Y'know, who needs net neutrality? Who cares if we have to

>>133325196
Jews were cursed to search for their 30 pieces of silver. That's why money is the only important thing to them and why we can't have nice things.

>>133325196
I feel like I'm being bullied into supporting net neutrality.

"Cat GIFs, the sum-total of human knowledge at your fingertips, the most democratizing power the world has ever known."

They have to resort to hyperbole to make me care.

>>133325196
Tell me this, how come internet providers didn't do this anytime before the bill?

>>133328359
I'd assume it was before they really understood how much money there was to make in online customers. Back then there was not as large a marketplace for internet users.

File: 7495.jpg (71KB, 360x403px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 360x403px

>>133325196
>Comcast has a monopoly in your area
>nothing can stop them from exploiting the hell out of you now other than leaving your area and all your family and friends
I feel like everyone who supported cutting out net neutrality is a city dweller who doesn't understand how important net neutrality is for flyover country. Either that or they do know and they just don't care because "lol everyone should just move here and be packed in like rats"

>>133325196
>If we don't give the federal government total control of the ISPs will immediately divvy up the internet despite not doing so for the last three decades.

>>133328710
Horseshit - this isn't the 90s anymore. Between satellite internet, low-speed DSL startups, and mobile internet even small towns usually have access to 2-3 alternatives. They won't all be the same cost or the same speed, but that's how the free market works - you decide what's important to you as a consumer and how much you're willing to pay and how much inconvenience you're willing to put up with.

>>133329097
>They won't all be the same cost or the same speed, but that's how the free market works - you decide what's important to you as a consumer and how much you're willing to pay and how much inconvenience you're willing to put up with.
The fact that you consider DSL an option in 2017 proves you don't give a FUCK about me or the area I live in
"Oh, the free market will sort it out, just pick the guy who will fuck you in the ass less" is not a good situation when I can have the alternative of NOT getting fucked in the ass by having net neutrality

>>133329097
>last 3 decades
internet was too slow so they couldnt do shit at that time you stupid fuck also dsl is 3rd world shit and satellite internet is too expensive

So why is /pol/ not talking about this? have we been so flooded by shills and slide threads that nobody cares anymore?

>>133329307
>The fact that you consider DSL an option in 2017 proves you don't give a FUCK about me or the area I live in
Then go with mobile internet, or if you're really isolated a satellite provider. The

What's your zipcode? Fifty bucks says you have at least two other options besides Comcast.

>>133330393
26047
Looking at a site explicitly made to find Internet providers, my only options are Comcast, DSL, and one "fixed wireless" provider that the website doesn't have any information on. From what I gather "fixed wireless" is literally just a cell phone connection to the nearest tower, and we have terrible cell phone reception here so I imagine it would be as slow as DSL.

>>133330965
Your DSL provider offers 6 MB/s, not great for gaming or streaming, but more than fast enough for any basic needs. You also have a satellite provider - HughesNet which is pretty reliable. You've also got multiple cellular providers in the area that offer mobile internet with reasonably good speed and coverage.

You're in the middle of nowhere and you've still got multiple options. People in other parts of the country have even more.

We've been down this road before - plenty of times Comcast and the other big ISPs have floated the idea of non-neutral treatment of network traffic and every time they get enough of a reaction from their subscribers that they immediately shoot it down.