Dont fall for Net Neutrality scam

>>133371865
>>>/g/61334666
>>>/g/61335873
>>>/v/383697332
plebbit isn't that good at making a psyop campaign look organic.

>>133371865
Network Neutrality IS a good thing. Otherwise, the Internet will turn into a (((controlled))) environment

>>133371865
> Net neutrality is the principle that Internet service providers and governments regulating the Internet should treat all data on the Internet the same, not discriminating or charging differentially by user, content, website, platform, application, type of attached equipment, or mode of communication.

So if there is no net neutrality, nothing prevents American internet service providers or search engines from blocking access to "hateful" websites.

In principle I agree that they should be able to do whatever they want but in the real world corporations are globalists and supporting those who give them more power to push their agenda is retarded

>>133372240
Explain, in detail, how the wording of the Net Neutrality legislation accomplishes this.
Because as I see it, it only gives the government the power to levy fines against any internet entity they want, as well as forgive fines owned.

This is how you get (((government))) controlled internet.

>>133372240
Nice meme you fucking idiot.

Why would corporations be shilling for other people to have more control over them.

>>133371865
>These posts are by an organized paid group (shareblue). "Net neutrality" sounds good but is just more laws to regulate and censor the internet via the FCC.
>Do not fall for this shit anon...
THATS THE FACT JACK.

>>133372240
I dont remember anything wrong with the internet back in 2015

>>133371865
yea this isnt the first time they campaigned for regulating the internet to "save" the internet.

yet the government already has a power to stop tiered internet access: anti-trust laws.

end the cable monopolies. stop them dominating internet access, and there will be companies willing to offer non-tiered internet access, without any new laws or agencies.

>>133372240
You know what happened last time they tried this? They said they had to pass the law before it could be released to the public.

Nope. Nothing sketchy at all there.

>Thursday's vote comes after Commissioners Michael O'Rielly and Ajut Pai asked that the FCC "immediately release the 332-page Internet regulation plan publicly and allow the American people a reasonable period of not less than 30 days to carefully study it."

That request was denied; we'll post the document here when it's available.

tldr: it was never made available.

File: Its a Trap.gif (998KB, 500x250px) Image search: [Google]

998KB, 500x250px

>>133371865
the internet was under the FTC, Obama tried to move it to the FCC which has more authority and control, Trump is just moving it back to the FTC where it is already sufficiently regulated.

>>133371865
>Rural retard wants me to vote against my best interests in favor of mega-corporations
Hmm, where have I seen this before...

>>133373079
Here's the source article. I'm too lazy to archive and I don't care anymore.

>http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/02/26/389259382/net-neutrality-up-for-vote-today-by-fcc-board

>>133373384
Please archive it https://archive.is/OkBPg

>>133373382
>vote in the interest of one mega-corporation over another
show flag, leaf.

>>133371865
Giving FCC power over the internet is like letting a pedo guard the daycare. Anons are fucking listening to google sucking the cock of 'net neutrality' takeover.

>>133371865
>These posts are by an organized paid group (shareblue). "Net neutrality" sounds good but is just more laws to regulate and censor the internet via the FCC.
This
The entire thing is a false dilemma meant to give the FCC control of internet content so it can stifle political speech.

The solution is simply to break up internet ISP monopolies. This triggers the net neutrality shill.

>>133373492
>>133373382
AT&T are /ourguys/

>CNN boss in crosshairs if AT&T-Time Warner merger approved

http://nypost.com/2017/06/28/cnn-boss-in-crosshairs-if-att-time-warner-merger-approved/

File: sharebluejpg.png (37KB, 814x262px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 814x262px

Who did this?

>>133371865
yeah, no

NN is an absolute essential
the net dies without it

>>133373574
please rub 2 brain cells together

>>133373966
>reddit spacing
>insults intelligence instead of constructing an argument
checks out

File: 1499146643522-pol.png (142KB, 600x842px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 600x842px

>>133371865
Go fuck yourself.

>>133373966
>NN is an absolute essential
>the net dies without it
What was wrong with the net back in 2015?
NN is a solution in search of a problem
typical marxist tactic

>>133371865
how can better than 9/10 of this thread not even know what it means?

oh right, because they dont care what it means

File: carl aids.jpg (53KB, 580x649px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 580x649px

>>133373966
>please rub 2 brain cells together
not an argument

>>133374114
>1499146643522-pol.png
>-pol.png
Hi, shareblue.
>>133374182
>more lefty insults
You are not good at psyops. Stop.

>>133371865
A couple years ago, I actually listened to Reddit and sent e-mails to my politicians about NN. But now that the election has outed Reddit as a literal Jewish propaganda arm, I'm not so sure about NN anymore. There has to be some catch that the Jews are hiding from us.

>>133371865
>These posts are by an organized paid group (shareblue)
Sure, you paid corporatist shill. Sure.

Sage!

>>133371865
Fuck you buddy! Google, Amazon and Facebook are spending hundreds of millions of dollars lobbying and advertising for net neutrality because they have my interests at heart.

How can you talk negatively about such generous and altruistic companies?

OP is correct

>>133371865
Well obviously I am up for the great American shoa

>>133371865
pussy on a pedestal never do dis

>>133374289
The Jews are on both sides, dumb goyim lose either way.

>>133374499
The solution to the problem is breaking up ISP monopolies. Why do you think the only solution is handing more power to the government?

>>133374499
>break up the ISP monopolies
>paid corporatist opinion
wat

>>133374289
>There has to be some catch that the Jews are hiding from us.
Go read the legislation in question. It effectively allows the FCC to pick and choose who to levy fines against. They also retain the ability to forgive those same fines.

So it is essentially an attempt to gain control of the internet by way of targeted fines.
>What? You aren't supporting the correct candidate?
>Well, you see you are actually in violation of [vague statute #12553], and thus owe us $10M. If you support candidate X however...

>>133374653
They don't actually understand /pol/ memes and trends, they just repeat them to try and blend in.

>>133374665
Please give me the link for the legislation.

>>133374279

>You are not good at psyops. Stop.

various fallacies, false assumptions
try to stick to the matter at hand and not red herrings/etc

>>133374218
>not an argument

"but its ok when i dont offer any, thats different"

>>133374171
>What was wrong with the net back in 2015?

there were NN rules in place then
im no marxist thank you
but what you want to argue is "what was wrong with it before there was ANY talk of NN??"
answer is: none of the ISPs/Telcos were big enough to clever enough, nor where any of the big corporations opposite them(who support NN) for such protection rackets to exist, for which they entirely have their motivation in ending NN

>>133371865
Litterally putting pussy on a pedastle

>>133374567
>pussy on a pedestal never do dis
LOL.
I agree. Her head is degenerate.

>>133371865
You LITERALLY want jews to tell you which sites you can and can't go to.

Daily reminder that increased government regulation is the reason ISP monopolies exist.

File: duncan-1.jpg (60KB, 640x552px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 640x552px

>>133374279
Not likely.

i fucking hope nn dies simply to trigger all the fucking faggots in pol

>>133374653
the two sides are:
*big ISPs/telco coporations
*the data-CONSUMER (non-provider "corporations who use them
the former HATE NN
the later NEED it

File: 07.jpg (214KB, 1280x1930px) Image search: [Google]

214KB, 1280x1930px

>>133371865
good picture and good post. have a bump

>>133375196
How dare you imply our benevolent corporations would ever undermine their customers, like selling their browsing history to anyone with enough money.

>>133372240
>Rus who doesn't realize his media is already comprised
nice meme

>>133371865
i'm still pretty confused by the whole issue. what's Trump's position on all this? i'll support that! PRAISE KEK

>>133375081
>reddit spacing
>>133374922
I need to search for it. The wording is seedy and laced in statements that are essentially fluff, in a 500+ page report.
It might be easier if you just check out what powers the FCC holds over what is their jurisdiction. They can do quite a lot.

>>133375426
>like selling their browsing history to anyone with enough money
they already do that. You're retarded if you think otherwise

>>133375566
Its sarcasm Sasha, chill.

>>133372866
That's because there was another order from the FCC in 2010 and yet another from 2005

If Trump thinks we need to get rid of Net Neutrality then I agree. If he thinks we need to keep Net Neutrality then I also agree.

>>133371865
>NET NEUTRALITY IS A SCAM
Kys shill

sage

You edgy faggots are so contrarian on every issue that you LARP as net neutrality haters.

Kill yourselves.

OH BOY I CAN'T WAIT TO SPEND MORE MONEY FOR THE SAME SHIT I ALREADY HAVE

GEE
I WOULD LOVE IT IF I WAS UNABLE TO RUN A WEBSITE BECAUSE I'M NOT ON AN ISP'S PREFERRED LIST

You fucking moron, OP. Repealing Net Neutrality is basically turning the internet into Obamacare.

>>133371865

Internet is and always has been fine as is. Don't muck it up with needless government regulation

#freemarketwillfixit

Net neutrality: Your ISP gives you the same speed to access facebook and 4chan

No net neutrality: Your ISP can give you full speed to access facebook, 0,001% of the speed to access 4chan and then you can never browse this site and other non ((they)) approved sites as well. If it is not neutral, they can pick favorites or dislike some content

>>133373423
Thanks norway

>>133375922
>>133375827
>>133375970
>flood of 1 post by this ID
hmm, you guys have convinced me. Maybe giving the government control over the internet is a good idea after all. They need to regulate hate speech, afterall!

>>133375760
>If Trump thinks we need to get rid of Net Neutrality then I agree. If he thinks we need to keep Net Neutrality then I also agree.
Fair point, but you should also consider that Obama thinks we should keep Net Neutrality, so that's a pretty convincing argument to get rid of it.

File: pepe-angry.jpg (19KB, 403x392px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 403x392px

>>133372866
reminder that the Internet we know developed under the principle of Net Neutrality, and the Gov set the rules when the ISPs said they were not going to follow that anymore.

>>133371865
butters

>>133375970
>Repealing Net Neutrality is basically turning the internet into Obamacare.
Odd you should say that since Net Neutrality was another Obama agenda item.

Guess we know what side you're on.

>>133376205
>pepe-angry.jpg

>>133376008
You dipshit, the current internet HAS net neutrality.
>>133376091
Because I just woke up you raging nigger autist. Net neutrality is what we already have. We're not giving them control of shit, we're removing that control from ISPs. They're the ones who want to regulate and control the flow of bandwidth, not the fucking government. For once in your life stop looking for boogeymen.

>>133371865
You're a retard (though the girl's cute). Explanation follows.
>>133372435
One of the biggest effects of net neutrality was making internet service "utility" - it means that your provider cannot differentiate how much you pay depending on how you use his service, the same as if you'd use other utilities - water or electricity, for example. You pay merely for access and general quality of access.

The current bill attempts to do away with that designation, meaning that now ISPs will be able to check which services you access and levy additional fees.
>But it'll be free market, anon, they won't do that because competition will then get clients!
Not exactly. Most of ISPs go through infrastructure of a few giants, like Comcast. Giants which are vulnerable to political and corporate pressures. If those giants will adjust their infrastructure to preferentialism toward some services and content, smaller ISPs will have to adjust or pay extra in place of their clients - and you can bet your ass most won't.

There are places that are thorn in the site of quite rich and powerful. France already blocked 4chan for a short bit around elections. Now, consider that to be a norm in US should some multimilionaire, like, for example, Clinton or Soros decide that there should be limitations put on places such as 4chan, as they're hate speech centrals.

I am willing ot bet that some ISPs will buckle easily, it's hard to explain special treatment of places like this one, what's with reputation current libtard society is ascribing to us (sometimes correctly, given how many shitlords we have). P2P, proxies etc won't help long term.

Government currently controls internet, correct, but because of that it also forces it to follow certain rules it drops on everyone. Yes, it limits free market and that's normally a bad thing but in this case free market also takes away limitations set by government and leaves them free for grabs for whoever wants to buy an ISP out.

>>133376298
>Net neutrality is what we already have.
No, it is some fluffed up term used as a virtue whistle, imprinted onto people by GOOGLE, MICROSOFT, FACEBOOK, REDDIT, AND THE REST OF THE SILICON VALLEY COMPANIES.

Learn who your corporate masters are, shill. You sure as hell don't fool us.

>>133371865
Is that some pussy on a pedestal?

>>133376222
>post is defending net neutrality
>decrying obamacare

??????

Net neutrality has been the standard practice, unlegislated, for decades. It was only legislated during the Obama years because it was a popular issue and shit like SOPA and PIPA kept popping up, things he also pushed.

If you think for one second your ISP has your best interests in mind you're a moron.

>>133376506
>One of the biggest effects of net neutrality was making internet service "utility"
This was never implemented, because it thus makes the ISPs legally responsible for what is transferred over their networks.

If this reclassification were to take effect, ISPs would be REQUIRED to check your data for illegal content, because they could otherwise be sued by the government, or any other private organization. Do you really expect them to risk such legal trouble for your "privacy"?
This is fucking censorship, and you fucks have taken the bait just as intended. Almost identical to what happened with the Patriot Act, and you dumbasses are eating it up just like people did back then.
>WE NEED SAFETY! FREEDOM ISN'T FREE, YAKNO. LET THE STRANGE MAN GROPE YOU AND HARRASS YOU.
sheep

>>133372913
this.

File: 1493384322658.jpg (58KB, 554x592px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 554x592px

>mfw a good portion of 4chan users are now completely tech-illiterate
HTTP was a mistake

>>133376506
In this case, with net neutrality gone, ISP can be easily affected by social and political agenda. Rather than being, well, neutral anymore, as all businesses they will have to conform. And since none offers limitless bandwidth, you'll quickly get a hierarchy and priority services established - not on the basis of constitution or any rights but on the basis of profit, a side of free market normally merely demonized by clueless libtards but in this rare case - an actual threat.

There will be no avoidance of having some big businesses buying bandwidth priority. So sure, you may get a really good access to facebook or twitter, but companies not politically aligned with financial powers, like 4chan, will get screwed over naturally, even assuming no one will feel any malice toward the board or want to shut us down because we're the "alt-right nazi misogynists".

So, sure, on the new bill ISPs stand to gain quite some cash, I agree. But it also unshackles them to sell out their consumers access rights and for the mighty dollar - screw us over for anyone willing to throw cash at putting their websites and content over what their opponents would like. Welcome to North Korean intranet brainwashing at worst, "pay additional $10 a month to access risque sites like infamous 4chan!" very likely, even if worded subtly.

File: What.jpg (25KB, 600x512px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 600x512px

>>133371865
Won't it just be great when 4chan gets throttled or blocked by your isps? Have you guys forgotten that all companies are ran by lgbtqrmxyv Jews who thrive by appeasing the left? And you, a board full of larping nazis, want to give them power over what you say? That's fucking rich.

>>133377225
>giving authoritative control to the FCC will prevent the ISPs from being affected by political agendas
Holy shit, do you even read the shit copypasta?
>giving authoritative control to the NSA will prevent computer companies from spying on their customers
This is you.

>>133376514
>shill
There's your virtue signal. Tell us why you think companies (((they))) control have your best interests in mind, tell us what you think is going to happen with net neutrality.

Enforcing net neutrality was the only good thing Obama did.

>>133377403
>i know you are but what am i
they should teach you guys better deflection strategies.

>>133376920
>This was never implemented, because it thus makes the ISPs legally responsible for what is transferred over their networks.
Are you certain? Again, utility merely forces ISP to allow access without limitations so it pretty much absolves them from managing traffic to different websites on part of their clients. The same way as other utility services work and, say, electricity provider is not guilty no matter if you use your power to keep the fridge going or charging little electric chair made for the neighbour's kid - consequences of the use of that power are only on your head.

>>133371865
>net neutrality is a scam
Come on now OP, /pol/ can only get so retarded

>>133376506
>France already blocked 4chan for a short bit around elections.
Yes, because the government had jurisdiction over the internet there, labeled 4chan as a campaign website, and issued a media blackout during a leak, not because a corporation was paid to shut it down. This is literally an argument AGAINST net neutrality. What the hell is wrong with you people? The cognitive dissonance is unreal.

>>133377397
FCC will have to uphold 1A. Private corporations don't.

>>133377502
Electricity is not a carrier for data and products. If the ISPs are providing a connection for mexican cartels to conduct business in the United States, they are liable for it. This is how our laws work.

And make no mistake, this is the ultimate goal of (((Net Neutrality))). With it in place, the ISPs have very little choice in what they do, and this includes yielding a lot of control over to the government, and thus the laws.

So with such control in the hands of the government, what is to stop them from doing more NSA-style tactics?

File: gjx1b[1].jpg (36KB, 620x445px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 620x445px

>>133374567
>>133375194

>>133377502
>Are you certain?
Yes.

>>133371865
All I need to know is that Apple Jewgle and Faceberg are shilling hard in favour of ths inet neutrality kikery along with all the usual faggots of humaniy like liberals progressives and lolberts.

These companies will lose a fuckton of revenue and hopefully collapse. Faggots who can't pay will get the slow speed demo version of the internet with limited access 90% of the 4chan userbase are poor shitheads who won't get access and this shithole will collpase finally and faggots will have to leave the absement for the first time in their lives, all the cancerous e-celebs e-subcultures will collapse and the internet will be limited only to the patrician class

>>133377651
The FCC will also have to enact other controls that the government is mandated to do, which the ISPs don't. This includes (((Public Safety))), such as things like the Patriot Act.

>>133377651
>FCC will have to uphold 1A
HAHAHAHAHA

>>133377930
and then the public can actually go through a lawful process to oversee it was enacted properly. Because public piece is tied to Constitution in a away private entity is not.

>>133377164
No, graphical user interfaces were a mistake

>>133371865
You look like a scam. Censuring exists, but has nothing to do with net neutrality. The only censuring that could fall under net neutrality is bandwidth. Every law that spies on you isn't related to net neutrality. If they throttle your internet and close down torrent sites, spy on YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, isn't that censuring? They arrest people for comments these days, you really are free.

>>133378042
Just like the public can go through a lawful process to get their data expunged from the NSA database?
Oh, wait.

>>133371865
OP is a JIDF shill who needs more shekels from his media company shares. Net Neutrality is best for all and creates a level playing field for all authors and publishers.

>>133377758
>what is to stop them from doing more NSA-style tactics
The fact that legally, at least NSA still is bound by certain rights in regards to treatment of private data. Sure, they have bad track with that, but NSA spying on citizens making the news and being a huge scandal is such a scandal for a reason. The problem is that new bill doesn't introduce any substitute for even token legal protection net neutrality offered and with that gone, NSA still will have access to data on the basis of national security in the country the service is offered and by whose laws ISPs are already bound, except now ISPs will seem to have a right to buckle under pressures to limit access for those citizens however not only government but "private" powers want.

I'd really like the new bill to work so that obvious flaws of net neutrality anons mentioned would be covered. But they don't seem to be. More shit is just being heaped on top of it.

>>133378078
>The only censuring that could fall under net neutrality is bandwidth
So literally all of the data involved in the internet?

>>133376514
It's amazing at how these "I'm red pilled praise kek" morons keep falling for the same corporate tactics as always.

Every time the FCC has got in the way it was to regulate, to censor, to be inclusive, to make sure nobody is offended, yet morons here will come and defend the FCC getting in the way of internet because apparently provides will kike us, funny enough, they don't seem to target THE FUCKING THING THAT MAKES YOU DEPENDENT ON A DUOPOLY.

Government putting fires and then appearing with a hose to save the day.

>>133378243
>The fact that legally, at least NSA still is bound by certain rights in regards to treatment of private data.
Just like the CIA is "bound by certain rights" in regards to spying on people.
Did you know Obama effectively repealed the act that prevented CIA-made propaganda from being used on American Citizens? He did it right after he won the 2nd term.

Why would you want anything involving the Federal Government in control of the internet?

>>133376920
>>One of the biggest effects of net neutrality was making internet service "utility"
>This was never implemented, because it thus makes the ISPs legally responsible for what is transferred over their networks.
>If this reclassification were to take effect, ISPs would be REQUIRED to check your data for illegal content
Hah! This is such bullshit.

Yeah, just like the electrical company is required to dig into what you're using your power for, and the phone company is required to listen in on your calls.

This is a real shill thread. The anti-net-neutrality people have no way to make their case but with lies.

>>133377494
You continue to dodge every single question. Fucking go ahead, defend the Jew.

>>133378280
Their new tactic of "championing the cause of the enemy" is really disgusting. They will try to coopt literally anything and everything you or I stand for, no stop until public control.
And it works so fucking well.

if they start throttling just use a fucking vpn.

>>133371865
Yesterday: No threads about net neutrality, internet silent about it

Today: Everyone is suddenly adamantly for net neutrality. 10+ active posts on /pol/
Really made me think

>>133378439
Because it's shit, you're right, anon - but it's still less of a shit than I think Clinton/Soros buying traffic outright would be. Really, at this point, till someone will be able to cover net neutrality issues without opening doors for something worse, I can only go with lesser evil and I consider current net exactly that.

>>133378502
> just like the electrical company is required to dig into what you're using your power for
They do, or did you not know they monitor power consumption to check for people growing weed in their houses?
Leave it to a leaf to not understand this.

>>133378439
Because there's a more complete due process option for when it gets tampered with, unlike with private corporations.

>>133378270
Net neutrality removes administrators sitting at PC at ISPs or whatnot who limit and monitor internet for specific traffic. So CIA probably doesn't likes net neutrality, neither do ISPs, since they can't control what you do, so they have to sell you clean line without any specific thousand different deals with hidden disadvantages. Also if something goes wrong they probably have to fix it, not asking you for more money. You should get what you paid for. Nobody pays for internet admins deciding what you are allowed to do.

So many Redditors in this thread. Net Neutrality is a scam.

>http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7835173/

>http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6589032/?part=1

>>133378707
You better stop thinking goy or we will have to shut you down.

>>133378707
It's almost like gookmoot put a big ol' call to action up on the top of every page or something.

File: 1482271850365.png (17KB, 328x325px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 328x325px

>>133378541
>yeah go-i mean guy. Damn them jews!

>>133371865
Dude, dont put the pussy on a pedestal.

>>133378707
It's today that most social media, big youtubers etc exploded with info about it and that's why the sudden spread of warning about the thing.

File: 1471237878681.jpg (40KB, 657x527px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 657x527px

>>133371865
People think oh geez NN is good cause it will prevent my ISP from slowing some websites so they can charge me more later... b-b-but if my ISP strikes a deal with an internet company to provide a better experience for its users, NN won't allow it either.

Let's say an ISP is giving out a 1 year 4chan gold pass if you sign with them, and you also can browse 4chan 10 times faster than other site. This it would be breaking NN rules since it's benefiting one site against other online communities.

NN = COMMUNISM

>>133378799
>So CIA probably doesn't likes net neutrality
Why wouldn't they like something that gives them a direct avenue to control what is transmitted over the internet?
Please, try to think through these assumptions you are making, because they do not adhere to reality.

>>133378897
Must have included a fat check as well. Either that, or it was one of the mods. Also involving a big fat check, of course.

>>133378975
>Let's say an ISP is giving out a 1 year 4chan gold pass if you sign with them, and you also can browse 4chan 10 times faster than other site.
Given the reputation of the site among currently loud political and social circles, where 4chan is considered pariah by every side no matter whom they support, I'd expect the opposite - limit for access to the website for hate speech apologists, nazi homophobes, misogynists, racists and sexists that supposedly we are.

>>133378752
>Really, at this point, till someone will be able to cover net neutrality issues
Go read the FCC ruling from 1995. This is actually a matter that was decided on long ago, it is just the current generation has absolutely no clue towards it.
The FCC ruling in 2015 is quite an affront to their original commitments, which were in line with what you have been saying.
This is one of those games the politicians play to fight for control of things. Unfortunately, that involves convincing the public of whatever they have in mind.

>>133379140
>or it was one of the mods. Also involving a big fat check, of course.
Don't you know, they're doing this FOR FREE!

File: ISP money received by republicans.png (147KB, 783x2069px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 783x2069px

>>133379014
What moronic shit are you talking about? During Trump people voted, namely republicans to monitor your internet and being able to sell your intimate personal info to whoever they wish. With net neutrality CIA will probably still spy, but they can't legally do anything with that data and ISPs can't monitor for your data, which implies they probably don't store your data and can't sell it, at least not legally. In past nobody cared about what you do online, haven't you notice them closing down sites and blocking sites? Seems to me like they control what you do, especially if they control what you even write on Facebook.

File: 1485439354882.jpg (36KB, 657x527px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 657x527px

>>133379346
>It's not free, she said i could touch her penis if i did it

>newfag actually forget they do this every 2 or 3 days
>every time they try to remove net neutrality they fail
>not realizing this fight is actually ISPs vs websites (like Facebook, Google, and 4chan)
>actually, unironically, siding with the ISPs
>not knowing ISPs are waiting for this to pass to rape the internet

Jesus Christ are all of you this new to the internet or what?

>>133379397
I love how you, for no reason, jump to accusing republicans of doing things.
As I said, not a very good shill.

>>133379310
>Go read the FCC ruling from 1995.
Will do, anon. Assuming though that you're right and net neutrality is as bad as it may be, my concern still stands - the current bill doesn't seem to do anything about net neutrality issues, it onyl seems to create others. what security measures newcoming bill incorporates that will prevent its exploitation in ways I've described ITT and possibly others?

>>133379512
They removed net neutrality back in RIAA days when they chased Napster. Do you have any idea how many sites you won't even find since they blocked?

>>133372240
For Yanks.
Fuck em.

>>133379542
I don't assume, that's a fact:
https://www.theverge.com/2017/3/29/15100620/congress-fcc-isp-web-browsing-privacy-fire-sale

>>133379624
>net neutrality is as bad as it may be
It isn't bad, it is simply that the current people championing "net neutrality" are trying to destroy what they think they are defending. That is the ultimate concern.
As for the rest of your question, it is touched on in the 95 ruling. The internet is not as young as people make it out to be, and a lot of these concerns were addressed in the infancy.

>>133374567

ah! Funny american guy...

i'm not really following how exactly this will increase profits for the ISPs. i get that they can throttle websites that are not included in some "internet package" but there are millions and millions of people out there that will only pay for the absolute cheapest and most basic package. this whole thing mostly seems targeted at online video streaming, because that's the real big bandwidth monster at the moment. bandwidth for surfing the web is peanuts compared to online video streaming.

>>133379774
>fact
>news site

File: fae.png (33KB, 300x480px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 300x480px

>>133379835
you

>>133371865
source?

>>133378502

.... and... a fucking leaf!

>>133379827
It increases profits for the googles, facebooks, etc, by not allowing the ISPs to address the concern of how data-for-sale transferred over their lines plays into the Data Market.
It is quite funny, as this type of crony capitalism is the type of thing the reddit-types can't stand, yet it is ok when google does it? When Apple does it?

>>133377502
We already fucking have that, good god man. any service which enters your home at the entry point outside to inside, the responsibility ends for the provider. Its in the fucking agreements that everyone just clicks OK on or throws away.

Ending net neutrality ends internet websites the freedom to ban anyone they want for saying something they didn't fucking like. It prevents Google from shadowbanning accounts for saying they like Hitler, and it ends Twitter from boosting certain hashtags and accounts to be added that they support. It brings accountability to these internet businesses, which is the whole fucking point.

4chan will be fine. It is not pushing fake posts, etc. or selling a product or service, just acting as a message board. The only thing that will need to be done is re-add the satire warning, and change its 4chan pass agreement slightly.

>>133373874
kek, I love wiki vandalism.

>>133380011
>carefully scrubbed of Democrats
as I said, bad shill.

>>133371865
>1 post by this ID
>vague write up
>immediately blaming shills
>attention grabbing photo
Gee, it's almost like you're the shill.

>>133380300
Who says they won't start throttle 4chan some day to eliminate it from competition if there is no net neutrality? That's exactly what they done with p2p, of course they they made excuses it's because of piracy. Not many people know but there was a site called multiply who had music, videos and posts before facebook and youtube and they removed it for copyright material, because it was competition, but they don't remove facebook or youtube, why is that? Because they control that.

>>133380300
>Ending net neutrality ends internet websites the freedom to ban anyone they want for saying something they didn't fucking like. It prevents Google from shadowbanning accounts for saying they like Hitler, and it ends Twitter from boosting certain hashtags and accounts to be added that they support. It brings accountability to these internet businesses, which is the whole fucking point.

Isn't the other way around?
They will vamp it up and do whatever they want with it, namely, crack down on any semblance of anti-Jewish opposition.

>>133380674
>That's exactly what they done with p2p, of course they they made excuses it's because of piracy.
Wait, you think the ISPs are against piracy? They quite literally don't give a fuck unless some (((media organization))) threatens a lawsuit.
And even then, they barely give a fuck.

Unless you live in California. Shit isn't as easy over there.

It's sad to see how many people fell for this bait.

>>133371865

>1 post by this ID

Nice try, (((Brian Roberts)))

File: Ben-Garrison-March-of-Tyranny.jpg (131KB, 600x461px) Image search: [Google]

131KB, 600x461px

>>133380338
Good goy, play their game of good and bad cop, look everything opposite and political party related, that's so easy so you don't have to think or read laws. Maybe Democrats would sell your data too, but they knew Republicans will do so and they scored points for next election. Of course when they are in power they will try to remove your piracy and extract money from ISPs too, you are just missing the opportunity to protect your privacy and future of internet freedom.

File: 6107463.jpg (14KB, 300x256px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 300x256px

>>133379256
>supposedly
What did he mean by this?

>>133380526

Go back to plebbit kike

>>133380889
Why wouldn't ISPs care? You think corporate investment is limited to one company? Could be same owner for CNN, ISP and Hollywood and maybe even for the VPN company you are using. Imagine ISP owning also VPN, you are paying double, ain't you a good goy? But at end of the day they still sell your information and limit your internet, if VPN isn't limitation enough, where you probably need faster internet anyway.

>>133378806
>Net Neutrality is a scam.
>the Redditor meme
Shill #2

>>133377999
missed your argument there
oh, its because you are a 18 year old social "science" major with zero conception of gov/private interactions.

Thanks for trying though.

>>133371865
Net neutrality is a farce. Google and Facebook defacto controls your access tonthe internet through their ubiquity.

>/r/the_donald opposes net neutrality because their daddy Trump's street shitter who learned how to use a toilet opposes it
>net neutrality dies
>all ISPs fuck 4chan in the ass because it's a racist site
>/ptg/ dies and /r/the_donald returns to reddit
Sweet

>>133373423
Shut the fuck up.

>>133377891
>only rich faggots should access the internet

Not surprised you're a fucking leaf

>>133381508

Can't stress this enough, in my humble opinion.

>>133380674
>who is to say
the law is to say. what ifs can go fuck themselves.
we have a lot of laws when it comes to business practice for consumer interaction. If you believe ISPs dont already collect information, you need help. I used to work for Comcast and the data was collected because it had to be collected for DHA/FBI reporting if requested. It needed to be cached. Net neutrality dying will change nothing. It forces anything web-related to comply with business laws and regs. already in effect protecting us now. there are already crackdowns happening on piracy dude, I don't know what you are getting at. That won't be different.

>>133380798
No, as they now have to comply completely according to business law AND government laws - sites that make money/target consumers. its pretty big to deal with as social media would fall under different regulations as websites that outright sell a product. but as of right now, they can do whatever they want to anyone they want without any regulations on it, which are going to eventually end

>>133381597
No you

>>133381508
And how would getting rid of net neutrality help?

>>133381508
>google and facebook control the internet
>somehow you can still access the internet without those two sites
Facebook isn't an ISP and Google Fiber has like 8 cities it operates in.

>>133371865
shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill shill

>>133382337
Google benefits the most from NN.

>>133382643
So.

>>133382105
I never claimed ISPs don't collect information, since it's very obvious they do, now they collect it legally after republicans gave them green light.
>Net neutrality dying
Net neutrality is already dead, now it can only get worse, like: charging money for basic email, getting insult tickets on email.
Everything is different when it's legally forbidden, since then we can close down Comcast if they screw up.

>>133371865
I honestly don't care if the internet is slowed down or ruined, I only use the internet to go on 4chan and I can do that even with a throttled connection.

I hope they destroy the internet because wimpy little nerds need to go outside and get jobs and have white babies. I actually 100% support a nationwide internet throttle, especially if it impacts garbage like Twitter and reddit.

>>133371865
>"Net neutrality" sounds good but is just more laws to regulate and censor the internet via the FCC.

Can you explain more?

I knew something was up when so many Jewish and leftists group went crazy about net neutrality.

>>133381524
Good 4chan is a garbage dump full of idiots getting wrekt by liberals, would love to see this place go.

Are you guys ready for the Cox Imageboard Browser Package or the Comcast Social Network Package?
Net Neutrality issues make the shills easy to spot; only a retard would want ISP's to bottleneck us into using what they want us to use.

>>133383093
https://www.technologyslegaledge.com/2017/03/net-neutrality-in-sweden-pta-decision-suspended/
>My colleague Emil Odling, lead partner for IP and Technology in Stockholm, has written the piece below discussing a decision this week of the Swedish courts which suspends the decision of the Swedish regulator which would have required Telia to stop some practices on the basis that they infringe the net neutrality rules.

Sweden has no net neutrality, which is why they can block your sites at will.

You know what's rightist and Jewish:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweden
>officially the Kingdom of Sweden

So don't pretend you are Socialistic country when you are a monarchy in EU.

>>133376047
We don't have net neutrality now so how aren't they doing this already?

>>133377651
Never go full retard, island Moor.

>>133384037
>We don't have net neutrality now
False

>>133383093
Net Neutrality FAQ:
>1. Who supports NN?
Reddit, (((4chan mod team))), Google, Facebook, Netflix, Amazon, Twitter, Snapchat, AirBnb, Spotify, etc. Notice how all of these groups are leftist.

>2. Will anti-NN legislation "bundle" the internet?
No, this is a commonly repeated Jewish lie like "communism works". If a company "bundles" the internet, another one will not bundle and get all the customers, just as the free market intended.

>3. Are they going to block/restrict/slow down 4chan?
No. They have the technology and legal basis to do this right now, but they aren't doing it. Anti-NN legislation won't change a thing. This is just another Jewish fiction designed to cause panic.

>4. We need to fight for NN or the internet will go into the hands of the evil corporations and Republicans! Keep the internet free and independent!
The internet is already not free. Obama already gave control of the internet to the United Nations in 2016. This is still in effect.

>>133383012
That's is all what ifs. Now that Putin has attacked Ukraine, Russia is going to invade America!
Come on now. See, you missed the whole underhanded part of all of this - its been in effect for awhile now and we see sites actively blocking and barring any discussion they don't like with shadowbanning or outright bans, or Facebook pushing bullshit news stories Its already happened and its ugly. Before 2016 how was the internet?

>>133379794
I will disagree here, it indeed is bad.

It halts progress by forbidding ISPs to offer different kind of internet packages, perhaps some would be more focused towards netflixing, others for productive, etc, at cheaper prices, which would then liberate bandwidth and allow people to buy the internet expert package.

The main problem is competition, or lack of. People need to push governments to allow for competition, to stop being lobbied by corporations into setting free WIFI on government buildings in exchange of exclusive licensing on some areas, etc. No government should have the right to tell people they cannot operate or install their shit, only property owners should have that right.

>>133384292
Google/YouTube tweaking results so that their biggest donor's preferred sites appear first, i don't know if that even falls under net neutrality, that's simply corporate lobbying, where customers of internet have no clear involvement. You would probably have to create net neutrality and also ban lobbying to fix more things.

>>133384640
net neutrality sure, allowed every group to do as they pleased with their sites, but you see, it gave the left complete control since its left-wing faggots who run google/youtube/twitter/facebook. THEY benefit from net neutrality, since they can use their platforms to outright silence the right. this is why this net neutrality is garbage wrapped in a pretty wrapper. before 2016 the internet was just fine

>>133383021
This

Anything that hurts Facebook and google is fine by me. Fuck Netflix and Spotify too.

>>133384282
>Reddit, (((4chan mod team))), Google, Facebook, Netflix, Amazon, Twitter, Snapchat, AirBnb, Spotify, etc.
You could just say "most large Internet companies"
>If a company "bundles" the internet, another one will not bundle and get all the customers, just as the free market intended.
Because major companies have never tweaked the rules and practically legalized oligarchies. Even if they don't sell the packages they're still going to be throttling speeds to smaller and opponent sites.
>They have the technology and legal basis to do this right now
Lol false
>Obama already gave control of the internet to the United Nations in 2016
Obama gave up ICANN which is just a glorified address book; it allows you to access websites from other countries.

>>133384971
Google is just a site, it may be a good or bad site, management can change, their ambitions can change. So what are you saying, that you want to tell Google who to employ? Nah, i just think Americans are retarded for not punishing those sites to stop using them. Or maybe we can legally create a better contract between YouTube uploaders and YouTube staff. So why aren't they asking for better deal? They simply upload and then wonder if YouTube admin scratches its balls and deletes something. Make a deal that protects your videos better, that prevents YouTube to shit you up with featured videos of propaganda.

Fuck ISPs

End their monopolies but until then keep net neutrality

>ISPs are your friend!

These pieces of shit have already pissed on the gold that the government provided them (ultimately what we provided them), in order to improve the internet infrastructure, which they never did.

They still owe us tax payers, yet they continue to want more. Fuck 'em, desu

>>133371865
>>>>/b/738650002
https://archived.moe/b/thread/738650002/
>Error!
>The thread you were looking for does not exist.
WTF

File: nazi.png (20KB, 429x410px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 429x410px

>>133381040
>shifting the goalposts this much

>>133371865
>censor the internet
The government is bound by the chains of the constution.
ISP's have no such limitations and can censor anything they damn well please.

Who really wants the very companies that have corrupted the MSM to have control of internet but telecom shills and retards that think the only choices are corporate control or transgender bathrooms.

>>133371865
You Brockpuppets are really pushing this thing, huh? Consider meeting with your team lead for up-training.

>>133385342
>management can change
you and i know that personnel may change, but politics of a company will stay the same. thats the way of cliches and social circles.
>make a better deal
see, when rules and regulations start being added to something that was already "open" it just becomes a giant shit-show as sides get drawn in the sand. as for google, there are new products being created to be used instead of google, since google's shit has become bloatware. twitter is slowly dying already on the market. people are tired of their bullshit, and this was the doing of giving them the freedom to silence and suppress people as they saw fit. net neutrality did this

File: FB_IMG_1499778094746.jpg (34KB, 1091x600px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 1091x600px

>>133381508
Holy shit its posts like these that make me believe this board might actually be all satire

>>133371865
Yep, this.

Net Neutrality is just a big fight between the telecoms and Netflix and Google. It has nothing to do with an internet user's freedom to visit a web site, and there was nothing in the net neutrality "rule" Trump eliminated about it either.

If you think ISP monopolies don't happen, it happens in third world dumps like mine.

Just look at my flag and laugh.

When you're stuck on one tiny island and you only have 2 ISPs, to which one has to pay the other to use the SAFE cable, you got no choice but to pay exorbitant prices just for shitty internet from 2005.

Now add the distance lag and for someone who used to like playing online games, the experience was terrible.

>>133383021
sites like 4chan get thrown in the fire first you bootlicking shitheel

>>133384282
The internet is not even close to a free market. Try switching ISPs, oh wait you cant because whole areas have only one ISP due to infastructure. Its not as simple as switching as you would switch cereal brands.

If they were to bresk the isp monopolies we would have a different story though. Until then we need NN


Also you argue that rhose are all leftist websites, have you checked whose in charge of ISPs? ((()))

>>133385937
The problem of Google is the same problem of large ISPs, they accumulated so much power that they really don't give a shit if one customer complains or even thousand of them complains and leave them. The customers are increasingly seen as numbers, but at same time those numbers can be exposed and eliminated, it's becoming somewhat out of a Matrix film. That's always so with big companies owned by some guy. That's simply internet capitalism. Best internet would be to have 1000 per site and no more, same with companies IRL, then they care more what customers think. Google is now this super American dream company, they feel like very special.

So can anybody explain to me a likely scenario should the anti- net neutrality crowd get their way?

>>133386693
Now imagine you're living on an island. You can't even move abroad. It's that bad.

>>133371865
Fuck off. Net neutrality is THE MOST IMPORTANT THING FOR THE INTERNET. 4chan and whatever website companies feel like blocking can and will be slowed down to a complete halt of the ISP just so happens to feel like it.
You are a shill kike you and you need to die. Everyone that is anti neutrality is anti free speech, anti free internet and anti small business and a filthy censorship kike.
Kill yourself, OP.

>>133381524
How would it hurt? The big players in this are.complaining not because they care about the freedom of the internet but more their freedom to use users of the internet for profit generators and sources of data.

They are arguing that it will be the direct consumer hurt but more likely the companies using the largest amount of data currently would be surcharged for their usage.

They are pushing into onto their content consumers and data mines to get us feel like we are the losers but realistically the large internet monopolies will see a cut in their profits.

>>133386410
it's a tropical resort island bro deal with it. you got better shit to do than sit online all fucking day

>>133386955
There were no NN laws until 2015. Did you have bundles and packages in 2015? Okay, there's the answer. Fucking nothing will happen if we remove NN.

NN is just a Jewish mind trick to sway the public into supporting corporate welfare for Google, Amazon, Netflix, etc.

>>133386955
I suspect that we wouldn't directly see the meme infographic about the tiered internet service, per se, but we would definitely hear more and more about the ISPs using extortion tactics on various companies and hosting service providers, rendering some of the latter unusable because of subpar speeds.

>>133376920
AND THAT IS WHAT WE GET WITHOUT NET NEUTRALITY
NET NEUTRALITY IS "INTERNET IS UTILITY LIKE WATER OR AIR" AND THE LACKTHEREOF IS "INTERNET IS A SERVICE SUCH AS DIRECTV AND TWC"

Stop fucking meming, this is important.

>>133382508
No but both Google and Facebook are largwr than the largest ISPs and more directly control and regulate your content. than any service provider. It is not in the ISP interest to deny you access to sites you use otherwise consumers will drop the service.

>>133387335
>Did you have bundles and packages before 2015?

Fixed.

>>133385937
>this was the doing of giving them the freedom to silence and suppress people as they saw fit. net neutrality did this
Net Neutrality exists to keep the middleman, ISP's, from meddling in the consumer/provider relationship of other websites.
They can ban you from their space for the same reason I can ban niggers from my store; the US doesn't force you to do business with somebody unless you're infringing on civil rights.

This should literally be a non-issue but there's so much obfuscation that 90% of the people running their mouths don't know shit.

>>133387335
Look up shit from that year and before, about various methods of throttling, datacaps, etc.

And that was the ISPs just testing the waters for what they could get away with, bitch.

>>133387433
Name one site either has denied me access to.

>>133371865
Fuck off you shill. Go suck Trumps cock some more

>>133387335
How do big wig companies make money from NN? Just by not having to bribe the ISPs to not let others compete with them?

>>133387604
They'll never outright block websites, because that would be de facto suppression of speech. But what they will do, and have done in the past, is artificially throttle connections to servers, rendering the sites virtually unusable, unless you have 5 minutes to wait for a 15kb css file to load.

>>133387604
Blocking content works the same on practice.

>>133387173
Isn't there a fairness doctrine component to NN? Like if the internet traffic of Nazi ideas are greater than the traffic or content of Communist ideas, than the government will throttle the poplar idea in favor of the unpopular idea (if it is government approved content). Then the net is neutral, when all government unapproved content is balanced out: I.e. Neutral

>>133387934
what the actual fuck are you talking about

>>133387604
Google is quite literally paid to give searxh results that are more favorable to some sites. Go google something right now and look at the top results.

>>133387882
As stated before, Facebook isn't an ISP and Google Fiber operates 8 cities; there is no way for them to throttle my connection because they don't facilitate it. The only thing they can do is affect what I see and say through their services.

>>133387917
How is that different from stores not selling certain products? Shop somewhere else.

>>133388227
And that denies me access how? Are they forcing me to click those? Is Google the only search engine available?

Reminder that only shills are anti-net neutrality

https://www.theverge.com/2017/5/10/15610744/anti-net-neutrality-fake-comments-identities

>>133387291
>you got better shit to do than sit online all fucking day
I doubt you know that, because there's actually way less things to do here. I don't think you Americans will understand how lacking it is to live on an island unless you tried living on one for years. This place is like a prison you can never leave, unless you're willing to make a lot of extra effort and sacrifice just to get to work in the USA or Europe. I'm really lucky that my family can afford to go on trips abroad every now and then, but for the rest of population, they're miserable sack of shits.

I've been to nearly all the beaches and resorts around the island all my life, and they're all the fucking same. There's just so many lagoons you can swim in before you get completely bored out of your mind. I live maybe around 30 minutes away from the beach by car, and I still wouldn't want to go every week or month.

I seldom see your kind here, but Europeans come here a lot and leave in 2 weeks on average. When the boredom sets in, they can't wait to get back to their country.

Please don't buy into the Island paradise meme. You're in the best country in the world. Enjoy it.

it's pretty simple you retards
net neutrality: you pay the same as other customers to use your internet connection. what you do with your connection is nobody else's business and your ISP can't influence your internet usage with fees and restrictions.

without net neutrality: your ISP can look at what you use your internet connection for, and set restrictions and pricing schemes for different types of internet use.

don't listen to anyone who tries to confound this with other bullshit, they're either clueless or a shill

>>133388437
Sorry, I mistook that you were talking about Facebook.

>>133387739
The big tech companies use the most data per second, which is expensive for your ISP to transfer. Imagine millions of normies streaming Bill Nye's Fag Conversion at once. Under NN, this cost is transferred to you.

Without NN, your ISP could tell Netlix to pay up or be throttled. Or, nothing could change at all. The point is that we don't need more laws and government intervention in a free market.

In the end, it's about removing government regulations and meddling. All these doomsday scenarios are Jewish mind tricks meant to sway the panicked masses.

>>133388707
>don't listen to anyone who tries to confound this with other bullshit, they're either clueless or a shill

shills

>>133388658

>>133388707
You imply ISPs are suddenly gonna care what you personally are doing on the internet and are gonna expend massive resources to track that. You also talk as though setting restrictions and pricing schemes for different types of internet use is a bad thing, As much as it means you can get really expensive access it also opens the door for really cheap access.

You know, I bet if half of you fuckers stopped paying for your useless fucking cable subscription you could upgrade to the business plans for your ISPs and have godlike internet like anyone who matters.

They aren't going to throttle their best customers now are they?

>>133376298
Honestly i live in a rural area, i had only one choice, now i have another better choice, and soon there will be another choice. Three different isps competing over my rural area, to me free markets seem to be working a bit. I used to live in a small town it had atleast 3-4 choices, sounds to me like everyone lives in communist urban areas probably ran by leftists that has hurt free markets, hence why so many people claim to have only one choice.

>>133388707
This would suggest that specifically throttling peoples internet on a per-person basis wouldn't already fall under a book full of discrimination laws which would be much better at handling any individual cases that might come up.

File: 1497972259389.jpg (35KB, 599x563px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 599x563px

>>133371865
>tfw there's literally nothing to look at but the feet but it's ok cause you don't care about anything else in the first place
I'm beyond redemption.

>>133389132
Many rural folks only have one choice because expanding coverage is both expensive and risky. ISP's are hesitant to reinvest in the systems the benefit heavily from and provide us mediocre service at nearly twice the cost of other countries.

All because some faggot at the top needs millions a year. It has nothing to do with left or right horse shit.

>>133388865
>we can tell netflix to pay.

To be 8 again.

>>133387604
try searching 4+4chan on google

>>133389442
Yes, and the government stepping in and regulating what kind of fiber you can lay and how fast your internet needs to be is a GREAT way to encourage competition...

>>133389609
>brings up wiki page
>convenient url inches from the top of the page
Now, try to buy pornography at Walmart.

>>133389245
>This would suggest that specifically throttling peoples internet on a per-person basis

it wouldn't be on a per person basis, it would be based on content type, or perhaps based on site classification, like how website blockers can be set to block entertainment sites or porno sites by looking up the server and matching it to some large database. ISPs wouldn't block porno or entertainment sites listed in the database, but they could reduce connection speed to those sites to say, 10% unless the customer paid more.

If that's confusing to you, just remember that net neutrality treats all data on your connection as the same, regardless of content type, server type or any other classification. it's nobody else's business but the consumer how they use their connection.

File: 1461262274864.jpg (41KB, 688x456px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 688x456px

>>133371865

>>133389609
why is that not listed anyway?

>>133389907
something about the loli board

>>133389442
One of the ISPs "the best in my area" is actually locally grown and servicing the local area, it is not a massive company, it grew out of a town of less than 50,000. Idk about you but it seems a lack of regulation and free market did that.

Simple logic really, i live in a totally red state, cant help but think free markets and less leftism and less regulation had something to do with that.

The area is a farming area, really no tech ect, how the fuck is it companies are taking risks in my area? Because free markets and capitalism are risk. Those who take a risk are more likely to succeed. Your literally talking about companies as if they never take risks.

>>133371865

you are scum shill

i hope what they pay you is enough to sell out humanity over.

you fucking paki

>>133371865
using eye catching irrelevent OP images is a shareblue tactic

>>133375210
This guy knows what's up

>>133389702
>muh gubment sets quality standards for new projects
>this is bad
It's the same shit with building houses; what you build is going to last longer than you, probably. Regulation makes sure it won't deteriorate into a pile of shit some other guy has to clean up.

>>133390018
> it grew out of a town of less than 50,000. Idk about you but it seems a lack of regulation and free market did that.
If it's the only one and there are 50,000 potential customers. They fulfilled a need and are providing a service and are the only option which has much more to do with their success.
It costs more to bring Internet to rural area because the larger expanses of land; 1000 ft of cable in a city might give you 100 new customers but the same in rural areas might get you 5.

>>133388437
No one is forcing you to use a particular ISP either. You could use mobile networks or sattelite if you have a problem with cable.

The power company doesn't charge me more for using the dryer or my oven than my television except for the extra cost of power consumed. ISP works on a basis of unlimited data because the market demands that.

File: 1419003915433.jpg (21KB, 400x386px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 400x386px

>There are unironically people who think net neutrality is a bad thing


yes I'm sure these people aren't shills

>>133376506
Then why do my SoCal Edison rates skyrocket once I've used a certain amount of power?

File: Pm67vIP.jpg (52KB, 1188x1378px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 1188x1378px

>>133378502
>Yeah, just like the electrical company is required to dig into what you're using your power for, and the phone company is required to listen in on your calls.

>He thinks they don't already do this

>>133390607
>The power company doesn't charge me more for using the dryer or my oven than my television except for the extra cost of power consumed.
But if they did, you'd be pissed right?

>>133388865
>Without NN, your ISP could tell Netlix to pay up or be throttled
No, you're paying up or getting throttled. Both Netflix and your ISP are making money while also using your monetary paper trail to track your every interest, purchase, and peer in order to turn you into the perfect goy.

>>133390665
they charge based on quantity used, like any utility. how you use the power is none of the power company's business, you pay them to supply electricity and then you use how you damn well please. this is how net neutrality works, the only thing that affects your cost of service is the amount of data you want to use.

you don't have to pay different rates for electricity to run hot water than you pay for electricity to run lights. same with net neutrality, you pay the same for data to watch youtube as you would for internet phone, or for funny cat pictures.

File: 1496705154722.png (261KB, 1039x559px) Image search: [Google]

261KB, 1039x559px

>>133386369
nice facebook image you smoothbrain fucking nigger

>>133375676
[citation needed]

Fuck off, Verizon/Comcast/etc. shill.

its fucking amazing to me that you people out of all the people on the internet would be for censorship. You should all be fighting tooth and nail for a free and neutral internet. You should all be fighting to keep the big ISPs from blocking access to websites and services that aren't theirs. The simple fact is, net neutrality was designed to keep the internet a NEUTRAL place for ALL. to NOT ALLOW ISPs to BLOCK certain WEBSITES AND SERVICES. How fucking hard is it to understand?

I mean seriously there must be so many PAID SHILLS who go against net netruality. I cant fucking believe this shit. There were also 100k+ comments all stating the same thing against net neutrality that later was found out was done by large ISPs.

BOTTOM LINE IS: If you use 4chan, netflix, reddit, google, hell ANY large website or service, you WILL be charged more OR blocked off from using those websites or services until you pay up! WAKE THE HELL UP.

You 4channers love using your popularity to make changes in the world, MAKE THIS A PRIORITY if you want to keep this place and the internet NEUTRAL AND FREE.

you american guys are fucked, see you in Facebook and Google +

>>133392222
b-but the liberals are for net neutrality. How can we BTFO libtards then???

>>133392404

yeah. it's a sad time when right wingers are willing to give up EVERYTHING just to annoy liberals. It's just mind boggling.

>>133392804
do they even have a policy other than "fuck liberals"?

>>133391525
Of course but what is there to suggest ISPs wull block the sites their users obtain their services to view?

Where is their hard data showing that every ISP will lockstep to do just that? Not that they could but that they would and have plans to do so?

As it stands current net neutrality oicks winners and losers which I disagree with.

>>133392404
What if liberals did propose this law? Haha funny joke, they did.

Deeply retarded cunts. http://huffpost.com/us/entry/897518

>no more burgers shitting up /pol/

hell yes

>>133392982
Loberals were the ones in favour of a Net Neutrality a few years ago, open your eyes, libtards and republicunts are the same shit.

>>133393282
Your link leads to nowhere

>>133393174
>As it stands current net neutrality picks winners and losers which I disagree with.
If every site gets the same priority, how are there winners and losers?
>Of course but what is there to suggest ISPs wull block the sites their users obtain their services to view?
It's not likely to be a full block; just throttling the speed to near unusable levels and essentially selling you a fix in a package or perma-slowing in the case of competition. They've been caught doing it several times pre net neutrality regulation.

>>133393366

You're a fool if you think this only affects the United States. Other countries will follow. And don't forget, all big websites/services are LOCATED IN THE US. Facebook, google, HELL EVEN 4CHAN IS LOCATED IN SAN FRANCISCO.

>>133387934
No. The government doesn't interfere with the traffic. It is illegal for ISPs to try to lift up a less popular idea by making the website faster than a more popular idea. The idea of NN is specifically to stop anyhting of the sort from happening. Net neutrality is a blessing to the internet and everyone who knows the first thing about technology, computers and the internet on a technical level will tell you so. It is only big corporations that want to get rid of NN, because if they do then they can sell out the internet to the highest bidder in the sense that Hillary Clinton could pay Comcast to block every single website that was not pro-democrat or pro-hillary.
That is why NN matters, so that we can decide what we want to do on the internet.
Even Facebook could pay Comcast to throttle all other social media websites, or simply by comcast to make Facebook 10x faster than everything else. Right now, with NN, every website gets just as fast internet speeds as everyone else; it is a free market place where everyone can compete with everyone.

File: 5 years from now.png (377KB, 636x1415px) Image search: [Google]

377KB, 636x1415px

>>133393282
this isn't a football game you dumb spaniard, nobody cares about which political side is doing what.

>>133393174
well, if you want data to suggest this might happen, consider a large internet company (like comacast) who enters into a paid arrangement with a large media distribution company (like time-warner). they charge more for their customers to access competing media services (i.e. if comcast customers want to watch content on hulu, they would have to pay more), and enable full speed connection to the partnered service to all users for free. it doesn't need to be every ISP, just enough that some number of consumers are affected.

so much disinfo on this subject
the kikes are really trying hard to pull the wool over our eyes on this one.

File: 1458226309859.jpg (351KB, 1200x900px) Image search: [Google]

351KB, 1200x900px

Wasn't the problem with competition caused by large companies like comcast skullfucking anybody who wanted to cut into their pie with legal litigation, including companies that tried to lay fiber lines? Isn't this reason we haven't had fiber lines in the majority of our cities because large companies were dickslapping the FCC who had basically no power to stop them? Why the fuck would we think competition would be even remotely possible when larger companies already cockblock everyone with litigation and legal red tape? Why can't we just keep what we have now, it seems to be working alright enough especially given the complicated nature of things.

>>133394722
right?
how can anyone be against net neutrality

>>133394831
>Why the fuck would we think competition would be even remotely possible when larger companies already cockblock everyone with litigation and legal red tape?
Because liberals for once also agree that getting Jewed out of using your internet even harder than it already is happens to be a bad thing.

File: hgdjdfgjghgdg.jpg (29KB, 800x449px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 800x449px

>>133394831
>Why can't we just keep what we have now
Because the ex-Verizon stooge and literal poo in loo put in the chair by Trump is fucking shit up.

>>133371865
>never a problem before net neutrality existed
>implying there will be a problem after net neutrality goes away

>>133376506
>You're a retard (though the girl's cute). Explanation follows.
>One of the biggest effects of net neutrality was making internet service "utility" - it means that your provider cannot differentiate how much you pay depending on how you use his service


That's not how utilities work...

>>133395295
>I never heard of a problem=There were no problems
http://lifehacker.com/what-happens-when-broadband-companies-self-regulate-1794710098

>>133372240
Hey retard (((net neutrality))) will literally censor the internet

>>133392804
ISPs need my money, government doesn't. Therefore I trust ISPs more.

>>133396226
The net is neutral at the moment and you're unironically posting with a Nazi flag on a site known to harbor white supremacist ideals.
Do you feel censored?

>>133386369
this
the guy fucking claims that google and facebook control our internet? as if they have any fucking power to throttle our internet? is he actually retarded or just trying to be satirical

File: drumpf.jpg (117KB, 960x940px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 960x940px

>>133371865
>These posts are by an organized paid group (shareblue). "Net neutrality" sounds good but is just more laws to regulate and censor the internet via the FCC.
Nice arguments fucking retard. Fuck your fat kikish "president" by the way.

welp looks like the day of diabetes is nigh burgers
no more pooinloo insults for pajeets

>>133383457
doomsayers
please explain a viable business plan that starts at 10$ a month and sells packages to include the 100s of services and infinite future services. one grandpa getting a link that he can't visit means one call to the isp tech support line, multiply that by all of the pissed off old people who call in and you can quickly see why packaged internet doesn't work

>>133371865
The internet does need a police force though. There are too many rampant hackers and people who think they are above the law. It needs to be controlled and policed, period.

>>133371865
>These posts are by an organized paid group (shareblue). "Net neutrality" sounds good but is just more laws to regulate and censor the internet via the FCC.


Uh. If you "de-regulate" the internet, just like if you de-regulate TV, or banking, or anything, what exactly do you think is gonna happen, you stupid child? Unlimited freedom for everyone? Or... Maybe rich people will take over?

Jesus christ this site is garbage

File: 1499361566959.png (6KB, 253x199px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 253x199px

>>133371865
Nice try kike

So many shills today, it's unbelievable...

File: 1485948719426.png (14KB, 241x307px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 241x307px

>>133392190
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comcast_Corp._v._FCC
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verizon_Communications_Inc._v._FCC_(2014)
Fuck off.

>>133372435
>This is how you get (((government))) controlled internet.
this is exactly the problem
a few people might get fucked by comcast for them charging slightly higher rates but they can instead just use cell service to get internet if they really need it
why the fuck do people want the FCC (given its history) to have more control over the internet?

>>133398138
>The internet does need a police force though.

Fuck off.

>>133371865
Sauce?

File: b6f7bb4f5807ff6a4d42140efcb10f3a.png (22KB, 1092x266px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 1092x266px

>>133396979
You people are so stupid it's unbelievable.

They are the MOST VISITED WEBSITES. They EXERT CONTROL OVER YOUR ACCESS TO OTHER WEBSITES.

Google controls what results you get according to their fucking COMMERCIAL algorithm. Facebook controls what ads/news/memes you see, according to THEIR advanced AI algorithms. Both record all data about you and feed it into the algos.

That's why he said "defacto", meaning they don't "enforce" anything.

The question is, how fucking stupid do you have to be, in order to not know something like that? That (((private companies))) control everything you see and hear?

Oh, and just a side note.

>Zuckerberg was raised Jewish and had his Bar Mitzvah when he turned 13.[21]

>Page was born March 26, 1973[16] in East Lansing, Michigan.[17] His mother was Jewish,[18] and his grandfather later made aliyah to Israel,[19] although Page does not follow any formal religion.

>Brin was born in Moscow in the Soviet Union, to Russian Jewish parents, Yevgenia and Mikhail Brin

>>133398740
It does.

>>133395362
I don't think you know what he means. You don't pay your homophobe gas providers more to heat your faggot sex dungeon as opposed to your living room

>>133378682
That's not how it works, it will be everywhere. Your tunnel exit would have to have their "deluxe package" as well to bypass their throttle, and at that point why bother with the VPN. In fact it will make VPN services more of a pain in the ass becuase now you have to add in and buy the network package you want attached to your VPN. Are you going to tell me that all VPN companies are going to just have the largest - "it does everything" package? They are in it to make money, and virtualize your machines / cores, and shave costs of machines you aren't or are using too much of, they sure are hell going to gouge you with virtual network packages as well.

>>133380262
The internet essentially operates like an utility at this point.
>Cheap 5c/kwh power to use for your computer microwave
>All other devices are 50c/kwh thought
ISPs have no business deciding how I use my bandwidth, they sell me a 50up/25down access to the internet and that's it.

>>133372240
Then why did Obama push for it?
Its obvious kikery.

>>133398740
if you don't have rules, other people step up to make their own rules. billions of dollars are quite an incentive to do so

>>133372696
why do petrol companies support business models that accept climate change as a fact? because many want a reliable market rather than a feudalistic one where tyrants rule

To be honest it is pretty sketchy that many big sites are spaming this today. Even non european ips are getting these popups.

>>133380300
>Ending net neutrality ends internet websites the freedom to ban anyone they want for saying something they didn't fucking like. It prevents Google from shadowbanning accounts for saying they like Hitler, and it ends Twitter from boosting certain hashtags and accounts to be added that they support. It brings accountability to these internet businesses, which is the whole fucking point.
This is completely unrelated.
Websites banning or censoring content is not related to NN in any way, what NN does is prevent ISPs from throttling traffic or providing "priority" traffic to their own servers or servers they get paid to provide better access to.
Why the fuck are 90% of the burgers in this thread so uninformed.

>>133371865
FUCK OFF PLEBBIT

>>133400507
This happens like every 4 years, I don't know how you don't remember it. Of course websites are going to be against it as they risk being throttled or being made to pay to get access to users.

>>133399910
How many people in this thread are actually opposed this this, and how many are just retards who see "liberals" supporting net neutrality and automatically hate it.

>>133400014
maybe he just thought it was a good idea, or he wanted to maintain high approval ratings of internet nerds and technology buffs.
the larger issue is of course this: if you judge the value of things by whether or not barack obama approved of them, your value judgments are pretty worthless.

>>133398877
>They EXERT CONTROL OVER YOUR ACCESS TO OTHER WEBSITES.
Once again, no
They control what you say and see through their services, nothing more. Do you shit your pants when broadcasting stations only show commercials for companies who have paid them? Do you wail uncontrollably when Walmart only sells one brand of asshole flavored condoms?

If Google and Facebook are limiting your intake of information then you just need to use less Google and Facebook you literal faggot.

>>133371865

Net Neutrality lays the groundwork for internet censorship of "hate speech" and allows the Jewish corporations to legally discriminate against websites such as 4chan

File: 1473459863399.png (407KB, 734x734px) Image search: [Google]

407KB, 734x734px

>>133400829
nu-/pol/
If it's something democrats/liberals support then it must be bad, without even checking the details of what it is.
SJW level thinking
>if the patriarchy supports it we must stop it
Radical centrism has never been so relevant.

>>133400999
where did you get this information? because it's pretty wrong, it has nothing to do with censorship and is more about ISPs charging different rates for different types of internet usage.

net neutrality forces a flat rate for all types of internet data usage and makes sure that you can use the connection you paid for however you like.

>>133400999
>allows the Jewish corporations to legally discriminate against websites such as 4chan
No, it does the opposite.
This has nothing to do with the content of the websites.
The govt. already censors what it deems illegal by taking over domains, taking away servers, DNS, etc.

>>133400000

>>133400738
>This happens like every 4 years
Wait. Pretty sure the last net neutrality alarmist posts on pol were in 2015

>>133393967
>this is supposed to be banned
Why is that a crime?

It feels like more then half of people in this thread don't understand net neutrality.
All it does is ensure that if you pay for 20mbs download speed you are able to get that for every website you access.
Without NN an ISP would be able to censor websites by throttling ones that they don't like. And if they're feeling generous they could charge you more to access your 20mbs for those websites.

Imagine your other utility companies being able to charge you more for the water you use to water your lawn, verses the water you drink. Your electricity company being able to charge you more for the electricity you use to light your house versus the electricity you use to power your computer.

The amount of shills and the retards who believe them makes me want to hang myself.

What exactly is net neutrality, is it good or bad>?

>>133372366
You understand that regulations almost always benefit corporations at the expense of smaller businesses right? Corporations can pay fines (after a lengthy investigation and legal battle which they've already budgeted for) while their smaller competitors tank. The reason the internet is great is because anybody can create a website (for a small fee) and just go. With more regulations comes more fees, more centralized control, and more obstacles.

>>133377651
>FCC will have to uphold 1A.
FCC already enforces "decency" standards on network television.

>>133401804
>>133401784

But i would still encourage you to do research on your own, not just listen to what someone says on /pol/

>>133401784
So net neutrality is good?

>>133401713
it's a crime because because it's anticompetitive and makes monopolistic business practices easier, while providing no benefit whatsoever to the public.

>>133401684
Happened around 2010-2012 too.
Point is everyone seems to have completely forgotten what it was and is uninformed on the issue.

File: anti-nn summary.jpg (147KB, 1280x303px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 1280x303px

>>133371865
Opposition to Net Neutrality in a nutshell. Remember Net Neutrality =/= net neutrality.

>>133401976
network neutrality is good - there's a reason it's the de facto standard for ISPs

Net Neutrality is bad - it's imposing policy and service standards on companies, and will ultimately help solidify the monopolies maintained by companies like Comcast and Mediacom the same way the FCC's 1996 Telecommunications Act did.

>>133402023
i dont even need to read this to know it's bullshit.
to repeat: net neutrality ensures all data is charged at the same rate regardless of what it is used for.

shills like to confuse the issue with this kind of crap but it's actually very simple.

>>133401977
>anti-competitive
You're not banned form competing. There's no thugs waiting to burn down your alternative ISP. Where's the crime?

>no benefit
Because not paying for what you do use is no benefit to anyone?

>>133400954
>They control what you say and see through their services, nothing more.

Except "Their services" are your access to the internet's information and media, you horrible fucking illiterate dweeb.

>Do you shit your pants when broadcasting stations only show commercials for companies who have paid them?

? Are you kidding? You mean the fucking jew-owned media system that broadcasts consumerism messages into my house 24/7? Yes. Commercial media is the worst thing that has ever happened.

>If Google and Facebook are limiting your intake of information then you just need to use less Google and Facebook you literal faggot.

Alright, let me go call 300 million people and instruct each person to independently stop using the standard websites, TV shows, radio stations, etc.

You guys are so pathetic it's hilarious. You're all against capitalism but you don't even know it. Instead you unwittingly shill for very system you're against.