What the fuck is Congress thinking

Network neutrality was the de facto standard for 30 years purely as a result of free market demand. We didn't need to give the FCC vague, broad-reaching regulatory authority over the entire medium to "protect" a standard that wasn't at risk.

Congress has nothing to do with it. Fcc is getting rid of an overreaching law that was never put into practice

>>133325540
>>133325548

wew lad

these kikes are quick

>>133325540
>>133325548
>30 years before modern computers or the internet

Yeah I was really worried about them throttling happypuppy back in the day. Back when 128 kb images loaded in roughly two minutes, there was a real concern of ISPs cutting 10% of my speed.

Face it, we need net neutrality because speed has now increased to the point where even a few kilobytes per second can make or break a service.

What you're seeing are shit ISPs trying to become shit cable companies by choking the competition out of existence. You wouldn't watch youtube or netflix if it had to buffer every 30 seconds. Even if that buffer time was only a few fractions of a second at a time.

>>133325323
I think you should couple any such argument with reality.

Let's talk about I2 and G5, shall we?

>>133326048
>>133326301
Not a shill or kike. Pro nn side has all the astroturf

>>133325323
I think Internet should be considered a utility, but free market has allowed US Internet services to stay ahead of other large nations.

So, whatever pisses off liberals, I'm good.

>>133326048
>>133326301
Network neutrality existed long before we had "Net Neutrality", all King Nigger did was promise the FCC incredibly broad regulatory authority over the entire medium.

>>133326604
Eat shit, you can't be on 4chan and seriously think Net Neutrality is a bad thing.
>>133328066
>Network neutrality existed long before we had "Net Neutrality"
No, it hadn't. In fact Telegraph companies in the early 1900's tried to fuck over common carrier neutrality, but had to be told to fuck off.

What we're seeing today is simple what the telegraph companies tried to do in the 1900's: Only allow certain types of carriers and types of messages to have free passage on their mediums despite their medium being a single string in a larger communications web.

The only reason this became an issue now is because "now" is the only time since the internet's inception where speed has become a premium that is a requirement for services. Facebook, netflix, youtube. These are things that didn't exist in the 80's or 90's when that "Golden age of the internet" happened which operated just fine without network neutrality. They didn't exist because there was no way a connection in even the year 2002 or 2003 could support Netflix. Or a connection in 1995 could support facebook.

Why people are comparing the internet now to the internet 30 years ago (back when the only 'internet' was BBS boards and usenet) is baffling.

Want to talk about how all roads should be speed limited to 55 miles per hour because that's how it was in the Carter administration, and it worked just fine for almost 20 years during that era up until the Clinton administration?

>>133328066
>A handful of clear rules that tell ISPs that they can't fuck consumers over and have to give them what they pay for
>"Incredibly broad regulatory authority"

What the fuck are you smoking? The 2015 rules just give the FCC the ability to tell ISPs to keep from blocking or throttling content, and entering into special deals with websites or companies to speed up that specific services to fuck with free market competition. It doesn't give them the power to regulate speech online.

>>133325323
The internet prior to title 2 was literally hitler. I got arrested everyday for posting on /pol/ and paid $1700 a month for access to google and myspace. My provider rendered vimeo useless and sued me for visiting netflix. We can't go back to 2015.

Net Neutrality kills competition. Let ISP's conduct their business so they can innovate and bring us faster speed. You all advocating for net neutrality is like what happened to other utilities. They stop innovating and the companies do the bare minimum to provide lackluster service.

>>133332004
Every single modern "innovation" from ISPs has been some retarded shit I don't need or some bullshit subscription plan. I don't need a remote I can talk into, and I don't need 37 different ways to bundle unrelated services with my Internet. All I want is for my ISP to take my money and the money of their other customers and reinvest it into their networks to make them faster and more expansive. ISPs should just be dumb pipes that I pay for my Internet service and nothing more. They'd still make money hand over fist, too.

>>133325323
I'd rather repeal FCC regulations hampering telecom. That's essentially the only reason we're even having a "net neutrality" debate.

>>133325323
>Tell me /pol/ what do you think of the Net Neutrality law trying to be passed??
It's shit. Obama supported it and so did the left. It's government control of the internet.

>>133326820
us internet services are garbage compared to other countries.

the only way you're getting internet speeds comparable to south korea is if youre paying 600 dollars a year for verizons premium platinum internet tier

File: 1498934433989.jpg (41KB, 600x800px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 600x800px

Jewgle, netflix, reddit, and other kosher sites support NN. Therefor, I'm against it.

>>133326048
Says the anon with the EJew flag

>>133332988
>All I want is for my ISP to take my money and the money of their other customers and reinvest it into their networks to make them faster and more expansive.
and net neutrality ensures this will never happen. as the current ISPs have no inventive after the govt killed off their competition

>>133333193
does verizon still have pension?

>>133333630
net neutrality encourages competition

>>133333697
Does Google?

>>133333881
Negative.

>>133326301
>Yeah I was really worried about them throttling happypuppy back in the day. Back when 128 kb images loaded in roughly two minutes, there was a real concern of ISPs cutting 10% of my speed.
as someone who had internet at home for business 25 years ago, you are fucking right that internet service providers giving you the speed promised with the service is a big fucking deal.
They'd send guys out to switch out the quality of cable if you weren't getting what you paid for.
Why?
Cause we had 50 meg files to send.
And if it didn't get sent in time, I didn't get paid.

>>133333241
this. it's baffling to me that so many people have been kiked into supporting net neutrality, it's like watching /pol/acks suddenly come out in unironic celebration of the feminine penis

>>133333881
are you fucking retarded? do unions support competition? do monopolies support competition?

I have Verizon as cell provider.

Was i getting jewed? I like how Verizon is against while other kike owned businesses are for.

>>133326301
>What you're seeing are shit ISPs trying to become shit cable companies by choking the competition out of existence. You wouldn't watch youtube or netflix if it had to buffer every 30 seconds.
I'm still not going to buy their TV service. Don't need it, don't want it.

>>133325323
honestly if the isp's start throttling our net people are going to lose their fucking minds, their is no way this is going to end well if they start becoming uber jews about it and make them lose business and they don't want that.

I wish I knew what the fuck you are all talking about so I'm going to hope someone explains it in abo-tier language for me

Net neutrality sounds like a general statement that one service provider has to provide the same quality to all customers

>>133337174
basically they want to make it so if you want the speed the internet is now, you pay a premium and anyone that doesn't pay that premium gets their internet speed slowed.

File: IMG_7820.jpg (353KB, 1200x1600px) Image search: [Google]

353KB, 1200x1600px

>people are still talking about this
kys

>>133337546
Tends to happen every time they try this bullshit.

>>133337546
Blood seems fake? Second medical opinion?

>>133337486
That sounds pretty gay

I can't believe they're still trying to get it passed. Super fucked.

>>133326048
Fucking cuck shills thinking they're 2 alternative 5 me, they'll see once 4chan has to shut down because of this shit

>>133325323
can someone explain this to me? Will it affect me or just amerifags?