Net neutrality is retarded. You've all be duped by lebbit

Begone poo shill

So the argument against NN is that the internet should be a utility? Pay as you go?

>>133396073
You think commie content getting uploaded and getting downloaded far Faster than content by people with brains or vice versa is good?

>>133396381

It should be a fucking product. It should NOT be controlled by (((government bureaucrats))).

>>133396073
Give me one concrete reason why NN is bad...

>>133396591

>Net neutrality is retarded as mandating that all TVs be the same size and provide exactly the same picture. Can't you faggots see what is wrong with that? Can't you see what sort of product will result from such a mandate?

File: IMG_2771.jpg (40KB, 500x333px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 500x333px

>>133396073
>Doesn't the fact that all these major ISPs are supporting NN set off some red flags?
Bullshit you retarded lolbertarian faggot

>>133396696
That is a piss poor analogy.

NN is "you can watch whatever you want as long as it being transmitted"

Without NN it is "You can only watch the shows the company who sells you the TV wants you to watch."

Net neutrality is basically allowing content to travel as it is.No tinkering with the speed.

>>133396821

AT&T is literally staging a protest to save net neutrality

turn on the fucking news once in a while you dumb larper

>>133396073
We should laws that only affect the top 2% of anything across all the boards and leave the common folk alone. That would really make (((them))) shit.

File: 1458654651.png (109KB, 800x534px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 800x534px

>>133396073

>>133396591

Because large companies that use network infrastructure capitalize the resources.

In some areas things like Netflix take up to 1/3 of the available bandwidth open to an area via an ISP.

If you are a water company then you can charge companies based on the amount used, rather than allow free reign for anyone.

Imagine a company starting to offer 4K and 5K on-demand streaming as a base option. How do you think this affects the bandwidth for the rest of the individuals on a hub when most US network connections run via RG-59 or RG-6 cable lines?

This isn't even simple bandwidth, but also there are massive numbers of connections that stay open with things like streaming services. If you got to a webpage, you d/l it, cache, but then the ports are closed/listening. With heavy data use sites, you have a ton of frames going across the infrastructure at all times for each and every person using it.

File: IMG_3177.png (18KB, 420x420px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 420x420px

>>133396073
>Enjoy paying $50 a month to shitpost on your mongolian chemistry forum. Meanwhile tyrone is watching 2 netflix movies a night on your dollar.
This doesn't even make fucking sense. Why am I going to have to pay to post on here if NN stays in place

NN threads all over the chanz. Wonder why this is being shilled so hard?

Fuck off shchlomo. Gas yourself.
>sage goes in all fields

>>133396476
Yeah people will spend 10$ a month to acces science sites and pubmed instead of youtube, seems very likely

>>133396073
>I can't believe how many people are unironically shilling for shit
we are being raided.

File: IMG_3103.jpg (51KB, 512x512px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 512x512px

>>133397086
Nigger that's because they want to throw some new loopholes in it to fuck over consumers

>>133396591
Why would your landlord charge you extra if you want to go to a pub?

>>133397083

Shut the fuck up japan. You have no idea how the internet works so just stop commenting. You cannot arbitrarily increase internet speeds, there is a physical limit to how much data can be pushed across the country. Some people are going to get throttled no matter what.

Net neutrality means that ISPs have to treat your squinty-eyed grandma who checks yahoo once a day the same as tyrone who streams two movies a night. How does that make any fucking sense.

Do you think it's everybody getting the same speed no matter what they pay?!
If u do , then no.Its just getting the internet speed you are getting on an equal rate no matter what u are using it on.

>>133396073
Your either a troll, a child or a shill.

ISPs are going to fuck us and gouge us when given free reign to decide what costs what over our communication infrastructure.

There is no reason an ISP should charge both the customer AND the content providers. That's literally what our monthly bills are suppose to cover, access to content providers.

ISPs make money hand over fist already, how do you no see that?

File: just maybe this might have something to do with it.png (120KB, 1771x691px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 1771x691px

>>133397228

Remember to report all shill threads such as this one.

>>133397083
This.

>>133397086
AT&T sued to stop it being title II.

AT&T wants to be able to charge website to give faster access, and they want to be able to offer their movie streaming without it counting vs. caps. They only oppose the concept of time based caps

Obama fixed the Internet.

Trump wants to give it to corporations.

Trumpcare failed now he is after your porns.

>>133397207

Netflix users will drive up the cost of the internet. Because ISPs have to treat all the data the same, you will be indirectly subsidizing heavy data users.

>>133397086
You flaggots really are the worst, gook moot wants to clean up the site and holy hell he figured out a way to make the worst part of the site crash and burn with these flags.

>>133397713
Are you a bloody ancom

>>133397195
Companies are allowed to charge customers on the amount of bandwidth they use under NN.

They just can't force you on how you use that bandwidth. It doesn't matter if Netflix or Amazon or PBS is taking up the bandwidth, just that it being used.

>>133396073
I mean 4chan itself is advocating for it "Join the Day of Action for Net Neutrality, or else we may all end up banned from 4chan."

I have no idea wtf ur talking about.

>>133397727
guess what, you aready do.

ISP can charge for bandwidth already, they just can't charge more for accessing netflix then PBS.

>>133396073
Hello India

how have you been

>>133396073
Nice try JIDF.
>>133397727
>NN exists
Lots of people use Netflix, which increases demand, which increases total cost but decreases cost per GB
>NN doesn't exist
Lots of people use Netflix, which increases demand, which increases total cost but decreases cost per GB, but now companies can throttle speeds in order to reduce costs while keeping their fees the same, thus increasing their net profit

>>133396073
>>>133397207
>
>you will be indirectly subsidizing heavy data users.

Heavy or light weight doesn't matter.Equal speed(the one you paid for)on everything.

Why the fuck would that be subsidising? Its totally private.You go to Fucking yahoo mail.You get around 35mbps.You go elsewhere.YOU get the same.
Its not like you pay $15 and some nigger paying around $10 getting same speed.
You get what you wanted.YOU get only what you wanted.

>>133397808
Syndicalist. Mr. River Poo.

>>133397887
This. Without net neutrality Jewcast will be telling you that you can't watch straight white on white porn anymore. All you can watch is BLACKED and trap porn now.

>>133397598
Your post makes no fucking sense. You pay for access to the internet, not content providers. There's nothing anywhere that says you are paying for content, you are simply paying for access.

File: IMG_3119.jpg (63KB, 1024x852px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 1024x852px

>>133397727
Motherfucker, these multi-billion dollar companies have all the bandwidth in the world, the cost of the internet will be fine. What won't be is the price gouging that'll happen if NN is cucked


Listen to this nigga
>>133397887

Is /pol/ being raided by shills big time or are we in the middle of a "Who can be the goodest goyim" contest

>>133397887

This is myopic though. Bandwidth is only one part of the issue. Things like Netflix wreck network infrastructure because you are running TCP frames from server to client and back again at all times. Yes Netflix can be charged for bandwidth use, but what about the extreme use of routing and switching processing due to all of the traffic that is constant and real time.

This isn't like conventional internet in which you have a transient connection, and even games generally have low network overhead (as well as often using less intensive UDP protocols without having to worry about ACK packets).

Systemically, sites like Netflix, YouTube, and even things like Twitch have the ability to damage the experience for an end-user even if he has high up/down, simply because these sites are utilizing an outsized amount of the network infrastructure. It isn't just the size of the bandwidth pipe itself.

>OP will justify this
sorry but if you're not a normie, your life will be completely JUST if net neutrality goes away

only normies who don't leave their facebook bubbles won't be affected

File: 1499883033714.png (2KB, 300x168px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 300x168px

>Apparently Netflix is angling to become Silicon Valley’s king of corporate welfare. We learn from a New York Times economics column advocating for an Internet industrial policy that “Netflix is trying to build a coalition of businesses to make the case for… net neutrality.” And that the “online video powerhouse Netflix started a political action committee to complement a budding lobbying effort in support of the idea that all content must be allowed to travel through the Internet on equal terms” — translation: always at no cost to Netflix.

>But Netflix isn’t in need of public assistance; it is America’s video subscription leader with 23 million subscribers. Netflix has $3.3b in annual revenues, $1.2b in gross profits, $800m in cash, a 34% return on equity, and a market valuation multiple over twice the market’s. And Netflix flexed its exceptional pricing power last year in raising its prices 60% without losing many subscribers.

>Netflix’ net neutrality plan is a shameless Washington plea for corporate welfare via Government price regulation of privately-owned broadband networks so… Netflix’ uniquely voracious 33% usage of the Internet’s traffic peak does not cost Netflix anything! Greedily Netflix is asserting that it somehow has an inalienable “right” to forever gorge on nearly a third of the Internet’s peak capacity without any obligation, responsibility or expectation to either responsibly use, or contribute to the cost of operating or investing in, the Internet infrastructure that they use more than any entity.

>Source: http://www.netcompetition.org/corporate-welfare/netflix-net-neutrality-corporate-welfare-plan-part-10-of-a-series

Comcast and the big ISPs need more control over what I view and how quickly it's delivered. There is more than enough ISP choices in America which is why we have the fastest internet.

File: 1499866459971.jpg (298KB, 1113x688px) Image search: [Google]

298KB, 1113x688px

>>133398722
forgot my meme

>>133398671
>but what about the extreme use of routing and switching processing due to all of the traffic that is constant and real time.
You mean what about the ISP customers using their connection they have been sold?

If an ISP can't provide the service they are selling then they shouldn't be selling that service. Crying when people want to use what they bought isn't a defensible position.

File: when-your-neighbor-tells-you-l-am-going-to-take-12387981 (1).png (110KB, 500x569px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 500x569px

Fuckin ancapistan bullshit "hey guys if we lick the boot that's stepping on us a little harder maybe it'll be a better more fancier boot!"

>>133398671
Then build better networks. It not like the internet providers have not known about this for ten plus years and have spent their capital improvements as such. Youtube been around since 2005.


>>133398774
>being a literal shrill

Netflix is not the user of this network capacity, the people watching netflix are the users.

>>133397580
It's just equal ACCESS.
Without NN:
You wanna watch straight porn.
You pay for 35mbps.
You get 15mbps for it.
You wanna watch Black Pansexual Incest Shit.
You get 70mbps.
With NN:
You pay for 35Mbps:
You wanna stream some movies from your ISP.
You get 35mbps
You wanna stream a movie from some other site other than your ISP.
You still get 35mbps.
Nobody is going to get more speed for less money.


If you still dont get it, You are an eternal Normie.

File: edward-barnays-propaganda.png (55KB, 740x301px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 740x301px

>>133398774

Again, if you ever find yourself fighting alongside Netflix, you do so at your own peril.

Please engage in some introspection. Look at how coordinated the media campaign is.

This whole situation would be a wet dream to Edward Barnays, the pioneer of public relations and propaganda. They've actually convinced the public to support corporate welfare.

>>133399133
Even if you're a NatSoc, you should be against this.
The consistent position for a NatSoc is to nationalize the ISPs.
Either have a free market or have it publicly managed.
None of this dangerous middle ground.

>>133396073
WOW WTF I love comcast and big telecoms now!

>>133399643
>fighting alongside Netflix
And your fighting alongside comcast

>>133399799
Yeah but the Jewish corps aren't gonna do that

File: 1486105427950.jpg (232KB, 979x832px) Image search: [Google]

232KB, 979x832px

>>133396073
>implying micro transactions are a bad thing
>implying cost of ISP won't go down due to distributed costs
>implying this won't make bitcoin skyrocket

I'm okay with this. If you haven't bought a 4chan pass, you're already working for google for free.

File: yourtimenears.jpg (73KB, 600x900px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 600x900px

>>133399133
>more fancier boot
okay sure, maybe ancaps are dumb, but the illiterate will be the first to go on the day of the rope.

File: Political_chart.svg.png (8KB, 220x239px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 220x239px

This is why any ideology that falls under the x-axis is batshit

>>133396073
>ISP should be able to control what websites you browse, what games you play online, what programs you use and everything else you do online

Fuck off you kikery shilling faggot. I don't want the Internet to become ISP's personal playground.

File: IMG_3109.png (15KB, 718x420px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 718x420px

>>133399643
>Be Ancuck
>Lick corporate boot
>Surely the market will become cheaper and faster once NN is gone
>NN gone
>The two or three mega corps jack up their prices
>There is no other competition to challenge them
>JUST

>>133396073
>Enjoy paying $50 a month to shitpost on your mongolian chemistry forum. Meanwhile tyrone is watching 2 netflix movies a night on your dollar.
This is why ISP's provide different tiers of service. If all you're doing is posting on mongolian chemistry forums, you don't buy the $50 high speed package. You buy the $5 shit-tier package. If tyrone wants to watch 2 netflix movies all night, he has to pay more. What a crazy concept!

>>133398940
When will retards realize that the ISP isn't a content creator or provider?

>>133400746
>When will retards realize that the ISP isn't a content creator or provider?

They literally are the provider, what the fuck do you think the P stands for you fucking moron?

>>133400746
when will you realize that doesn't stop ISPs from choosing what to connect you to once net neutrality is gone?

I have a computer science degree so please don't lecture me on technology, you on the other hand don't because you would be in favor of net neutrality if you did

>>133400746
TV:
>pay us additional monies
>some of this monies will go to content producers
ISPs:
>pay us additional money
>well yeah, it won't change anything for them, you'll still have to pay content producers separately LOL

>>133396073
Quick recap
>Net neutrality = internet at the same speed for all (law made in 2005)
>IF net neutrality get taken away = 2 different speed internet (pay to have a better internet)

Basically without net neutrality site have to invest more money on company for optimization of content sending (i don't know the english term, in my language is called instradamento)

>>133400861
Mate you are gonna get retarded if you continue this conversation with this ancuck anymore.

>>133400861
They provide access to the internet not the content on the internet nor what you do on it.

>>133400924
>>133400953
tv (((licensing))) and other common kikery found in broadcasting isn't anything at all like the internet.

>>133399109

>If an ISP can't provide the service they are selling then they shouldn't be selling that service.

ISP are selling bandwidth at the moment. I suppose you are right, they could simply sell network utilization. Would you agree that would be in their right?

>>133399471

>Then build better networks

You have just created an even greater monopoly. Tell me how regional ISPs are going to be able to "update" network infrastructure without simply being subsumed by larger Tier 2/3 providers? The TCP/IP standards are old, and a lot of stuff can't be fixed from a design standpoint without massive changes to infrastructure.

File: amistupid2.jpg (43KB, 413x427px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 413x427px

>mfw there are actually people who want the internet to become more like cable TV, where you have to buy packages to get fast access to certain types of websites.

Want to just browse Facebook? Pay $10/month for the ultracuck social media package! Oh wait, what's that, you also use 4chan? Well why not give us another $20/month for the edgyMcEdgster package. Oh, I guess you also use gmail. That will be another $5/month for the superduper communications package.

File: netflix.jpg (59KB, 625x415px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 625x415px

>>133399471
>Netflix is not the user of this network capacity, the people watching netflix are the users.

That's like saying food producers don't benefit from the existence of food stamps, because food stamps are only distributed to individuals, not to corporations.

Do you even understand what you're saying?

>>133400024
>>133400503
IT'S NOT JUST COMCAST. THERE ARE SMALL INDEPENDENT ISPS.
I know the owner of an independent ISP who went out of business because his tax dollars subsidized his competitor. This shit always happens when the state gets involved.
This WILL make it harder to enter the market. Regulation ALWAYS favors the established corporations because they can eat costs better than the little guys.

>>133401158
They can also control the speed we get while receiving different content.

How to fix this problem? Civil War.

>>133396073
if you're wondering what ISPs will do if net neutrality is repealed, we already know.

2005 - Madison River Communications was blocking VOIP services. The FCC put a stop to it. https://www.cnet.com/news/telco-agrees-to-stop-blocking-voip-calls/

2005 - Comcast was denying access to p2p services without notifying customers.

2007-2009 - AT&T was having Skype and other VOIPs blocked because they didn't like there was competition for their cellphones. http://fortune.com/2009/04/03/group-asks-fcc-to-probe-iphone-skype-restrictions/

2011 - MetroPCS tried to block all streaming except youtube. https://www.wired.com/2011/01/metropcs-net-neutrality-challenge/

2011-2013, AT&T, Sprint, and Verizon were blocking access to Google Wallet because it competed with their bullshit. http://www.businessinsider.com/verizon-blocking-google-wallet-2011-12

2012, Verizon was demanding google block tethering apps on android because it let owners avoid their $20 tethering fee. This was despite guaranteeing they wouldn't do that as part of a winning bid on an airwaves auction. https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-tech/post/fcc-fines-verizon-125m-for-blocking-tethering-apps/2012/07/31/gJQAXjRLNX_blog.html

2012, AT&T - tried to block access to FaceTime unless customers paid more money. https://www.freepress.net/press-release/99480/att-blocking-iphones-facetime-app-would-harm-consumers-and-break-net-neutrality

2013, Verizon literally stated that the only thing stopping them from favoring some content providers over other providers were the net neutrality rules in place. https://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/2013/09/18/verizons-plan-break-internet

>>133401158
That's the point, it's not the same and we shouldn't allow this bullshit.

>>133402033
Checked. Archive the clickbaiters.

>https://wired com/2011/01/metropcs-net-neutrality-challenge
https://archive.is/LwLMM
>http://businessinsider com/verizon-blocking-google-wallet-2011-12
https://archive.is/YlqZs
>https://washingtonpost com/blogs/post-tech/post/fcc-fines-verizon-125m-for-blocking-tethering-apps/2012/07/31/gJQAXjRLNX_blog.html
https://archive.is/MzqNt

>>133396073
How would 4 chan work without net neutrality?

>shill thread.

>>133401252
ISP should sell bandwidth, nothing more.

>>133400987
No that is not correct. Sorry for my shitty italian.

NN = Si paga l'importo impostato per una determinata quantità di larghezza di banda

no NN =
Paghi di più per alcuni siti web, poi altri siti

>>133401529
No, Netflix is responsible for paying ISPs for faster access to their website. Right now they pay the same to host as someone like 4chan. Basically we're all subsidizing their business and they are raking in way more profits than they should because they don't actually have to pay for the costs of doing business.

/pol/ would cut its nose to spite its face in order to keep being contrarian.

>>133402120
> Netflix is responsible for paying ISPs for faster access to their website. Right now they pay the same to host as someone like 4chan
You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

>>133402090

>ISP should sell bandwidth, nothing more.

Why? Why are they not allowed to sell services that they choose to as a company?

>The year is 2028
>Cable TV extinct.
>3 ISPs in the entire world.
>The smaller one Releases relatively better offers to get new customers.
>As TV is also running entirely on internet, other companies make the connection time out whenever somebody goes to their site to see their ad.
>The smaller one dies out of competition.
>2 ISPs.
>They divide the internet.
>One is the JWW
The other is WJW.
>JUST
U
S
T


One starts

File: IMG_2743.jpg (27KB, 200x318px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 200x318px

>>133401494
>THERE ARE SMALL INDEPENDENT ISPS.
Motherfucker 89% of Americans only have access to one or two ISPs. This is not a market you can enter regardless. Any new ISP that would gain traction would just get bought and incorporated into the Borg that is broadband. When will you retards learn that competition doesn't spring up out of nowhere just because you rolled back regulations

File: pigeon.png (88KB, 230x195px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 230x195px

>>133396073
>Doesn't the fact that all these major ISPs are supporting NN set off some red flags?
WRONG BITCH
they're the ones trying to repeal it

>>133402120
This. Internet corporations are not paying their share of bandwidth thats it. Corporate shills are latching onto the whole net neutrality rhetoric to scare monger people into defending them.

>>133402587
Hope the Supreme Court does something.

>>133401494
No you fucking idiot.

ISP sell access to the internet. They can sell it by speed, or overall access. But they can't do something like "We will not let you do VOIP since that competes with our other business.

This isn't some sort of tax subsidy, so your other comment is not even related to NN.

>>133401252
How can smaller car companies survive dealing with the big three, Honda, Toyota, and VW?

You make a great product that people love or you go away. If you can't scale up you have to provide better service.

Also, since in many areas there is one provider, NN is treating them like a utility, which is what they fucking are.

>>133402346
Because the internet is too important to be seen as nothing more than a business opportunity for large corporations. What you're proposing is akin to privatizing the country's fresh water supplies. Fucking retarded loblertarians prove that they have no common sense once again.

>>133396073
>wanting to pay netflix rates for posting on imageboards
You can always tell who the shills are, they use the same phrases all the time

>>133402033
And don't forget in 2009 Verizon was inflating people's bills if they pressed the wrong button on their phones
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2009/11/12/technology/personaltech/12pogue-email.html?_r=2&8cir&emc=cira1&referer=

>>133403050
>unarchived shill
https://archive.is/7Ilr8

>>133402346
Why not:
>ISPs sell "bandwidths"
>ISPs also sell their services/content separately
Most ISPs don't have anything to do with majority of content available on the internet.

>>133402310
Where am I wrong?

POO IN LOO AJIT

So is the answer to this more competition? It seems like Net Neutrality is a massive consumer issue in America from what I understand.

In the UK if a company tried this they'd get fucked over, it'd be financial suicide.

>>133403108
>Most ISPs don't have anything to do with majority of content available on the internet.
Wrong, Comcast, AT&T, Time Warner, and other ISP are active in developing content on the internet.

>>133396591
you won't be able to post here soon

Honestly I just despair of our entire era.

Even in this bastion of free thinking everyone is in lockstep with the rest of the indoctrinated masses. I've never seen anything shilled so hard from both sides.

Obviously since we've NEVER had truly free markets, when things aren't working the answer is another even less free market.

Just another clarification: you can have one company with 100% market share and it's not necessarily a monopoly because a competitor can still enter it.

>>133402033
Oh are we citing Wired and Washington Post now?

>>133402840
>nothing more than a business opportunity for large corporations
You sir are an anti-capitalist.

>>133403141
You are right

>https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-344614A1.pdf

Read this fags. FCC is going to usher in a another economic boom. Quit sucking jew tubes and neflix teat on your free starbucks WiFi. Spending money isnt evil its called an economy and we need to bring it back.

>>133402033
>>133403050

OP BTFO

>>133403141
Netflix pays a metric asston of money to stream content. ISP's don't host anything. All they do is direct traffic.

File: IMG_3220.gif (1MB, 200x150px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 200x150px

>>133403141
Pic related

You're the kid, this thread is the wrestler

>>133403502
With NN I will be able to post here. Do you have a hard time reading?

I am asking why NN is bad, not that why removing NN is bad.

File: 1496159388609.gif (999KB, 360x449px) Image search: [Google]

999KB, 360x449px

Frankly, I feel like the internet is one of the very few things the Gov't should regulate. It's too important to leave to private corporations. I'm torn. The founders could have never imagined anything like the internet.

I have never seen someone so irrevocably BTFO, ancucks are such fucking embarrassments.

>>133403536
the most basic kind of subversion
>convince a rebellious group that some controlled opposition Zionist is /their guy/
>they're so starved for good news they now blindly support everything he does

>>133396073
KYS corporate shill

>Licking the boot of the Jewish owned telecom companies

Read this
>>133402033

>>133403608
sauce
>>133403675
NOT

>>133403814
Either have a totally free market (what Ancaps want) or nationalize the ISPs (what NatSocs want).

The middle ground combines the worst of both.

>>133403814
Treat ISP like utlities.

They get to set rates that give them a defined profit and allow them to do capital investements.

everyone else gets to use the internet to make money.

Just like it doesn't matter if I am using my electricity for a dishwasher or washing machine, it doesn't matter if I am using Netflix or Hulu.

File: IMG_3221.gif (2MB, 276x244px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 276x244px

>>133403536
>Obviously since we've NEVER had truly free markets
Lmao "it wasn't REAL Socialism" 2.0

Pic related you're the little bitch and we're the big nigga

Holy shit, I can't believe /pol/ is this retarded that they genuinely don't understand the importance of net neutrality.

You are literally retarded, leddit normies and contrarian braindeads.

>>133396073
>Enjoy paying $50 a month to shitpost on your mongolian chemistry forum.
Yes, that's where you are heading without net neutrality you retard of retards.

>don't thread on me
Are you retarded? They are controlling and selling you data right now. Have you not read any single Wikileaks or laws or had any sites whatsoever? That's what's happening now.

Only a total ancap would argue against net neutrality, internet more or less fits the definition of a natural monopoly because the societal benefit of everyone being able to communicate freely is staggering.

>>133404126
the Utility model proves that otherwise.

File: happy merchant shekels.jpg (155KB, 960x686px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 960x686px

Wow great research you've done with this thread creation CNN
Really made me think

>>133396073
Ancaps proving time and time again how retarded they really are.

>>133396583
>yeees goy
>everything should be a product, commodify EVERYTHING

>>133396073
So when is this being voted on or whatever? Or is everyone being a sensationalist retard again?

File: 1499440192373.jpg (995KB, 1599x1165px) Image search: [Google]

995KB, 1599x1165px

>>133404184
this anon gets it

>>133404126
This. Same goes for healthcare. Either single payer that shit or go full free market.

>>133404095
>sauce
My source is the fact that I'm a web developer and I know how this stuff works. You're completely clueless.

>>133399643
yea ISPs should absolutely be nationalized
its fucking disgusting how much moeny these kikes are milking off us even though all the infrastructure is already built and it requires very little maintenance

File: IMG_3114.png (15KB, 420x420px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 420x420px

>>133404095
That's right, take that retard flag off you little bitch. You've been BTFO pretty bad

>>133403814
Yes. I think the same way with banks.
>>133404126
Exactly. Every 4 to 8 years we will be doing this dance between government control and private profits. Lets pick one already.

>>133396073
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.

>5. NN keeps us safe from evil corporations!
NN laws didn't go into effect until 2015 and things were fine before then. There were no bundles or packages, which is just a fictional threat invented by the Jews to control the panicked masses.

I still don't feel like charging users for certain websites/services on the Net is ok.
>>133403536
>Just another clarification: you can have one company with 100% market share and it's not necessarily a monopoly because a competitor can still enter it.
Not when entering the market requires milions and isn't guaranteed success, unless you provide service for loss to undercut the competitors (and so require more money).
>>133403485
Well, I'm not oriented in those matters. What are they doing?

>>133404553
So you have nothing, gtfo.

>>133404594
We have IDs frogposter. You have to go back.

>>133403536
What if that company with 100% market shares is in cahoots with gubbermint that does it bests to raise entry barriers as high as possible?

File: 1497550123332.png (14KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 1600x1200px

>>133404676

>>133404676
What about this, then? >>133402033

>>133404314
I'm not an ancap but kill yourself you retard.

Ok let's say NN stays, you guys really just want to keep internet as is? so how long do you imagine we go on like this with Facebook, Reddit and whatever other site that has monopolized their field of content. I say fuck NN and lets blow up internet as it is now, something new and exciting will come of it.

>>133404842
>So you have nothing, gtfo.
You're the one who claimed that ISP's pay for Netflix's streaming costs. You prove it. That's the dumbest shit I've read all day you dumb fucking nigger.

>>133402033
Don't forget about the multiple lawsuits that were caused by slowing down traffic to Netflix so they could promote their own video streaming services. Like every American ISP did this.

>>133404888
Then it's a definitely a monopoly. Ancaps hate government because it does exactly this. What's important is that a corporation be threatened by potential future competition.

A corporation can be threatened by competition from totally outside its sector as well. Airlines are threatened by Skype for instance. Donut companies are threatened by KFC. etc.

>>133405158
No dumb dumb, we are paying for it. Our costs for subbing to an ISP would go down as you would only be paying for what YOU use not collectively covering everyone on the network.

Why do you think large websites are pushing this? So they can keep their costs down at OUR expense. You might have to pay a little more for netflix.

its a wonder people are not understanding net nuerality. think of it this way. you pay your ISP and the other guy pays his ISP. its that simple.
if you don't have the bandwidth its for one of two reasons, one you don't have enough bandwidth, or two the other guy doesn't have enough bandwidth.

why do people not understand this?

also our internet and tv companies are such a joke it hurts, ask any europoor about their internet speeds and you'll be amazed they get roughly a dollar per mega byte a second. not this mega bit BS we get in the US.

File: net neutrality.jpg (2MB, 2607x2861px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2607x2861px

Redpill yourself goyim

>>133404676
>fight NN just to be contrarian to the left

If they said they fight for the right to breath, would you also go against it? "Look how all those evil leftist say breathing is a good thing, it's obviously something we need to ban"

>No, this is a commonly repeated Jewish lie
Bullshit, the jews are the ones who run this anti NN bullshit. You are the fucking Jew. You try to Jew people out of their Internet and force them to pay extra fees just to browse the websites they want because you are a greedy, money hungering piece of shit and websites like 4chan that go against your kikery are just shut down by default.

Kill yourself you dumb kike shilling contrarian piece of shit.

>>133405440
The problem is that removing NN is removing anti-monopoly regulations without removing main cause of monopolies.

>>133396583
>>133396073

Fucking retard, the internet was built with government right-of-ways and tax credits.

File: 1499389946037.png (1MB, 1800x1200px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1800x1200px

>>133396073

File: 1499892986255.png (251KB, 720x908px) Image search: [Google]

251KB, 720x908px

>>133405517
Well, I guess that settles it! I love comcast no-

oh wait...

>>133405451
>No dumb dumb, we are paying for it.
No we aren't you giant fucking dildo. Netflix pays tens of thousands of dollars per month to stream their content. All the ISP does is direct the content from Netflix's servers to their customers. This costs virtually nothing.

>Why do you think large websites are pushing this?
So they can kike us out of even more of our hard earned money. See: >>133401316

>>133397195
Consumers paid for that bandwidth, you stupid cocksmoker.

>>133396073
try b21

>>133405587
I'm aware that it's imperfect, which is why I grudgingly wrote this >>133404126

>>133405451
DING DING DING

Just like healthcare. Fucking Obama man subsiding the white man for the poor since 2008. Basically this prick takes free market business and subsidized it tricking people into thinking it was sustainable. GOD

I just do not see the internet going the way all the pro NN propaganda says it will. The moment a major carrier starts to do it, it'll be huge news, their stocks will slip, and they'll back off

>>133405746
>Netflix pays tens of thousands of dollars per month to stream their content
That's literally nothing. What is your internet capped at and what is your gb/usd? You're getting a raw deal leaf.

>>133397727
And do you think the net companies will pass the savings on to us if we don't stream Netflix? Yeah no.

>>133396073

>getting rid of net neutrality will promote mote competition

Oh my sweet Summer child. Not only will it fail to do that between ISPs but it means consumers will be discouraged from visiting small businesses on the internet as they will be outside cheap internet packages while behemouths like Amazon will be included in the cheap packages.

Say it with me. Anti-net nutrality is pro corporate cronyism.

>>133396073
>Choosing the ancap flag.
We all know who you are Shlomo.

>>133396583
you're so fucking stupid I'm actually surprised you can breathe

>>133405969
Yeah all that extra money they're going to gouge will surely upset their shareholders.

>>133405969
except verizion and comcast will just do it both at the same time in slightly different ways to further promote their confusopoly where they compete on a bunch of dumb bullshit instead of price

File: comcast.png (28KB, 621x392px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 621x392px

>>133405969
yeah, Comcast's share price and market capitalization has really been hit after all their attempts at throttling over the years. idiot.

>>133404183
>Yes, that's where you are heading without net neutrality you retard of retards.
>net neutrality enacted 2015

Yeah before net neutrality the evil corporations were charging us innocent ledditors $5 subscription to upboat

>>133396696
Whoever is paying you, it's too much if that's the best analogy you can come up with.

File: kids.png (401KB, 742x563px) Image search: [Google]

401KB, 742x563px

>>133396821
>jewbook and other jew companies supporting net neutrality
>Jew owned companies are against net neutrality

>>133406027
Holy shit an actual argument worth addressing. This is a legitimate concern. If the savings aren't passed on to the customer via lower ISP costs to the consumer then yes, the whole thing is bad.

>>133406075
ancap = free market ya dingus

>>133396073
Its a bunch of faggots with no idea what a cdn, transperent proxy / cache, traffic priorities are shilling for corporates and current year man

>>133405547
You do not have a right to breathe.

>>133405969
>>133406162

This really summarizes the anti-net-neutrality posters. Just pure unadulterated stupid.

it doesn't matter. the second NN passes, everyone who cares about their rights are going off grind and are going to follow the web 3.0 plan. there is absolutely no reason to pay more for less, when we can get everything for free anyways.

normies are going to buy it because they're stupid as fuck, but the end of NN means the rise of the dark web.

>>133406299
Yeah hheehhhehe the free market is good for the goyi- i mean free world. End all borders!

>>133406206
>Websites are pro NN
>ISPs are against it

HMMM SURELY THIS IS TO DO WITH JUDAISM AND NOT COMPETING FINANCIAL INTERESTS

>>133405517 >>133405741
>tfw you have to choose between a jew and a jew and you run out of gas
>>133405703
what the fuck

>>133406391
THIS

>>133396073

>Doesn't the fact that all these normie leftie sites are gunning for net neutrality AT LEAST make you question NN just a little bit?

Just because something upsets liberals, doesn't necessarily make it good. Just because liberals like something, doesn't necessarily mean it's bad.

>>133406494
This is simple though. If access to websites isn't paywalled, more revenue for websites. If websites are paywalled, more revenue for ISPs.

>>133404184
>the societal benefit of everyone being able to communicate freely is staggering.
then the ancaps are light years ahead of you. they have invented something called namecoin, which acts as an unsiezable DNS. this net neutrality regulation is not going to be optional and it will be written by the exact kikes who want it so badly

>>133406391
>the end of NN means the rise of the dark web.

Honestly this should be all the reason you would ever need to end NN.

>>133406566
This. That's why national socialism is the third way.

File: 1498388736795.jpg (142KB, 682x768px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 682x768px

>>133406633
i don't think this picture has ever been more appropriate

also czeched

>>133406566
It's not even liberals, it's all websites including 4chan who are pro NN. This is nothing to do with left vs right, it's competing financial interests

File: 1499276157138.jpg (101KB, 1046x496px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 1046x496px

>>133405547
>force them to pay extra fees
have you ever heard of something called taxes

>>133398606
Not sure, there does seem to be an influx of mega retarded posters recently, even more so than the kekistan kids.

File: op2.jpg (60KB, 680x471px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 680x471px

>>133406641
>my no-name shitcoin is going to change the world! pls invest now
>>>/biz/

>>133396073
Lefties have always been pro free internet unlike conservacucks who would have shut down 4chan and/or things like pirate sites long ago if they could.

File: jewblind.png (386KB, 899x899px) Image search: [Google]

386KB, 899x899px

There's a pretty easy answer to this. Do Jew corporations support NN? Facebook? Google? Netflix? ISP's? If no, it's a good thing. If yes, it's a bad thing.

the day won't come soon enough when we stop buying into the internet companies.
we need to start another zombie apocalypse network that as long as you have over laping wifi signals you can transmit to anyone on the network.

>>133406955
You leave my shitcoins out this you cocksucker!

>>133406981
Leftist never stopped whining about shutting down 4chan. Fuck off you moron. Take the anti-NN jews in this thread with you.

>>133406162
>>133406373
>>133406162
>all their attempts at throttling over the years.
the attempts! how could I hasve forgotten about the attempts! so many of them, I cat even name one theres just been so many of them

>>133406641
Blockstack looks promising too.

Laissez faire net neutrality will be better than any law.

>Doesn't the fact that all these normie leftie sites are gunning for net neutrality AT LEAST make you question NN just a little bit?
>leftists breathe air
>it must be bad then

File: 1499467062532.jpg (37KB, 680x539px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 680x539px

>>133406981
>4chan is a hotbed for people on the right and their ideas and free speech
>leftist regularly shut down free speech

I'm going to skin you alive mother fucker!

File: 1442463674178.jpg (60KB, 401x482px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 401x482px

>>133407209
>I cat even name one theres just been so many of them
see >>133402033

and then kys

>>133407174
lol no. 4chan is a pure filthy degeneracy for christfags and conservacucks.

Drumpf is shutting down the internet, we need to stop him.

>Net neutrality is retarded. You've all be duped by lebbit propaganda
the_donald opposes net neutrality, you fucking redditor piece of shit.

File: CommunismStrikesBack.jpg (23KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 300x300px

>>133396073
I agree, any form of service communism is a direct attack to low income families of our great nations. This is an attempt to control what it should not be controlled.

The only thing you can compare NN is to big brother from 1984. Also you should say Nu-Nazis.

>>133407076
Jews are both for and against NN. Whatever happens, they win.

>>133404136
This is the only sane position

>>133406955
namecoin is not intended to have value
you spend them on the creation of your domain
this domain is now untouchable at the DNS level, which used to be a central point of failure
I just figured that since all these people are internet experts like you they would apprecite something that enforces neutrality without needing taxes or force

>>133396073
No matter which side wins; we lose. Net Neutrality loses, internet is likely to be piecemealed by ISPs. Net Neutrality wins, internet is likely to be piecemealed by censoring liberals.

http://www.strawpoll.me/13420194

RISE UP /POL/

DESTROY THE DRUMPF MENACE AND TAKE DOWN /PTG/

>>133396073
Lol shills like yourself will pay a big portion of the bill

>>133406789 >>133406633
It's like a choice between paying much to TV providers and little to content producers vs paying little to TV providers and more to content producers.
The difference is that you most likely can choose content you want to watch (and content makers to support), but you're less likely to choose provider you want to support (like some areas have only 1 ISP).
...Choose your Jew.

>>133407363
I see comcast on there a whopping one time, 12 years ago
so now the person who said attempts is proven a liar
additionally, hoppe is not a jew. you lose

>>133396696
Shill be gone. I can see you are not from around here.

>>133397086
>b8 this gr8

Fuck you, you stupid nigger, show your actual country so I can shit on your autistic ass.

>>133396073
Shut the fuck up.
NN is in the interest of the American Citizen, go suck comcast's and Verizons dick you fucking shill

>>133399799
>rewind to 2009
>NN didn't exist
>everything was fucking fine the whole time

ITS GOING TO BE OKAY

>>133407469
How do you sleep at night, Liar?

>>133396073

I agree this site's been more than crazy, but being asked to have to give money to access it will kill this website.

>>133400538
/thread
PAY WHAT YOU USE!

>>133396476
r-rare?

All happening under Blompf's watch.

>>133396073
You fucking hook nosed kike shill kill yourself. The net is as neutral as its likely to be right now. The way it is now is fine so don't fuck with it. If you are against this you are an actual subhuman.

File: esworking.jpg (293KB, 1036x772px) Image search: [Google]

293KB, 1036x772px

I voiced my opinion here

>>133407732

pls respond

>>133396073
Before we had net neutrality by law here ISPs used to pull shadow kikery all the time.

>>133396073
I posted this in the other thread, and I'm going to post it here.

I'm going to be as unbiased as possible, whether you believe me or not is up to you

The Issue:

ISP Companies want to charge services extra metered data for pushing extra amounts of information across their networks. This has never happened before in the internet's history, and don't believe anyone who has said so. Speed has become such an issue that every last bit of it is saturated, and demand is only going up. ISPs are trying to leverage this to get more money out of services by using a medium which they served (The internet) in which they were only the gatekeepers at one time. Now they're trying to be the gatekeepers, service providers, and meter content on the side.

FOR Net Neutrality:
-The internet is faster than ever
-Which means services require every bit of speed in order to function
-Even a miniscule blip in service can mean that something is unusable, IE: Netflix
Therefore:
-When Companies try to charge these services per megabyte served, that doesn't go over so well when these services are pushing multiple gigabytes across their networks
And
-Customers get double screwed because instead of being able to choose between services that they can use on the internet, the only true unmetered service is going to be their ISPs offering (IE: Comcast cable, AT&T U-verse, etc). Everything else will either come with an addition usage fee or extra transfer fees for the service provider. Either ways someone is paying extra to deliver information from that service you might use to you on the basis that it's a very popular service.

AGAINST:

-The FCC is a terrible company who has rarely ever done anything right
-Classifying ISPs as Title 2 serves the same purpose anyway
-This opens the door to the question on if the government is the true gatekeeper of the internet
-The FCC's approach is more of a sledgehammer approach than a surgical approach

>Cont.

>>133396073
>the big corps are trying to enslave us
>yeah letting the government to give big corps the power to control our access to open information is going to work great
I thought you lollertarians would like gov and big corps to bite each others to death rather than let them work together to jew you.

>>133396073
Hiro and the mods advocating for net neutrality is good enough reason to oppose it.

>>133408057
Please explain, because all of what I've read about NN is all about giving more control to the government over the internet.

File: 1438741235_1438740344028.png (214KB, 472x357px) Image search: [Google]

214KB, 472x357px

>>133408366
No matter how you look at it, you're going to get screwed either way. If it doesn't pass, you better believe we're going to see a cable-TV type internet within the next few years. I hope you like paying that extra 4chan pack that includes 200 memes (but only 200 memes) per month.

OR, alternatively, we're going to see the government regulate the internet further and further until we're like Britain. Why? Because giving control of the internet in America to the FCC is essentially asking them to do so. I hope you got your internet drivers license, citizen. We want to know if you've posted any racist Pepes as of late.

So the question you, the /pol/ user/ should be asking is this: Which entity do you think would be easier to evade and subvert when it comes time to make the adjustments needed to keep living your e-life in peace? Do you think the government would be as surgical at screwing you as multi-billion dollar corporations? Or do you think the corporations would be busy fumbling over themselves to be as effective as a singular regulatory body which has its own police force?

Choice is up to you. Either ways, be prepared to learn how i2p and tor works over the next few years.

>>133408558
Fuck off to reddit if you hate it here so much

>>133406391
>>133406645
So how will this non-ISP web work?

>>133408551
No doubt libshits would put pressure on ISPs to block "extremist" websites.

>>133408163
Rare what?

>>133408639
yes, but it is about giving the government the power to supervise ISPs, making sure they followed NN protocal, and taking punitive actions should they not.

y'all must be Dumb to want either nationalised web or zero government regulations for ISPs

>>133396073
>Doesn't the fact that all these normie leftie sites are gunning for net neutrality AT LEAST make you question NN just a little bit?
LITERALLY EVERYONE except a handful of the largest ISP (ie. Comcast & Verizon) are pushing for net neutrality. Literally the only thing at stake here is the creation of a new rent.

>Can't you see that banning a tiered internet basically means that the only economic dimension left that ISPs can legally compete against eachother is SIZE? Doesn't the fact that all these major ISPs are supporting NN set off some red flags?

This is simply false. You've got it backwards. This whole thing is just a regulatory capture, with a 'former' Comcast executive now installed to the top post behind the attempted repeal.

>Net neutrality is retarded as mandating that all TVs be the same size and provide exactly the same picture.

Oh, ok, you're a shill. Kill yourself, nigger.

>>133408769
>be prepared to learn how i2p and tor works over the next few years.

Good thing that these can easily be shut down too if anti NN passes. When only ISP approved IPs will be provided you can say goodbye to tor, i2p, VPNs and anything else you think can save you.

>>133396591
its not
do you love tv shows of the old?
do you hate youtube?
tv shows will make a comeback and and youtbe will be down in the ground for good if NN is abolished

why? because tv companies will pay isps good money to make sure the internet is nothing but cable tv

>>133409063
common core's strict dichotomy had doomed us

>>133396073
imagine being this cucked

>>133404800
>Well, I'm not oriented in those matters. What are they doing?
The main thing right now is Movie/TV show streaming and VOIP.

The main thing is Netflix/Amazon/Hulu are raking in the dollars, and the ISP want to slow down Netflix and prime and then offer their service as faster, or go to netflix and say " Give us 1 billion dollars or we will slow you down"

>>133408790
The point I was making is if something like Tor became the norm then the internet would be even better because you no longer get noticed at all for using it and the internet becomes a freer place, or at least a more wild west kind of place.

>>133401252
To expand on this, a Dutch company called Reggefibre was specialised in glass fibre connections and was building a nice new network that beat the established providers.
When KPN snagged them up for a reasonable amount of money, they stopped expanding the glass fibre network.

Even if a tiny startup gets going, the big boys will swallow it up like Moby Dick and end the story prematurely.

Great Molyneux video on Net Neutrality. It's a cancer that will kill the internet should we keep it around.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Z_nBhfpmk4

500kbps is literally fine by me. You fucks with your 4k streaming and online gaming can suck dick. Let NN fall.

>>133408163
Not even close, newfag.

>>133408900
What? Damn I feel like an idiot now, is the first time I see it was going to be used to control the ISP so they don't become like the E3, that makes more sense, than a direct attempt of control of the internet freedoms of speech. I was wrong, god damn.

>>133409486
you thought it would be... tor network can be easily poisoned or sniffed by infiltrating the network junctions. They might not know what you are sending, but they still know whos and whens.

File: 9f9.jpg (28KB, 613x533px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 613x533px

>>133402835
>Also, since in many areas there is one provider, NN is treating them like a utility, which is what they fucking are.

And the only reason there is one, is because of over regulation.

>>133409181
They cant actually do that because "ip" as a concept isn't referencing a machine, its referencing an address, which can be spoofed

File: 1493399538160.jpg (16KB, 232x260px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 232x260px

>>133409524
>Molyneux
I am not clicking that shit you nigger

Begone poo shill
Shoo, shoo

>>133409692
Beats the ever living shit out of clear net.

>>133408360
Examples?
>>133408878
Rare fl- actually LURK MOAR
>>133409398
And you're defending them? This isn't good business practice. They don't offer a better product, they bring the competitors to their level.

Comcast ordered their shills here actually believing they would raise a modicum of support for their pathetic cause on a timorese water puppet forum, sad! Off yourselves

>>133409797
No anon, it is due to efficiency of scale.

Have you noticed that Google doesn't talk about Google Fiber anymore, once it started its industry wide push for control of the internet? If you want to know which side of the debate to be on, look for the one that actually pushes innovation, not the one that entrenches the biggest players. An open and neutral internet means one that is anarchic. Introducing any new regulations destroys the very fabric of what makes the internet the most powerful tool ever created. These regulations are not being built to keep the internet as it is. They're there to give the government an off switch, and Google's going along with it because they get to have their finger on the trigger.

>>133409841
Your IP is assigned to you by your ISP, explain to me how the fuck you are going to spoof shit when every address that could theoretically help you to spoof it (like a VPN provider) is banned too?

>>133409688
of course there will be cunts trying to expand this legislation to britain level. Our job is to make sure the written laws only give government power to act on NN violations, not all what they see fit.

>>133409994
But what if, like, this is a sincerely held belief with actual arguments?

>>133409872
>not liking Molyneux
>not liking evidence and reason
>being an unironic natsoc

>>133404594
>>133407209
>Hurr durr look how retarded I am everybody! If my dumb ass doesn't know about it, because I'm a dumbass, it obviously never happened!

>>133409978
No, I am in strong support of NN.

ISP should be like the electrical utility. You buy speed/bandwidth from the company and you get to use it how you see fit.

File: 1497505793503.jpg (10KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 250x250px

>>133409872
..

>>133408366
>FCC is a terrible company
>Company
Nice argument, fellow

>>133410138
Good luck with that, I'm not giving an inch now so I don't have to fight over a more important inch later.

>>133410138
Yeah I can see the oligarchic push somewhere, but as long as the majority wants it, the government will do nothing about it.

>>133410312
Good catch, meant terrible bureaucracy

Point still stands.

File: (((Shut it down))).png (138KB, 642x766px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 642x766px

>>133397086
Fuck off Kike! AT&T is one of the biggest Anti-Net out there.

>>133409978
Modyfing contents to promote their own shit(Orange is the champion of doing this)

Throttling of youtube and other stuff because muh costs

Straight up blocking of acces for pure financial reason

Net neutrality by law is fairly new(early 2016 if I'm not mistaken)

And it's not under gov control, it's a public independant authority(ARCEP) who's in charge of keeping it, amongst other things.

File: ❤worm.png (65KB, 249x309px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 249x309px

Every single fucking poster that has told me that all the NN propaganda is secretly bullshit can never answer one simple question.

How would reversing NN benefit me personally?

Still fucking waiting.

>>133411031
Lower cost to sub to an ISP.

>>133410237
No, you literally just explained why NOT to support "NN". First, the internet is not at all like a utility, in either function or mechanics. Cable is somewhat like a utility, which is why it is regulated as such. But cable is not the only way to access the internet. And it certainly won't continue to be. The internet is simply the protocols of inter network communication. These are already data blind, with a set up that favors text data over video data. So long as there are usage limits, this cannot be entirely ISP blind. On top of this, I agree, people should pay by usage. And guess who uses the most? Websites like Google and NETFLIX. The people who use the most are the most strongly in favor of "Net Neutrality". Look at how Imgur is responding. They're apopleptic. They don't take in enough revenue to pay a higher premium for their content. The cable companies already have tiered service. They're trying to make an even higher tier that only corporations have to pay for, and all you fucking cucks are trying to stop them because you think they can do things they're already prohibited from doing.

>>133411167
>Lower cost to sub to an ISP.
For less content. Lower cost to sub for less content. That's a net neutral. No pun intended.

cable companies are so fucked when it comes to NN.
>can't tell people how much prices will drop when corporate welfare goes away, or they'll be sued to hell by customers after.
>can't reveal how much traffic behemoths like netflix use, or they'll get sued by netflix
>forced to rely on politicians in a bribery bidding war between the two sides to do the right thing

if you don't understand how costly these companies are to ISPs, you are truly r*ddit

>>133406086
and you're a retarded slav monkey who can't make an argument to refute anything

>>133405609
No it wasn't, that's utter bullshit. government built a distributed computing system to communicate if muh soviets decided to nuke is.

They spent billions of tax payer money and had a network of less than 20 computers from 1965 to 1995. Reaching the pinnacle of government achievement of 20-something computers in 1995.

When they privatized it in 1995 (because muh soviets stopped being a meme) within 5 years, the internet had over 1 billion devices connected to it.

Imagine where would we be btw if they didn't have control over the internet for 30 years...

>>133411296
>>133411296
ISP's don't provide content.

>>133411357
Counterpoint: Fuck cable companies.

>>133396073
Its shit fuck off.

>>133411031
What you like about the internet wouldn't disappear forever. It would cost you less to use the internet, and everything will be faster, because the heaviest users will have to pay the market equilibrium price for their access, instead of receiving a government forced subsidy pushed onto the consumer through higher ISP costs.

>>133411462
That's like saying cable companies don't provide cable.

>>133411528
Cable companies have exclusive contracts with (((studios))). People need to get this idea of internet and cable having anything in common at all out of their heads.

>>133396073

Fuck yeah! While we're at it, who needs public goods/services like roads, police, firefighters, national guard, electricity, sewage, water, etc. et al.

Because Fuck You! I've got mine!
(Until I hit hard times or get unlucky in life, then I'll come back hat in hand for assistance)

>>133411528
So the ISPs pay for YT, Facebook, Google, all blogs, 4chan and literally every other website in the net?

>>133411469
Fuck google. Fuck amazon. Fuck netflix. Fuck corporate websites. For fuck's sake. You all want to know how you're being manipulated, but can't see how you're the same as the gibmedats. You're mad at cable companies cause they"re grump and rude. Then the people with the actual power say the cable companies want to take away your toys and you riot! Of course you have UN flag, you complete piece of shit.

>>133411469
your past posts are pushing the fallacy that if regulations are taken away, cable companies will all of a sudden create a pay-per-site model and charge people thousands of dollars. we've all seen the infographic created by reddit.

now how about an actual counterpoint? name one other industry with no regulations that behaves that way?

>>133411674
OH MY GOD, A BUNCH OF HOT TAR POURED OVER DIRT WITH SOME WHITE PAINT ON

HOW WILL WE MANAGE TO BUILD ROADS WITHOUT THE GOVERNMENT

IT'S GONNA BE CHAOS

CHAOS I TELLS YA

CHAAAAAAOOOOOOOOOOOOS

>>133411663
>People need to get this idea of internet and cable having anything in common at all out of their heads.
You know what's stopping cable companies from having exclusive contracts?

Hint, it starts with an n.

>>133411708
No, you do.

>>133411861
>redditspacing
>ancucks are this retarded

Figures, really.

>>133399471
>build better networks
high quality fiber is expensive
I'm willing to bet 60% or more of backbone isn't even 40 gigabit yet

>>133411674
gibsmethat

>>133411882
Poses no advantage to enter exclusive contracts for a firm like facebook with random ISP's around the world and its also infeasible to form contracts for literally every website in existence.

What is more feasible is individual contracts with consumers, like what is already happening with firms like Netflix.

>>133411768
or just to add to this, since net neutrality was introduced in 2013

and the internet existed from 1995, feel free to name an example of ISPs doing this from you know 1995-2013.

>>133411966
>I can't refute his argument, so i'm just gonna call him retard. I win!!! this is no way a projection of my own intelligence.

>>133411882
Then why ISPs get to make me pay more to get access to sites I pay to access anyway?
It's as if airlines charged passengers more if they went to Florida to go to Disneyland.

File: kuruminha.png (85KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 600x600px

>>133396073
>>133396210
>>133396381
>>133396583
>>133396591
This is bait, dont go for that. Brazil pass a regulation in 2014 like Net Neutrality called "Marco Civil da Internet". We have a internet regulation org named Anatel and the prices of the packages goes up because they cant control the traffic distribution anymore. Now services like Whatsapp can be blocked to all country based on that. If you want compare the proposols of both and their effects, you will have an ample knowledge about that subject on pratice.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazilian_Civil_Rights_Framework_for_the_Internet

>>133411528
There is not such thing as "the internet". Cable companies provide two things--the data transfer medium, and the high speed networking. Corporations on the other side provide the content. You have a network, the cable company has a network, and the company has a network. The cable company uses their network to share information between your network and the corporation. The corporations use the most internet. The cable companies want to charge them more. The corporations are mad, because they know they can't pass this expense on to you, the consumer, because people are very price sensitive when it comes to online content. So the content corporations lobby the government to force the cable companies to reduce the price of internet for only the biggest internet users, passing the expense on to everyone else. Super duper fucking neutral, isn't it?

>>133411488
>because the heaviest users will have to pay the market equilibrium price for their access

Every time I see this, I don't get how people can think this is possibly the case.

Net Neutrality is about being able to access all sites fairly no matter the data load and no matter the time of day, phase of moon, etc.

The "heaviest users" already pay the ISPs more than you do to use the internet. That's why they have speed tiers and datacaps.

All this would do is let them chop up sites and places you like and dole them out based on where and when you're trying to access them.

Please explain how this hurts the 'heaviest' users and not you because you want to use every site on the internet.

>>133411998
Hence why the cable companies want websites like Netflix and Google to pay for it. After all, they're the ones that are using it.

>>133411861
ft: Ancap who has zero fucking clue how a road is built and has never worked near a roadcrew.
PS: Pay for my road you fucking scum :^)

>>133412193
Are you fucking blind or do you ignore >>133402033 on purpose because you don't have an answer?

>>133411768
>name one other industry with no regulations that behaves that way?
Name one other industry where you have to pay per individual product?

Almost all of them?

And I'm more worried about companies entering into agreements with cable companies to prevent them from doing business with their competitors.

I don't want fucking Bing entering into an agreement with Spectrum where they block Google. And yes, that shit happens in other industries too. It's why literally every restaurant only carries Coke OR Pepsi, not both.

>>133412186
>Poses no advantage to enter exclusive contracts for a firm like facebook with random ISP's around the world and its also infeasible to form contracts for literally every website in existence.
So naturally they'll just block them. Unless you pay roaming fees, of course.

>>133412237
>Internet regulation org
There's your problem. This is the government, not a third party.

>>133410091
This!!!! Google fiber was being pushed in Austin 2 years ago, did they ever install it? No. They built a new campus hq and sat back on their haunches.

>>133412516
>hurr just block them

Yeah that'll hold up well in the free market.

>>133396073
>>>/s4s/

I want you to go there and look what the mods posted at the top of the page. who the fuck let you fucking shills become janitors anyways.

>>133412432

>>133412193

>>133399471
>build better networks
Hey moron, Youtube can fucking buy comcast 3 times over.

Maybe the corporate welfare leeches over at google, can, you know, build better networks?

Net neutrality
>service is shit
>well there are only 2 other companies that are equally as shit, tough luck pal.
>no competition because you need gigantic bandwidth so your neighbor can watch netflix all day

No Net neutrality
>20 companies to choose from, because of the lower barrier to entry
>Service is shit ? Pick another company
>Cheaper, because you can, for example, choose to not include bandwidth eating websites such as youtube and netflix. Want them ? Well, it's the same price as it is now or a bit higuer, pay for it.
>Abusive shit like having to pay to unlock each websites ? Choose another company. Don't like packs? Want everything included ? There will always be a company(or more) that offer that.

Statists btfo

>>133396073
No

No. No

No.No

>>133410091
> An open and neutral internet means one that is anarchic
Stopped reading there.
That 'open and neutral' internet is the reason we can have 4chan and /pol/. Open and neutral means that you can connect to any fucking site you want without having to answer to a third party for it.
And that's how it should be.

>>133412856
>>20 companies to choose from, because of the lower barrier to entry
Oh, more people putting fiber in the ground? Because that's the barrier to entry for an ISP: how much fiber they can put in the ground.
>>Service is shit ? Pick another company
My current choices are Comcast and Time Warner. Great choices.

>>133412396
Yes yes, i'm sure building a road is this magnificent feet only government """engineers""" can build

Private sector wouldn't begin to understand complexities of it.

>PS: Pay for my road you fucking scum :^)
not an argument, also low iq response, you are retarded.

>>133410492
>all the red companies are known for absolutely abysmal customer satisfaction rates
Really gets the noggin joggin

>>133397195
>In some areas things like Netflix take up to 1/3 of the available bandwidth open to an area via an ISP.
>If you are a water company then you can charge companies based on the amount used, rather than allow free reign for anyone.
It's not like companies whose services use a fuckton of bandwidth have to pay a gorillion dollars for that bandwidth. It's not just the end users who pay for bandwidth, you know.

>>133412719
>Yeah that'll hold up well in the free market.
DA FREE MARKET WILL FIX IT

>drives on roads
>breathes air
>goes to public buildings
>uses a telephone
>posts on the internet

FREE MARKET
WILL FIX IT
IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT LEAVE THIS FUCKING COUNTRY. FREE MARKET WILL FIX IT, VOTE RON PAUL

>>133412719
It's not the free market, though, you idiot. It's already a fucking monopoly and killing NN just cements it further.

>>133412297
Because the heaviest users are websites like Netflix and google that are consuming so much internet cable companies need to build new infrastructure just to keep the rest of the internet from slowing down. Net neutrality was a concept that developed in 2005 that was specifically referring to being data blind, and not throttling based on content. If a major corporation pays for a private lane inside a cable companies private network, everyone else's speed will go up, because that traffic will no longer be clogging up the main network. What part of this do you not understand. The internet is not like roads or plumbing. It's a lot similar to air traffic control, or shipping lanes. UPS and other shipping companies pay more to get favorable treatment. Some companies pay more to have faster mail. No one complains, and these are areas in which the total volume of traffic is mostly fixed. Cable companies want other coporations to pay more to build more volume, instead of letting them simply pay to be prioritized on a fixed volume. They are creating subnetworks within their network, not prioritizing data packets. Not a single shred of this debate has anything to do with net neutrality.

>>133413004
>ISP: how much fiber they can put in the ground.

What a prime example of Dunning Krueger effect.

Go ahead then, start your own ISP, no idea what's stopping you, if it's so easy. Why are you still paying to Comcast and AT&T?

File: 1499831018447.jpg (92KB, 348x488px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 348x488px

>>133413168
You're talking about what competing firms offer you fucking imbecile, literally free market.

File: widespread death and suffering.png (3MB, 1920x977px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1920x977px

>>133412193
>feel free to name an example of ISPs doing this from you know 1995-2013.
A while back when 10 mbps download speeds were still new in my area ISP told me my internet would be cut off if I continued to torrent. They had sold more bandwidth than they actually had architecture in my area and as a result they couldn't actually provide the promised 10 mbps download speed per household, so to mask this they were threatening to cut off service to anyone that might actually fucking use it (ie torrenters cause direct downloads had absolute shit speeds back then) and cause service instability in the area.

This was not a C&D for copyrighted content (cause that shit doesn't happen for hentai). This was not a violation of the terms of a specific rule of the terms of service beyond the standard "we reserve the right to yadda yadda yadda". I was just using their product in a manner in which they marketed it but not the manner in which they intended.

If you legitimately don't think different sites and services won't be fucking abused by ISPs without net neutrality, you are fucking retarded.

Do NOT trust cable companies

>>133407575
That's actually kind of a neat idea, but the amount of work involved to implement such a thing would be gigantic. Think about, say, how much went in to designing IPv6 and how it still sees almost niche use compared to IPv4.