Do you honestly think voting for Hillary Clinton would have made things better for people who wanted Trumps policies? I never understood this rhetoric that Trump voters were being duped. Perhaps it wasn't that they were just hopeful for positive change, but so desperate for someone to help them or their issues that they were willing to vote for a celebrity businessman with almost no political experience.
No, but Bernie would have actually helped those people (or at least tried to, congress would probably try to block him since most of them are in the pockets of big business).
Trump had 2 main groups of voters- retarded /pol/yps and disenfranchised workers in rural areas, the latter group being much larger than the former. The manipulation I'm referring to is that these people's problems are being scapegoated to other sources like immigration or China, when the source of the problem stems from capitalism itself- the wealthy have exploited these people for all they're worth and left them to die when they saw chances at greater profit elsewhere. There is an absolutely staggering level of wealth inequality in the west and automation is just going to make it worse, we need to shift to a socialist system ASAP if the working class is to have a future, but instead they're cheering for a crooked businessman who gives them bullshit excuses for their problems and promises to fix them while allowing the real problems to worsen. I'll never understand why so many Americans are so eager to get fucked over by capitalism...
>>124952
Accelerationism is a fucking meme

>>124722
yw, centralist here.
>>124732
Google isn't your isp, try reading.
>>124781
Which of the links provided were fake news?
>>124959
>>124960
>>125012
Can you guys go back to /b/, /s4s/ or /pol/ and shit post there?
>>125075
I think they could at this point and they'd still have a defense force.

>>125012
If you can't make it to the top, you deserve to roll around in the shit you created.

>>125084
>muh capitalism is evil meme
Go back to /leftypol/ and kill yourself, in that order.

The AHCA was killed because the people who wrote it were crooks. Nothing more, nothing less. The same thing should have happened to Romneycare, but didn't.

>>125118
>Go back to /leftypol/ and kill yourself, in that order.
Does someone need a safe space?
>The AHCA was killed because the people who wrote it were crooks.
And yet people like you are voting these people into office and cheering when they pass shit like Citizens United because "regulations are BAD!"

>>125118
>The AHCA was killed
But it's doing just fine

>People ITT trust AT&T and Comcast to not fuck them over for money (e.g. by sharing your medical related search history with your insurance company without your knowledge/consent)

Really?

Why does it even matter when the CIA + others have been exploiting this for ages now anyways?

>>125136
They would rather defend multimillion dollar corporations than admit their side is fucking up

>>125137
>lol doesn't matter
>dude It's been going on forever who cares

Please stop pretending to be a complete idiot. You know those things are not the same. See the other post i replied to.

>>125123
Why do /leftyshills/ resort to the safe space argument when their board is one big safe space that bans all opposing opinions in the first place?

Is it hypocrisy? Denial? Or just classic MUH SIDE IS RIGHT SO IT DOES NO RONG cognitive dissonance/double standards?

>inb4 denial of accusations as if we don't all know where you're from

>>125153
Sounds like you've run out of arguments.

>>125153
The fuck are you rambling about lad? You telling someone to go to another place is you trying to create a safe space where everyone is like minded and can jerk themselves off over their shared opinions. What is there not to understand about that?

>>125132
What's funny about it?

>>125168
The Republicans can't even repeal Obamacare. You think they can replace it with the AHCA?

An interesting tidbit in this is that now if it passes the House the ISP's won't have an effective regulator at all, they'll exist in a gap. This is because the FTC cannot regulate common carriers.

So it's potentially worse than just not having any sane privacy/data laws on the books.

>>125245
They are children. They could actually work on the problems they have with it. They think they can just pass on the blame the whole time, as if Obama didn't inherit messes. Welcome to the presidency Dolan, and whether you like it or not, his approval rating will continue to be fucked if his plan now is "fine, we'll just watch your plan explode. That'll show the American people HA!"

Fucking idiots don't give a shit about this country. They care about money in their pockets, proving a point, religion, and for some reason an odd obsession with gays and non problematic drugs.

Trump needs to veto this as a fuck you to those cunts who crashed the AHCA

>>125261
*Some of the benefits. Does it really fucking matter when their own republicans wouldn't get behind it either? Since it wasn't right wing enough? You can't be serious.

>Left wing disagrees on bill over obvious political differences stemming decades
>Wow! Unexpected, children they are!
>Right wing disagrees on the same bill because they don't get enough tax breaks in the deal
>....

I'll never understand being such a bipartisan faggot that you can conjure up an excuse for everything the party does.

>>124718
http://www.businessinsider.com/this-is-how-facebook-is-tracking-your-internet-activity-2012-9

They do.

>>125283
>Yourselves
>Implying i'm a democrat
>Implying whatever happens in the country does not affect people that have invisible red paint on them

So when Obamacare "EXPLODES", then what? All the republicans stand around and say "hahaha told you :p"? Christ be damned if they actually had to do some hard work around there.

You're right along for the ride buddy (assuming you're American). Hope you realize that at some point.

>>125283
>dems are children for not voting for this bill
>but it's shit and republicans didn't even want it, also it was not their bill

wat

>>125288
>You're right along for the ride buddy (assuming you're American). Hope you realize that at some point.

That's the sort of collectivist mentality that leads to dictatorships.

>>125290
It's the facts. It's like pretending you're not an American the entire time a democrate hold office. The regulations are going to come (or be removed in these cases) and they affect all of us.

Explain what you mean, i'm genuinely confused.

>>125296
He's a sovereign citizen "AM I BEING DETAINED?" type, anon

>>125303
Thank you Mr. Full Circle. We've went back to "but democrats"

>>125306
How about you just explain yourself instead of latching on to the obvious non issue in the reply?

>>125309
So basically, democrats bad, conservatives good, war is peace and ignorance is strength.

Got it, comrade.

>>125313
I don't even know what you're talking about. If you're the one that made a statement that you can't explain, why bother replying? Can't even defend your side without trying to "/thread". End yourself

>>124706
If you were to access hardware residing in the US, I see no reason they couldn't collect the data and sell it back to people in your country.

>Democrats are children for giving zero votes to a bill that was basically Obamacare

Except that it wasn't at all. It removed significant protections for the poor and the sick.

How many democrats were allowed in Republicans' closed-door meetings while crafting this bill?

>>125309
>Republicans never wanted this. Obamacare was rammed through without approval. Now they're stuck with it and are trying their best to find bipartisanship agreement. It failed, moving on now.

Republicans wanted nothing but the status quo where some folks chose between meals and essential medical treatment.

Senate minority leader during Obama's first term said publicly that Obama couldn't be allowed to succeed , so republicans shouldn't work with him. Even after Obama chose some republicans for his cabinet. How many democrats are on Trump's cabinet?

If republicans don't believe that all people who need healthcare should have access to healthcare without compromising on other basic requirements for livelihood, and if republicans were willing to obstruct Obama in benefiting Americans with respect to any initiative put through congress, then it was not possible to improve healthcare through legislation with republican help during Obama's two terms.

>We all know Obamacare is going to fail, and millions will go without coverage.

If republicans were concerned about people losing coverage, they should reach out to democrats to fix the law as is. That was the original idea, that regulation would keep insurers from limiting their network, but republicans obstructed that. Just like republican governors refused funding to their constituency for the medicaid expansion. And now they've gutted the individual mandate.

>>125329
Okay, well on to my next thing

>Liberty good
>While posting in THIS thread

Amazing

>>125334
>Republicans wanted nothing but the status quo where some folks chose between meals and essential medical treatment.

They should learn to help themselves. Parasites should man up and learn to pull themselves up on their own. Life's hard. Shape up and deal with it. Become self-reliant because the only person who can help you is yourself.

We need a free market of ISPs. Right now, it's next to impossible for them to compete and make a profit. Regulations on the internet may look like they are to protect US, but really, they prevent companies from starting up and unreasonable chain those who manage to make that hurdle. We need to get rid of regulations like Net Neutrality, the FCC, and Broadband Privacy Rules. Let the company and individual decide what they want to happen to their PRIVATE data. If consumers don't want their data to be shared, let them tell the ISPs "If you don't respect my privacy, I am dropping you and going with someone who will."

>>125303
>Then we go back to normal healthcare.
"Normal" healthcare would be single-payer like a civilized country
>>125309
>Democrats are children for giving zero votes to a bill that was basically Obamacare
Obamacare has a lot of problems, but Trumpcare was a million times worse and served little purpose but to funnel more money to the rich at the expense of the poor.
>Ryancare offered a solution to this, but the democrats said "fuck you" and that's childish.
Trumpcare was going to cause millions of people to go without coverage
>>125329
>Communism bad, liberty good. It's VERY simple.
>Implying Democrats are Communists
Top fucking kek. I doubt you could even DEFINE communism OR liberty, let alone explain how they're at odds with eachother or why you think communism is so awful
>>125339
>quit lying and actling like Obamacare helped anyone.
The people who had preexisting conditions before Obamacare say hi
>They're right, it would destroy our economy forever. We would be forced to shrink our military in a futile effort to save this sinking shit only to be bombarded by Chinese/Russia/Muslim hordes.
>This is what /pol/ actually believes
My fucking sides. Perhaps you should try to actually understand economics instead of just parroting whatever nonsense Stefan Molyneux spews
>>125341
t. trust fund kiddie

>>125351
What if all ISPs get together and agree to sell the data. Who would you go to?

>>125351
>We need a free market of ISPs
Hahaha... AHAHAHAHA! Oh man, this is funny.
You have no idea how the ISP market works, do you? Its actually quite similar to the way health insurance companies work.
The ISPs don't compete with eachother because THEY DON'T WANT TO. Why would 2 ISPs want to spend tons of money on infrastructure in the same areas and compete with eachother, thus driving down their prices, when they could just agree to stay in separate areas and save money while keeping prices high? Most small towns only have 1 or 2 ISPs not because other ones aren't allowed to, but because it wouldn't be profitable for them to do so. The so-called "free market" just ends in pseudo-monopolies like these because the barrier to entry is too high for anyone besides those who are already rich, and they didn't get rich by competing with eachother.
>>125357
Literally every developed nation besides the US and even many poor or developing nations have single-payer healthcare, so yes, it's "normal"

>>125359
>America is the model for civilized countries. Not European communism shitholes who rely on American military for defense.
Like I said, all civilized countries besides the US have some sort of single-payer system, most of which have a higher quality of life and median income than the US. Laissez-Faire healthcare is the model of third-world shitholes like Somalia. And European countries don't waste all their money on pointless military spending because its retarded to do so. Maybe the US should stop playing world police for a change, especially when doing so just keeps making things worse.
>Trump had nothing to do with this plan. It's Ryancare, your ignorant tool
Trump eagerly endorsed the plan and threatened to "go after" any Republican politicians who voted against it. Honestly, Trump doesn't know the first thing about writing legislature, he just gives a rubber stamp to whatever the establishment types put on his desk
>And millions are going to go uninsured because of Obamacare.
And where exactly did you get this idea? Millions of people are covered now that weren't before, and while prices have gone up for some people, it's not the Dem's fault if Republican politicians refused federal funding in order to drive up prices. Its also important to keep in mind that healthcare costs were ALREADY skyrocketing before the ACA and that it actually reduced the rate at which it was increasing.
>Figures you don't think communism is awful
Not an argument
>Medicare. Wow it's magic, they get coverage.
Many people weren't eligible for Medicare before the ACA, now they are.

>>125365
>And European countries don't waste all their money on pointless military spending because its retarded to do so. Maybe the US should stop playing world police for a change, especially when doing so just keeps making things worse.
This is why I like Russia so much over Europe. They know how to be real men over there.

>Trump eagerly endorsed the plan and threatened to "go after" any Republican politicians who voted against it. Honestly, Trump doesn't know the first thing about writing legislature, he just gives a rubber stamp to whatever the establishment types put on his desk
It's the Democrats fault.

>And where exactly did you get this idea? Millions of people are covered now that weren't before, and while prices have gone up for some people
They never deserved it to begin with. If you need to take a government handout, you've already failed.

>, it's not the Dem's fault if Republican politicians refused federal funding in order to drive up prices.
You mean not getting involved with failure and standing by freedom of commerce.

>Its also important to keep in mind that healthcare costs were ALREADY skyrocketing before the ACA and that it actually reduced the rate at which it was increasing.
It's a private industry. They can do whatever they want.

>Not an argument
Not an argument

>Many people weren't eligible for Medicare before the ACA, now they are.
Medicare itself is an indication of the government overstepping its bounds and abusing its power.

>>125341
Dear god lol. You remind me of those people I went to uni with that raved about how "they worked all through school and everyone should suck it up"

Worked through school meaning they had a part time job and paid for their alcohol and restaurant trips, while their parents paid for their actual living expenses, bills, and in most cases cars.

>>125363
>There is a reason why America stands unchallenged as the #1 super power on Earth.
Ooh! Ooh! I know the answer to this one! Is it because the US spent the first half of WWII profiteering and they're one of the few nations that was relatively undamaged by it, while most of Europe was forced to spend most of their resources rebuilding? Or maybe its because of the "globalism" you hate so much (despite being a fucking synonym for your beloved "free market") and American imperialism in developing nations? Or all of the above?
Its also worth mentioning that China's economy is growing much faster than that of the US, and will most likely overtake it before too long.
>poor ass European countries have whatever bullshit like that's supposed to inspire me.
Again, the actual quality of life and median income of the people there are much higher than in the US
>Liberty and hard work are what what creates a flourishing society. Government only slows down progress.
Do you seriously think that some wallstreet fatcat works hundreds of times harder than the average blue-collar Joe? Economic mobility is borderline nonexistent in the US- wealth typically comes as a result of nepotism and exploitation, not hard work. As George Carlin once said
>They call it the American Dream, because you'd have to be asleep to believe it.

>>125369
Yes. Dear god. Because the notion that choosing between meals and essential medical treatment is "helping yourself" is just completely fucking dumb.

The fact that it's acceptable in a first world country is even more ridiculous.

>>125374
You can't reason with an ancap. If you could, they wouldn't be ancaps.

>>125363

Except those European countries spend less on healthcare than the US for better health outcomes. If anything, your free and hardworking society should sign on to socialized healthcare so they can spend less time being sick and more time working hard.

Also, the US did not rise as a superpower based on its healthcare system or military might, but because of the postwar decline of the old European powers caused by wartime devastation and loss of colonial power. America rose because it remained untouched while Europe had destroyed itself one too many times through military conflict. This is not to disparage the US, but to show that it went from being a "power" to a "super power" based more on geographical conditions and the chance of history than any specific policy it had. If the British, French, and Germans had held on and not been so crushed by two world wars, they also would have continued being super powers on par with the United States.

>Government only slows down progress.

It's days like these where I wish I saved the "government can do nothing right" copypasta to make fun of people like you.

>>125366
Not that guy, but your post is an own-goal if I've ever seen one. Why should I support a party that doesn't even pretend to give a shit about me? Is cutting the nose to spite the face all that matters to you?

And if you think government's holding you back so much, why don't you move to Somalia?

>>125379
>American
>Lazy fucks like myself
>5 years of college
>Work 5-6 days a week
>Complements on how nice I keep my yard from neighbors and dog walkers

Your turn King of Productivity.

>Inb4 bringing personal shit into it.

You set yourself up for it with that strawman.

>>125379
>He said, while spreading his cheeks for oligarch dick

You want to let corporations have their way with the people, while the government gets paid to act as pimps. I'd say the shoe fits pretty damn well, muppet.

>>125387
Damn dude, you 1up'd me literally in every aspect. I guess I'm with you now

>>125388
I'm not sure which is more impressive, your ability to strawman anyone who disagrees with you or your incredible lack of self-awareness

>>125388
>diverting THIS hard

Explain to me why every single point brought up in >>125366 (if you wrote that, even better!) is a good reason to vote Republican. You've spent quite some time putting down everyone else's ideas, so why don't you try selling me on yours instead?

I really would like a taste of that delicious red pill you've got. Honest.

>>125395
>That's not a strawman, it is me attempting to clarify what you're saying.
I'm not the anon you were replying to.
>And who told you that they don't care about you?
The lack of concern for the working class has been self-evident from their fucked up health care proposal, their economic policies which result in funneling money to the super rich, and all their corrupt bullshit that favors megacorporations over people, like lowering pollution regulations and changing the rules for ISPs.
You're the one who can't think for himself or care about real issues, you just gobble up jingoistic bullshit like candy.

>>125403
>We all udnerstand what is meant by "real men." Hard work, personal responsibility, these are the values the GOP wants to focus on.
That's funny, because to me it sounded more like "We can't compete with overseas sweatshop labor or underpaid immigrants! Save us daddy Trump!". Don't get me wrong, I'm all in favor of helping the people, but its the exact opposite of what you're claiming and I doubt any of Trump's policies will actually help in the long run, especially when automation is the main thing destroying the job market but noone seems to notice or care.
>Democrats are constantly trying to expand government and try new ideals that cost money.
They're far from perfect, but their policies lean more towards trying to save money overall or help the working class, at least compared to the Republicans.
>The GOP says enough spending, enough government, just stop trying to create a utopia and let's work with what we've got.
I suggest you read up on what life was like in the late 1800s and early 1900s in the US, because that's what you're advocating.
>The people who need help will get help. No shit. But there is a vast number of people that don't really need help, they're just lazy
Sooo... you think people who are unemployed are lazy, yet one of the reasons people supported Trump is because he claimed there weren't enough jobs left and that he would bring them back somehow. Which is it?
>Why should my mother have to pay for crackheads in Detroit who don't give a shit about anything but crack?
Interestingly enough, the new drug problem in the US is actually opiate abuse in rural, predominantly white communities. Yet I've never seen anyone condemn them as criminals, they're always portrayed as victims who we need to help. Hmmm...
>This is wrong to steal.
"Rob from the rich and give to the poor" is literally the main theme of one of the best-known folk heroes in the west.

>>125405
>You could say the same thing of the democrats
I'd be the first one to tell you that the ACA is far from perfect and that the modern Democratic party has a lot of problems, primarily due to the fact that they shifted their economic policies to the right back in the 90s because the boomers and gen x'ers can't stop sucking corporate dick.
The only guy who was running that actually gave a shit about the people and has a track record to back it up was Bernie, and he's a socialist. But for some reason people like you think that favoring the working class instead of wallstreet fatcats is a bad thing.

>>124694
>Internet privacy

LMAO

>>125437
The failed AHCA Trump Supported literally just gave tax breaks to the rich to the tune of 700 bn and cut medicare by 1.1 trillion, rising costs for the middle class, the elderly and the poor in a play to gain favor with younger voters.

His tax reform coming up will likely be similar, which has already confirmed to get rid of the estate tax (dead people and their spoiled millionaire kids). Trump wants rich people to have two yachts, one for the Atlantic, one for the pacific. He's already stated he's getting rid of a tax (AMT) that if gone, will allow him to pay a lower percentage than someone making 35k per year.

>>125437
>Every one who values the working class just voted for Trump
Letting ISPs sell your info helps the working class? Preventing lawsuits against businesses that use asbestos in their buildings helps the working class? Cutting funding for social programs while drastically increasing spending on the military industrial complex helps the working class? Reducing taxes on the super-rich helps the working class? Starting trade wars which will increase the costs of consumer goods helps the working class? Privatizing infrastructure plans helps the working class?...
Face it anon, you're getting cucked by the super-rich and cheering them on as it happens.

>>125437
You say that like all those bitter coal-miners and rust-belters knew what the hell they voted for. If they actually understood the value of independence, they would've put in the effort to educate themselves and ditch their increasingly irrelevant trade.

But they didn't, and they're going to pay for their belief that Trump is going to keep them afloat. His support for mechanisation is just more salt to grind into the wound.

lol

Hillary lost almost five months ago, get over it already.

>>125459
Ivory towers are destroying the left and eroding it from the inside out. Just let it happen, when they're reduced to begging for scraps they'll see the folly of their manner.

>>125458
>But the super rich supported Hillary not Trump.
Because the super rich know you can't drain blood from a corpse. An old geezer like him sees no problem with fucking over the future for short-term profits since he'll be gone by then.
>Maybe something bad will happen, but it hasn't happened yet.
He's gonna crash this economy with no survivors
>>125459
How is that anon wrong? You conservatives are the ones who advocate that people should "pull themselves up by their bootstraps", and if they can't find a job then they're just lazy. Pointing out your hypocrisy isn't being an asshole.

>>125461
>>125462
These. It's over, liberal scum. It's finished and done. Get off your sinking ship like a good rat or drown.

>>125458
you say that like its a good thing. She had support from people like gates, buffet and bezos because they dont need anymore money, theyre idealists.

Also, you should look at what hard right rich people are concerned about with trump, they think he's not hard right enough, they want benefits for the poor gone, period.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/koch-brothers-pledge-millions-gopers-opposing-health-care-bill-article-1.3006272

>but it hasn't happened yet.

Do I really need to show you tweets where Trump supports the dead health bill? The guys a hostage in the white house, republicans can subpoena his tax ruturns at any time and cause outrage but they wont do that as long as he keeps signing their shit. Trumps ideals are falling through one by one as his party does as they please. He could have used any of the shit he signed in a hurry as leverage to lead his party, but he did not give one shit about fixing our healthcare and has now moved on. He doesnt give a shit about our privacy on the internet, he has complete control over that and can appoint a different FCC chairman at will, he just does what the republicans tell him to do, he was their pick.

>>125464
No, the 'liberals' and 'RINOS' you despise are the people trying to plug the fucking holes your ilk are drilling out of fear and spite.

We all are on that ship, and we'll all sink just as fast if it goes, whether we stand on its right or left. What will it take to drop the partisan scales from your eyes and see that you're a part of the society you treat with contempt?

>>125465
Smart rats don't get trapped below deck and drown when a ship starts to sink. The problem with the modern left is that they think they're smart with no evidence or results to back that belief up. You see retards like this:
>>125084
>>125427
>>125463
>B-BUT M-MUH AUTOMATION
parroting bullshit they've read from these "geniuses" who just got their ideological asses handed to them in the last election.

Watch the crybaby fit they pitch over the next few years as their power and influence dwindles in American society. They know the emperor is naked now and they see average Americans like us pointing their fingers and laughing at the idea we ever took them seriously in the first place.

It's over. Done. The Obama presidency was it, that's their watermark. How pathetic is that?

>>125471
If you don't see the point I'm trying to make, maybe it's time to consider if you just don't give a shit after all, as long as those dirty Liberals are getting served.

You're a pretty poor excuse of a patriot. But according to >>125473, you'd definitely make a good rat.

>>125478
Case in point.

These are the arguments I've seen:

>1. This isn't a Republican-caused problem.
>2. You don't think they're doing this already?
>3. This won't affect me since I have nothing to hide.

To address each:

1. When it's purely Republicans voting for the bill, yes, the company "Republican" caused the problem today instead of the company "Democrat" from a few years ago.

2. Providing the legal ability for ISPs to do this removes any recourse that we have as individuals to stop them when discovered; they will be guaranteed the legal right to do it publicly and as frequently as they choose.

3. It's not about hiding the secrets that you consider secret, it's about a right to privacy. Please understand the difference and that dismissing this fact says a lot about who you are as an American, if not solely as a person.

Ajit Pai of the FCC is low life scum. He wants to take internet access away from poor people.

He already stopped permission for nine broadband providers to participate in a federal subsidy plan for low-income consumers. Next on his list is he wants to kill net neutrality. The man is evil. I allege he is corrupt and as head of the FCC he is not representing the interests of the people, he is just finding ways to line his own pockets.

Do I have to explain KEK to all you newbies? In America we need change because under the covers most politicians and the 1% globalists have been selling out the American people for decades.

How do you get corrupt people to change? You give them terrible pain. Trump was put into power by our vote because we know he is going to be the worst president ever. Donald Trump is that very visible pain and that pain will inspire real change. It is all part of the plan of people that really love this country and love ALL the people in it. Would you rather have blatant disgusting Trump or sneaky Hilary? Choose the one who is mostly likely to inspire real change after 4 years...and that would be the in your face Trump, a bigly man with a supersized ego who feels no need to strongly cover his greedy moves. Trump's Tweets or Hilary's private e-mail server are both bad, but seeing how government fails via a public twitter feed is priceless. We deserve better. In sum folks, Kek is the god of chaos...who has a frog's head (I am not making this up). According to the legend, out of Chaos comes order but you need chaos first. The sheeple outside of 4chan think KEK means LOL and we like it that way. It spreads the message faster. All hail the clan of kek!!

>>125569
>This regulation was some crap Obama only did in his final months

I don't understand this, how does him enacting it in his final months discredit this? It's almost as if the world is rapidly changing and shit like this is necessary. You wouldn't have even needed a bill like this 6 years ago, before every one saw the value in data collection from every aspect. Oh yeah, and this isn't just some thrown together last minute horse shit that republicans do. You know, where they get together over a few weeks and try to hammer out the details of a healthcare plan?

Nope, it's 73 pages
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/12/02/2016-28006/protecting-the-privacy-of-customers-of-broadband-and-other-telecommunications-services

Fuck for all we know they had been working on it for years and actually think shit out before they open their mouths and sign away.

>and it will be replaced with something that is actually good

You have zero basis behind that. You know they would already be raving about their great plan if they had one. Be sure to check out how much money democrats and republicans alike, get from large telecommunications companies, and tell me it's just all one big game of 14d chess.

>>125567
Christ, you are retarded.

>>125569
Here's some of the content

Data security.
(a) A telecommunications carrier must take reasonable measures to protect customer PI from unauthorized use, disclosure, or access.

(b) The security measures taken by a telecommunications carrier to implement the requirement set forth in this section must appropriately take into account each of the following factors:

(1) The nature and scope of the telecommunications carrier's activities;

(2) The sensitivity of the data it collects;

(3) The size of the telecommunications carrier; and

(4) Technical feasibility.

(c) A telecommunications carrier may employ any lawful security measures that allow it to implement the requirement set forth in this section.

>>125584
he just condensed a technical 72 page bill for you thats meant to govern the handling of hundreds of millions of peoples personal data. Theres a reason the FCC doesnt blow up the media when they do stuff, its hard to understand technical gibberish for most so when republicans run with the money they just kind of get away with it with little backlash.

>>124713
Start creating aliases with strong (see: long, because a capital letter doesnt give a shit and neither does a special character when it comes to good crackers) passwords and using proxy nets. Stop setting google (8.8.8.8) as your dns and for the love of god keep track of whether your provider's policies change. Also get a real good firewall to block any tracking data traffic that isnt over an open port.

>>124713
Renting a VPN gateway or using Tor is about the only thing that will help.

Republicans didn't cause the excessive surveillance. Islamists did. Get that straight in your head.

>>125681
Ok man, but you could say that about every regulation and we could go back and fourth all day long about it, but you actually have 73 pages of information on it right there. They actually explain themselves and the intentions in most of top. So you can remain ignorant or read it.

Tell me in this specific case, are these interests more for the people of the country, or would getting rid of these make us more free?

Also
>Thread about a regulation
>3 days later someone actually quotes it
>The rest of the replies prior are just political shit flinging

Never change 4chinxxx

>>125726
I'm sorry, but that's a horrible defense anon. Should they make sure they put stick figure explanations too with an audiotape?

Laziness is no excuse for not getting information. I'm willing to bet you've spent more cumulative hours doing less productive things than reading regulations that affect all of us.

>Wiped clean
Meaning what?

>>125726
>72 pages for "don't steal people's shit OK?"
That is also why you will never work in politics or write laws. It's that long because otherwise they'd loophole the shit out of it.

>>125800

Unfortunately it's not. Have you seen the rules of American football, for example? It's a fucking encyclopedia, and that's the abridged version. It covers shit including what kind of mud stains are allowed on your jersey (seriously).

So when the stakes are even higher, as for the billions upon billions transferred in and out of the federal government, the legalese gets that much longer -- and that's before the courts fill in the gaps that people still find and exploit (they basically say "that's obviously not what is intended, so banhammer", and the court case is filed but not included in or added to the text of the law itself, even though it's de facto part of the law, which is why you need lawyers and law books of court rulings on top of the written law itself).

>>124694
Oh fucking please nigger faggot, nobody on here put the republicans in power. The DNC did it when they went with the one politician that could and would lose to Donald Trump.

>>125851
>the two politicians that could and would lose
FTFY

>statists getting angry at gaining freedoms

What a time to be alive.

>>124799

>10 rubles have been deposited into your account

>>125851
>nobody on here put the republicans in power.

Except the ines that voted for Republicans in the most recent election

>>125621

best VPN option?

>>125452
His kids.

>>125437
>Every one who values the working class just voted for Trump

Because the working class bought his lies. He's a fucking snake oil salesman saying exactly what he needs to get votes. He is the fucking swamp. See >>125449

>>126461

The alternate was Hillary. There was no winning play.

>>124914
This is true. Source : am Indian.

Please don't deport him, we don't need to wreck our already shitty internet any further, thanks.

>>125726
> "don't steal people's shit OK?"
>I wasn't stealing their information, I was sharing their information your honor.

Lets keep going, I bet we could all have a laugh at you trying to govern dick-ass telecom companies.

>>124914
>He wants to take internet access away from poor people.
>He already stopped permission for nine broadband providers to participate in a federal subsidy plan for low-income consumers.
I thought you said he was scum? This is great.

>>125380
That's not how the numbers are calculated.
You should look it up some day.

Since there doesn't seem to be a way to filter out the political BS and tl.dr. above, who can recommend a good VPN? I don't want the authorities banging down my door just because some moron posts CP on /mu/ as a joke or something. And I don't care if you think they will or not, I just want advice on a VPN.

>>126517
>posts CP on /mu/ as a joke
Stop browsing /mu/ and stop being a pedophile, you fuck.

>>126520
I knew I should have asked on /g/, or just googled it. Can't you read?

>>126521
>Can't you read?
No, why do you ask?

>>126527
PC Mag has a decent list.

>>124886
But they can...

>>126513
Yes, lets take the power to take online classes and apply for better jobs away from the poor and prisoners. Making it harder for them to un-poor themselves for a trifling cost is clearly in the countries best interest, we clearly want more poor people. Save 2 billion, add 54bn to bloated and wasteful army. MAGA.

>>126621
>for a trifling cost
Indeed, it is a trifling cost. Anyone who is so devastatingly poor in the US as to not afford internet access is either mentally ill and homeless (rare) or has chosen to be (common).

>>126621
The poor are poor because they deserve to be poor. This is about making America great for the people who deserve society's riches.

>>126685
>Said the wingnut while cashing in his welfare check
If a poor man wishes to better his station, society should do everything to help him rise. One lazy crack-addict abusing the system does not justify damning a thousand hard workers to eternal drudgery, especially when earning a living is hard enough as it is without someone treading on you.

And why don't you tell that to all the coal miners and rust-belters who believe the country is obligated to prop their obsolete trades? By your standard, why should we owe them anything if they refuse to drop the pickaxes and pick up a pen?

>>126685
>deserve
build a better straw capitalist, pls

>>126691
Says who? He is only in it for himself you dip shit.

>>126758
Trumps appointee (who worked for Verizon) has stopped measures to allow more companies/competition over our internet services as well, which would end up in cheaper internet prices, this is the root of the problem, Democrats were working on a way to make internet cheaper period, by allowing the fee market to dictate prices. Pai currently has no plans to make internet cheaper or faster. He always makes his decisions to benefit telecom companies (which often post profits at 97% margins in the billions every quarter).

This 2bn dollar subsidy was a stopgap measure which lowered the price of internet by only 9 dollars, but the idea was that coupled with competition that 9 dollars would make super cheap 20 dollar internet a reality very quickly within a year or so, with the subsidy eventually being cut from the budget once the free market decides the real price of the internet.

>>125045
Your argument is basically, "lol y u mad :v)".

Why exactly do you support companies having this much control over everyone's information?

Why do you believe deregulation will somehow fix all of our problems?

>>126912
Govt creates problems to justify its own existence.

When it comes to government provision of anything, we have good reason to expect poor quality, high prices, and arbitrary and wasteful resource allocation.

There are plenty of other reasons that the market, the arena of voluntary interactions between individuals, deserves the benefit of the doubt over the state, and why we ought not assume the state is indispensable without first seriously investigating to what degree human ingenuity and the economic harmonies of the market can get by without it. For instance:

The state acquires its revenue by aggressing against peaceful individuals.

The state encourages the public to believe there are two sets of moral rules: one set that we learn as children, involving the abstention from violence and theft, and another set that applies only to government, which alone may aggress against peaceful individuals in all kinds of ways.

The educational system, which governments invariably come to dominate, encourages the people to consider the state’s predation morally legitimate, and the world of voluntary exchange morally suspect.

The government sector is dominated by concentrated interests that (I don’t think “interests” would be taken as meaning people) lobby for special benefits at the expense of the general public, while success in the private sector comes only by pleasing the general public.

The desire to please organized pressure groups nearly always outweighs the desire to please people who would like to see government spending reduced (and most of those people, it turns out, want it reduced only marginally anyway).

In the United States, the government judiciary has been churning out preposterous decisions, with little to no connection to “original intent,” for more than two centuries.

Governments teach their subjects to wave flags and sing songs in their honor, thereby contributing to the idea that resisting its expropriations and enormities is treason.

>>126912
Fuck Obama

If it needs to be regulated, the patriot Donald Trump will handle it. Obamas shit didn't even go into effect so nothing has changed here.

This story is bullshit created by Obama anyway. Democrats always create some shit like this for the next president to deal with. The story looks bad and that was the point.

>>126763
>Democrats were working on a way to make internet cheaper period
Lol

That's not even their party focus. You Lying sacks of shit.

Here is a great video of a representative loosing it on the floor over this issue.

https://youtu.be/6I1omhnGrT8

>>126937
This, get a vpn. It will be cheaper than when ISPs start raising your rates to make up for the loss of income the fools provide to them.

>>125380
That's not how that even works.

>>125390
>My views aren't hidden
>Can't guess my views
If they weren't hidden why does he have to guess them to know them?

>>126937
Proof?

>>126938
and what are republicans doing to further this goal? For 19 bucks in France you can get cable TV, a phone line and high speed internet, and have several other companies to get your shit from if one tries to fuck you. US prices are triple what most other countries pay.

>>124753
He has probably "nothing to hide".

>>124782
https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2016/06/rat-finks.jpg

>>124694
You're welcome!

>>127252
He does have an amazing record for two months. I have never heard so much shit on the news about the president. Constant, consistent failures, lies, weird tweets, the occasional 'presidential' moment and it's all done with this overt shadiness and flaunting of laws because the checks and balances have been thrown off.

>>127252

>The republics will bring in high speed internet

kek

>>127297
>from the news
ah, you are brainwashed, got it

Hillary 99% chances to win fellow news reader

>>127252
Executive Orders are instantly law

>>124694
>meme spewing retards vote for drumpf
>now he will ban your shitposting and arrest you for your unforgiveable porn folder
It is over. The right is finished.

>>125569
What part of,
>The resolution also would bar the FCC from ever enacting similar consumer protections. It now heads to the House.
don't you understand?

>>124694
You will realize that National Socialism is the only ideology that works for civilized domesticated man. Otherwise you should just return to Barbarism and tribal living. Enough with the half measures.

>government regulation will protect internet privacy

t. nsa and cia

>>127367
Uh ever heard of the supreme Court idiot

>>124694
>ads already used data from caches in your browser
great rebbit headline

>>126763
> Democrats
> Allowing fee market
That's hilarious.

>>127396
>its all google
>google is a private company who can already do what they want with their info about you, except sell it.
>passing this bill will allow them to sell your info
>anyone can buy your info, like hiring employers.

can you read instead of acting like a redditfag and assuming?

What's it gonna take for the FCC to classify ISPs similar to voice providers?

It solves ALL(ISP related) net neutrality and privacy issues. Permanently.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2pUAmfw-Rk0

NOTHINGBURGER

Styx already debunked it

>>127367
>>127390
Are these posts a joke?

>>127423
I hope to god that doesn't happen. I don't want to get nickel and dimed by an ever increasing list of fees and gibsmedat programs to pay for nogs to post on twitter and facebook.

>>127516
I think he's being shortsighted. The inevitable habituation of users to the loss of privacy will allow ISPs to change their privacy and data collection policies over time, which is what has happened with websites and gaming platforms over the last decade.
http://www.lossofprivacy.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/wbjCmbt.jpg

>>125064

>Le Corporations are Ebil!!!!!

Man I can't wait for this new crop of kids to start paying taxes and paying for their own healthcare

>>127536
Corporations are profit driven. Doing 'evil' is more profitable than good. Jesus doesn't promise riches, the devil does

>>124713
Get off the Internet or stop doing anything other than being an average joe on the net.

As an European I can't tell you how the "great United States of America" is looking more and more like a plutocracy and their willing slaves. And that's coming from the Glorified Bureaucracy Union.

Worth mentioning that EU is doing the opposite right now.
https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/proposal-eprivacy-regulation
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/jan/10/whatsapp-facebook-google-privacy-rules-ec-european-directive

Just to drive the point : that's not another rules to stifle the divine right of the internet new masters. It's part privacy protection and making clear what company can be selling. (Orwellian scrutiny of dissenting citizen versus global feedback over your products reception)

The internet giant would still gather all your data, but only share it with your "explicit consent". It's the idea at least. I'm not sure the leash will yank hard enough for Google to get back to his motto "Don't be Evil"

>>127757
With current internet infrastructure, privacy will inevitably die without deliberate caution on the part of the user to protect it, regardless of any law or regulation.

>>127759
The biggest form of infrastructure we have is law itself. State are only held together by laws.

Beside, we wouldn't want the internet to become /b/ which it would with true anonymity enforced by the law of physics (if you see what I mean).
What we want is company to be held responsible for breaking actual laws, since they weren't legally responsible before (a fix until the 99.99999% overthrow the 0.00001%).

I wonder what it would take for American to finally feel indignation for this. A scandal were an ignoble corporation tracked a Person of Interest and sabotaged his righteous action?
Or just something low key like a racist/serialkiller/pedophile/terrorist/freegunproponent/republican buying theses datas to track and harass someone in particular?

I shudder at the idea of technology eventually SENDING BRAINWASHING SIGNAL BY THE INTERNET.
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/03/17/us/twitter-journalist-strobe-epilepsy/
http://www.wired.com/politics/security/news/2008/03/epilepsy
It would be like Ghost in the Shell made real.

>>127760
Draconian control would be necessary to actually prevent--not just deter--violation, and will destroy the internet as we know it. I don't understand why you'd be so eager to ever give so much power to politicians, or their bureaucratic fetishists, in exchange for so little?

>(a fix until the 99.99999% overthrow the 0.00001%).
If we're drawing arbitrary partitions of the population, well, 99.99999% don't belong on the internet anyway.

>>127764
Maybe it's the hope that people remember that we (are supposed to) control the Politician?

The control you don't want to give to politician will, in the absence of laws, go to profit-driven individual controlling the technologies -which is worse-. They rarely become the richest persons in the world caring for others' well-being or equality (sociopaths make the best CEOs).

A lot of things are already under draconian control and could only be better with even more control. Laws are more flexible than some people think, that's why the constitution rules above the laws and so on...
I wish we stopped learning lessons through world destroying mistake.

>If we're drawing arbitrary partitions of the population, well, 99.99999% don't belong on the internet anyway.
You would have a point if keeping the third-world out of the Internet was somehow a goal. But when they and China inevitably flood the internet I do hope there will be better rules in place to at least impede facist or plutocrat willingness to practice social engineering.

If Trump wasn't held in check by precious policies you just know he would have enforced his own fact as truth (like say his claim his inauguration crowd was the biggest ever).
We've been so careful to prevent power abuse that we forgot how to recognize a madman.

I was obviously referring to the 99% movement, this is hardly arbitrary since it's the current state of wealth distribution. We ended with a situation were a young-adult at best got control of everyone's social network simply because he did it first and ownership spread one way.
[/overly long rant]

tl;dr
There will always be a more fundamental problem to fix, but until we do we can at least keep the symptom from creating new problems.

>>125004
>I don't even take a "side". This isn't about dems or republicans.

>the actual republican politicians are doing their usual push to maximize profits in all areas with no regard to the general population or rights,

Yeah, definitely not taking a side here.

>>125084
Bernie had ample time and opportunity to get legislation passed in his 30 years as a congressman, but I don't know any notable legislation that he sponsored, only some that he blocked. Illegal Immigration puts a strain on the country, which is why former president Obama deported more people than any president in history. We don't need more socialism, as wealth redistribution doesn't work, it would seem that we need some protectionism, combined with a Romneycare healthcare system.

>>125621
This doesn't prevent ISPs from seeing what websites you visit

>>127808
Would using Google DNS at least limit (to google) who see it?

>>127808
Sure, an isp somewhere will see what websites I visit pseudonymously.

>>127803
Everyone who plays that "im neutral and moderate" bullshit is a liberal

>>125380
Maybe polacks should actually take a page out of Europe's book for once. All those great aryans you fucks jerk off to love their socialized healthcare, why don't you want to imitate it? Why are american conservatives so insistent on giving corporations as much power as possible and keeping everyone else (including them) riddled in debt? Here's a hint: it doesn't matter if the CEO is a jew or not, they don't give a fuck about you, your race, or your country. They only care about making money.

>>124694
>republicans
nice scapegoat, retard. if dems are so great, why didnt' they stop domestic spying during King Nigger's 8 years?

>>127810
use dnscrypt with an alternate resolver. google's nameservers would be a poor choice for privacy. vpn providers will have their own private nameservers, and your dns requests should be routed through the connection to the vpn.

>>124782
You made your bed and now you get to lay in it.

Now I get to have 4 years (sorry, 8) of laughing at cucks like you

>>125245
>w-w-w-we just l-let you w-w-w-win!
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>>125339
>LALALALALALALA I CANT HEAR YOU

>>127359
>five rubles have been deposited into your account

>>128442
>MOMMY THE BIG RUSSIAN MEANIE BOOGEYMAN IS TEASING ME

>>124694

Where can I by the internet browsing history of Capitol Hill?

>>124697
>Opponents of the regulation argue the FCC's definition of sensitive information is far too broad and that it creates an imbalance between what's expected of Internet providers and what's allowed for Web companies such as Google
You know it's quality politics when the only argument they bring to the table is that they want an equal opportunity to fuck our assholes inside out.

>>124728
Freedom is only important for companies anon.

>>124706
Rogers isn't owned by AT&T

If you think this news story is scary think about the fact that is is the one they were willing to cover. The reps have been up to some truly dark shit that isn't getting full coverage. But if you look at the votes they've had so far you see they are trying to deregulate the whole Damn country