(((Net Neutrality)))

That is the most retarded thing I think I've ever seen posted here before.

This is not going to happen. It can't. Internet is not a fucking cable package.

Hahahaha ironic considering that we'll all be banned off 4chan if this goes through

This image literally triggers me.

>>133431130
>NN repealed
>ISP bans [insert website here]
>Drop ISP For one that doesn't
Wow, so hard.
Also, wtf is going on with the CAPTCHA. forgot to turn on legacy, and now Google keeps telling there are cars when there are no cars.

It's not a free fucking market when over 50% of the country only has one ISP available, and another 30% only has two to choose from.

>>133431883
>Drop ISP For one that doesn't

Where do you live that you have a choice in ISP?

>>133431883
>>Drop ISP For one that doesn't
You can't do that. Your ISP depends on your region. You can't change your ISP.
They need to break the monopolies before removing net neutrality

>>133431993

You are free to choose no internet.

>>133431883
I have two choices for ISP. DSL and cable.
Unless they enforce regulations which stop them from creating monopolies, I'm fucked.
There are a few places in the US which have municipal lines, the one I experienced had """fiber""", and it was utter shit.

File: 1484114941338.jpg (29KB, 399x385px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 399x385px

>ameripoors being stuck with ONE (1) provider

>tfw you live in a city that banned this isp's from pulling this shit

>>133432197
Twitter warriors would never have that option.

>>133432346
Good thing you used half of your data cap to post that, otherwise I wouldn't feel bad ;_;

File: Screenshot_2017-07-13-03-21-55.jpg (156KB, 1017x671px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 1017x671px

Is this shit real? It's not the 90's anymore. There are a lot of people who cut the cable and are depending on an internet connection to view TV.

Pic is my current internet package

>>133430675
If we lived in a world with 20+ ISPs competing for customers, I'd say go for it. Instead, we live in a world where over 80% of Americans have only one or two choices in ISP. The "muh free market" argument against net neutrality is out of touch with reality.

File: 1484377076672.jpg (565KB, 1462x1462px) Image search: [Google]

565KB, 1462x1462px

>>133432486
well goy better hurry up and try and get NN to stay because you'll end up using your entire cap to post what I just posted!

I wish they taxed social media sites more than anything. I wish it costs money to post on social media. It's the catalyst for fake news, and western degradation.

>>133432197
Regardless, a monopoly is not an element of a healthy capitalist system.

File: broadband map.png (296KB, 797x464px) Image search: [Google]

296KB, 797x464px

>>133432056
This place called "the world"

File: wireless map.jpg (70KB, 723x388px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 723x388px

>>133432724

>>133430675
if it increases my internet anything past 600kpbs im down for it.
Already pay $120 a month for this garbage

>>133430808
what

I would have no moral stipulations with rounding up every single an-cap and Libertarian and putting a bullet through their thick skulls.

>>133432724
Sparse on the east coast, random bits in the west, or North Dakota.

Also, what is North Dakota doing that the rest of us aren't?

>>133432724
Interesting. I'm part of that map and there's no secondary choice let alone a third or fourth.

>>133431883
>ISP "A" and ISP "B", being the only two ISP's in the region, make an arrangement to ban [insert website here] (or even charge extra for access to it, because jews)
>due to no competing ISP's, users of [insert website here] are forced to go fuck themselves.
I assure you, this won't be nice.

File: you-just-went-full-potato-thumb.png (112KB, 304x229px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 304x229px

>>133431883
>Drop ISP For one that doesn't

>>133432848
Prior to 2015 there was no legal enforcement of network neutrality and we were just fine all that time.

>>133432955
What's your zip code?

>>133432967
Except that's a violation of existing federal anti-trust law and the FTC will fuck them both in the ass for it.

Right wing sites are going to be the first to go under these packages. Once again libertariansm will make conditions where libertarianism isn't possible.

>>133432948
>Also, what is North Dakota doing that the rest of us aren't?
Fracking

>>133432948
This. I'd think North Dakota would be as fucked as South Dakota...North Dakotanons, what gives?

File: IMG_1097.jpg (24KB, 258x245px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 258x245px

>tfw americucks get jewed, once again

>>133432967
More likely each ISP creates a standard for what content it will allow and what content it will block, causing ISPs in the same area to block a similar selection of websites without any explicit arrangement.

File: 1451723342970.gif (88KB, 300x277px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 300x277px

>>133430808
>being this fucking stupid

>>133430675
what's gonna happen to the fucking TCP/IP protocol

>>133430928
>Internet is not a fucking cable package.
You can thank NN for that.

>>133430928
ask the UK...

File: beanafu.jpg (33KB, 384x661px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 384x661px

How many ISPs do you Eurocucks and Aussies have?
I honestly have no idea.
I thought I heard that show Adam Ruins Everything claim that other countries have plenty to choose from, but that dude is a liberal douche and I don't trust a word he says.

>>133432991
The FCC has been able to fine ISPs over net neutrality violations since before you were born you down syndrome monkey retard

File: 1489598786552.png (81KB, 624x628px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 624x628px

sage this shit

File: 1493252210591.jpg (10KB, 256x256px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 256x256px

How did you niggers post on 4chins before Net Neutrality was put into effect? Really makes one ponder

File: IMG_0148.png (77KB, 375x444px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 375x444px

>>133430675
If you notice in this thread and others of the same topic, OPs flag seems to always be posting against NN.
Interesting

>>133433736
>everyone agrees with me, no one is stupid, everything is bait
go to hell

>>133433619
In my area I have 9 ISPs to choose from, 5 of them offer fiber internet with speeds up to 10gbps and the other 4 offer cable internet up to 500 mbps

>>133433389
Well, in just searching around for a house, I've noticed we have a many different rural ISPs. Midco also has a huge presence. That's probably why.

>>133433619
at least 7 in my vicinity

sage

>>133433901
Fugggg.
It's crazy how most Americans don't consider that lack of competition caused by the government interference causes so many of our problems.

>>133433841
Net neutrality existed way before the FCC codified it.

>>133433577
>>133433598
I guess my mind just can't grasp this type of concept.
So they would put each website ever made into a category or something?! I'm sure I sound like an idiot, but I honestly don't get it.
Sure, I have certain websites I go to everyday, but I like to check out other places too.

Interneting is hard

File: WhitePowerCrowder.jpg (595KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

595KB, 1920x1080px

>>133433901
>>133434056

What do you guys pay a month?
Please use your currency amount or do the exchange rate for me.

>>133433619
at least 4 or 5 in most areas
2 to 3 in regional areas
think only telstra services the outback areas

>>133430928
>Internet is not a fucking cable package.
this is literally what net neutrality means

>>133434316
60AUD a month for unlimited ADSL2
speed for me is ass tier tho

>>133434316
I currently pay 108$ which has 10gbps speeds, however if you get something like 500 mbps you pay around 46$. Netherlands and the US have almost the same GDP per capita so the prices should be comparable

>>133432565
Reminder that you live in a country that is a fourth the size of my state

>>133434650
Yes I understand that, if you live in a smaller country network infrastructure is way more manageable

>>133433619
160000 citizen town, i live quite central, i know 5 big provider and theres a bunch of other niche providers/just worse providers, but the big ones dont really have differences, and i never heard about all this crap, i pay for 6mb/s download and thats all, no size limit, no blocked crap, only raw internet

>>133430675

Then I get the cheapest package, buy a VPN to a free country, and go wherever I want on the Internet.

Done.

>>133434316
I pay 40 euros for 100Mb/s (my actual speed is +-80) + hundred and something channels and phone.

40 euros is like 50 something dollars. But Minimum wage here is 500 euros, and the average is 850.

>>133434855
VPNs are leftist tools. ISPs have a right to ban them.

File: su metal sad.png (249KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

249KB, 500x500px

>>133434632
I pay $60 a month.

How can America be so awesome in some ways but suck so horribly in others?

File: net nutrality definition.jpg (28KB, 635x145px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 635x145px

>>133434273

File: Screen Shot 2017-07-12 at 8.46.54 PM.png (46KB, 407x604px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 407x604px

>>133435004
Shit, ment to use this pic.
$60 a month for this shit.

>>133434273
Think of it from a business standpoint. The ISP makes deals with all major websites to create a "basic internet package" that is very cheap, but only allows access to those select sites. The ISP makes money from the sites who pay to be part of the basic package, and the sites paying to be part of the package make money from essentially a captured user base.

Then you expand this system into more tiers of web access, each tier getting more expensive and providing you with access to a wider variety of sites, probably with an "unrestricted internet" package being the most expensive. A "pay per view" style system where you pay a dollar amount to access certain sites is unlikely, but a system where broad categories of websites are segregated into different packages is.

The "pay more to get more" idea also extends to stuff like streaming, data limits, etc. You want to stream 4k video? More data use? Gotta pay more. Imagine the current concept of paying more to get higher speed internet extended to every aspect of the web.

>>133435004
No country is perfect, and you know that. Luckily we live in the west and we should be thankful for it. There are a lot of people out there who don't have food or a bed to sleep in tonight

>>133434907
Forgot to add that if i wanted a package with just the internet, i would pay half for the same speed

File: normanportrait2014_1.jpg (14KB, 355x238px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 355x238px

>upto 22gb/month

>>133435266
I get the vibe you might be a tad liberal, so you might disagree with this, but the west is awesome because white people founded it.

Starving people who don't have a bed to sleep in weren't smart enough to start a society that considered such things.

hah maybe if it was a freemarket and not a monopolised one

>>133433684
"February 26, 2015 – FCC passes the Title II Net Neutrality Rules. “In a 3–2 party-line vote, the FCC passes open internet rules applying to both wired and wireless internet connections grounded in Title II authority.”"
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwid-tq6k4XVAhWH3SYKHUKVAccQFggqMAE&url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FNet_neutrality_in_the_United_States&usg=AFQjCNGmVZsFC8fmZJj7rrGSnWPaXDNiPQ

>>133430928
The Internet isn't what it was a decade ago. For most people, it might as well be a cable package.

The telecom companies know this and would happily exploit it.

What are the plebians going to do? Start their own ISP? Lol good luck.

>>133430675
you stupid fucking knee-knocking faggots. we had none of this fucking shit prior to 2016/obama's net neutrality garbage. in fact, prices were way lower because the companies had to pay for the data transfer on their end. now they force the consumer to pay it
you stupid liberal fucks are the dumbest people on this planet.

>>133434273
I guess my mind just can't grasp this type of concept.
So they would put each channel ever made into a category or something? I'm sure I sound like an idiot, but I honestly don't get it.
Sure, I have certain channels I watch everyday,but I like to browse other cable channels too.

Television is hard

File: banksy-2-War Capitalism.jpg (50KB, 660x421px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 660x421px

>>133430928
>This is not going to happen. It can't. Internet is not a fucking cable package.

Oh that's right. They care. They care about you. So it won't happen.

>The state of your denial/delusion/faith in muh big Corp being goody good good.

They would sell you oxygen if they could control access to it, what makes this different?

>>133430675
>>133430928
>1 ISP in your area
Y'all are getting (((rused))) in to adding more regulation (as if Net Neutrality somehow results in less? you fucking droolers would buy that shit from a bunch of liberal whiners, jfc) to a market a few ISPs are already monopolize because of current regulation blocking competition. I hate you all so much.

>Net Neutrality
>willingly giving control of the internet to the (((FCC)))
What a great idea, there is a 0% chance of this ever biting us in the ass. No siree, no chance at all.

>>133435534
I think socialists care more about an individual than a liberal. On the political compass I'm in the middle but leaning to the right. Most people on /pol/ can agree with you on that argument because whites are the superior race in any way. But the point I'm trying to make is that internet is a (western) luxury and people should stop chimping out over it

>>133430675
This is literally disgusting and fuck you for supporting it.

>>133430675
It's great. Would just kill those shitty companies. Goodbye facebook!

>ISP blocks website
>I open my VPN and access website anyway
>Meanwhile I shop for another ISP

Why do people think governments need to interfere with things that aren't problems?

>>133430675

let me tell you kiddies how it used to be

I had NetZero internet - cost ZERO dollars
I connected through my phone line - cost $9.50 a month
I had access to every website

No, there was no Netshit, but there were also no sissy girls, grandmas, authorities up your ass on the internet....good times, sorry you missed it

>>133432724
How has free market competition worked out for journalism? Surely it would be impossible for big conglomerates to all conspire together to force narratives and agendas upon the population? After all, there's competition right?

I'm sure ISP's would never ever be infiltrated or lobbied to throttle access to certain politically incorrect websites

Is anyone still surprised that nu-/pol/ loves riding the corporate cock? Those teh_donald faglords would even defend big pharma in a heartbeat.

>>133436039
Big difference between 450+ cable channels & 10,000+ websites.

>>133431883
Why would i listen to opinions from someone who cant figure out a fucking captcha

Fucking bannonshills are getting too obvious

>>133436080
If you even knew how cable packages works you would know that the cable companies actually buy the rights to broadcast channels from specific channels themselves, if internet worked the same way cable tv does you would find all ISPs paying places like Facebook, and Google to be able to allow access to their customer base to the website, not the other way around.

>>133435701
yet the great boogeyman comcast hadnt throttled anyone for 10 years when that was passed
hmmmmmmmmmm

>>133432719
Then the free market isn't a healthy capitalist system

>>133436425
>No, there was no Netshit, but there were also no sissy girls, grandmas, authorities up your ass on the internet....good times, sorry you missed it
b-b-b--but this is impossible! We need unchecked government bureaucracies to oversee things! Surely we can trust them!

File: Websites.png (56KB, 952x538px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 952x538px

>>133436497
>he thinks the internet only has 10,000 websites
99% of these will be throttled. They can't outbid Youtube or facebook, they're fucked

>>133436080
but the state cares?

>Honestly I do not see what is wrong with this. The Free Market at work is a beautiful thing to me.

Why doesn't ISP just create their own internet. I'm sure plenty of people would use AT&T verse or what ever they would call it.

>>133436213
People are very passionate about their utilities.
If there's a much smarter and better way to do something, we should do it. I think we mostly agree, but I think American's should chimpout over government jewish tricks fucking up ISPs being able to compete.

>>133436736
>Why doesn't ISP just create their own internet. I'm sure plenty of people would use AT&T verse or what ever they would call it.
Compuserve 2.0 incoming!

>>133436221
Burgers don't get freedom. ...

>>133436456
anyone that wants the state to do something is automatically spitroasting themselves

>>133436670
Again if you even knew how cable packages works you would know that the cable companies actually buy the rights to broadcast channels from specific channels themselves, if internet worked the same way cable tv does you would find all ISPs paying places like Facebook, and Google to be able to allow access to their customer base to the website, not the other way around.

>>133436670
>tfw you have access to two ISPs and one has a deal with Facebook to block Google services and the other has a deal with Google to block Facebook services

>>133436448
Free market has been great for journalism.
InforWars gets higher ratings than CNN.

Just because it's forced on the jewtube doesn't mean you have to consume it.

>>133436670
I know there are a shit ton more. I just threw out a random largish #. My bad.

But thats what I was wondering too. So they won't block you from websites, they would just throttle the shit out of the ones not in the packages?

>>133436103
in what way does NN block smaller startups and other companies from getting into the ISP market? What regulations does it add? Isn't that the ISP oligopoly that's doing that?

NN isn't that interesting of a topic. burgers when does this shit go through so i don't have to see shill threads anymore?

Isn't Net Neutrality really about ISPs charging website hosts, like Netflix, more for more bandwidth? The whole "website tiers" infographic has always seemed like a strawman.

>>133437012
NN already exist and has been active for a while.

>>133432724
I can tell you for a fact that that map is false, I live in CT which is all green, and my friend rented 2 different houses in 2 different towns near Uconn while he was attending, and in both towns he only had one choice for internet provider.

>>133433577

>NN wasn't in place before 2015
>OP's image never happened in the 30+ years of internet before that
>yet only NN can save us

hmm

>>133436981
>Free market has been great for journalism.
No, the internet has been great for journalism

The point is, when you have an oligopoly, they conspire. Even in broad massive industries with tons of competitors, they still find ways to conspire, push narratives, and act in seemingly self-destructive ways to advance political causes.

You think the competition between 2 or 3 ISP's will be enough to catastrophically cut prices, expand services, prevent any sort of manipulation (such as throttling "undesireable" websites). It doesn't work out that way in practice.

>>133437113
This has been said 100x, but the idea of a neutral internet has existed since the 80's. It became popular in 2005 and was made a law in 2015 to stop ISPS from owning the internet. So I guess the argument is that we didn't need it before 2015 because people weren't greedy dicks then.

>>133430675
>free market
>meanwhile 99.9% of websites are not available because of ISP Jewry
I wish I could put every ancap against a wall.

>>133430675
Lmfao

>>133430675
everyone that gets hooked on this bait is reddit

>>133430675
This will never happen. You think those companies honestly will let them get placed behind a paywall to access them? It would kill them all. They would lose a massive amount of traffic and their revenue stream would run dry.

If anything ISPs will charge the companies a shit load extra and those companies will either create their own subscriptions or the customer will see an increase in the costs of their product.

>>133430675
yeah who needs net neutrality? We should also have different levels of rent that allow you to use different services in your town if you pay enough

>>133433389
FRACKING

>>133432724
That map is a crock of shit and you should see to your own lynching if you were retarded enough to think it was valid

>>133430675

>Honestly I do not see what is wrong with this.
I easily use more than 385+ websites, and you are limited to only the sites in your plan unless you call your internet company? No fucking way. In America taxpayers paid for a lot of the fiber optic cable these cocksuckers use. Spectrum and comcast have millions of customers, 20-30, and the average bill is 100.00 so that's 2 billion a month? That's plenty, if they are allowed to do whatever they want the internet is fucked.

How the fuck do you guys have internet so shitty

>>133437466
>It would kill them all

not if they're the only options on the market and keep lobbying and buying out startups

>>133430675
If this is free market then I want socialism. Maybe the NatSocs were right. You ancaps are kikes

>>133430675
This is pretty much how television works. Poorfags get over it and make more money so you can browse your shitty anime shit.

File: ahem.png (25KB, 283x283px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 283x283px

>>133436987
Put it this way - suppose I want to make a new ISP. I don't have the infrastructure and the money to set up a network than can handle everything, but let's say I've got an idea for a smaller niche market: I'll make an internet service that doesn't handle any kind of really heavy bandwidth sucking traffic like movie streaming or games, but still manages good, reliable, fast rates for raw data transfer. Not terribly great for individual consumers, but companies that deal in a lot of data transfer like healthcare companies or research labs might be potential clients.

Throttling or blocking certain types of traffic, like data to/from movie streaming sites in order to keep those kinds of services from bogging down my network and provide the service I want my company to provide would be a violation of FCC standards for internet service.

Most startups would run into similar problems - if you can't offer all the required traffic at whatever the standard pricing, rates, etc are - you're prohibited from functioning as an ISP.

>>133432719
The isp monopoly comes from cable franchise agreements, not from net neutrality rules.

>>133437278
>oligopoly
I agree, and thanks for adding that word to my vernacular.

>>133437705
>Paying for cable

What kind of special needs person are you?

>>133430675

>Honestly I do not see what is wrong with this
>let's gate information behind what package you can pay for

Really? You don't see anything wrong with that?

>>133437528
It probably counts garbage .5mbps dsl as broadband

File: 32754983402.jpg (249KB, 840x485px) Image search: [Google]

249KB, 840x485px

>>133437872
Internet is the new television you idiot. After NN they will block free streaming sites and you'll be back to square one. Everyone already pays for Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon Prime anyway. Stupid nigger

>>133430675
jesus fucking Christ that's horrible

Let's put is this way retards. You go to a fast food place and order a number 5. Drinks are included. You would get made if two weeks later you had to pay for something that had been free before.

>even 4chan is trying to get people to sign
holy fuck, what worthless, stupid, fucking liberal pieces of shit. how can these fucks be that motherfucking stupid

>>133438104
There is hundreds of free streaming sited. Only dumbfucks pay for netflix and hulu. You are probably one of them

File: image.jpg (47KB, 518x770px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 518x770px

>>133430675
Me angry

>>133437706
Why would an ISP choose to throttle streaming from a popular movie site to allow your company to function? You're leaving out the part where the physical internet infrastructure your company requires to function is owned by a larger ISP company. You have to make a deal with an upstream ISP to get your ISP online, unless you feel like laying your own cable around the country.

The more realistic case is that net neutrality ensures your content is provided the same as any other content, while without net neutrality large internet companies can pay for extra bandwidth and cause you to be throttled by comparison.

>MUH HBO PLAN

People watch this shit on their phones. Most young people just need good internet that works for them. Anybody actually deciding on a bundle deserves to get fucked in the ass.

Fuck it, I don't care if I'm not American. Americucks, give me a zipcode so I can send a letter to your congressman

File: clintonprice.png (187KB, 1682x1032px) Image search: [Google]

187KB, 1682x1032px

>>133438168

>Drinks are included

Have you always been this stupid or are you just faking it

>>133438534

20002

>>133430675
NT Comcast.

>>133432685
>Aussy talking about internet

Nigger please. Your internet is as fucked as US healthcare.

File: 1498698443277.png (82KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 500x500px

>>133430675
Is it wrong that I don't care but just want to piss people off from all spectrum's of the political compass???

>>133437706
>I'll make an internet service that doesn't handle any kind of really heavy bandwidth sucking traffic like movie streaming or games, but still manages good, reliable, fast rates for raw data transfer.
Think about your own example for a bit, these low bandwidth sites don't need high speeds, they certainly aren't effected much by a "bogged down" network. Also, research labs probably use more bandwidth than you think since they tend to work with insane amounts of raw data.

File: youreafuckingretard.png (228KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

228KB, 1920x1080px

>>133438348
>>133438348

God damn you are all retarded. Get out of the basement and starting studying how markets work.

http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/17/technology/netflix-subscribers/index.html

>>133438645
>Thanks for emailing them!
Done.

>>133437706
The established ISP's would just cuck you out of your business by offering the same type of plan but at a much cheaper rate than what you could afford to offer.

>>133436980
>tfw don't use facebook or google services

>>133438542
>>133438878
I've always wanted to make a small version of these programs, they look like a shitload of work though. Also I'm shit at graphs and statistics. And economics. And finishing projects.

Give me GOOD ARGUMENTS for and against Net Neutrality

>>133438104
Cable isn't netflix, hulu, or amazon prime. Cable is you paying for channel up to 60 or 70. Paying more if you want HBO or any other special channel. The guy I was replying is ok if the internet is ran that way.

File: lol.jpg (88KB, 484x548px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 484x548px

>>133437706

>it's not a dump truck, you can't load everything on it

No matter how much things change, they always stay the same.

>>133435134
I pay 60 for over 150 mbps, here in south florida.

>>133438104
The internet providers merging with the media companies is going to be a fucking disaster. Streaming sites getting blocked is going to be the least of our worries.

File: 1499240567382.jpg (36KB, 657x527px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 657x527px

i don't under stand whats habbening.

>>133433598
...what? What about the UK? Do you think we don't have net neutrality or something? Are you that fucking stupid?

What the fuck are you talking about?

>>133439085
>tfw your post-net neutrality ISP offers you a monthly discount for the amount of time you spend on Facebook

>>133434273

Literally how satellite TV was originally until netflix came along.

>>133439545

Give comcast $400/month if you ever want to see your rare pepes again.

File: 6-24-16 naT gaS Futures.png (83KB, 926x560px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 926x560px

>>133439228

BS in Economics and Finance. The only redpilled fields left in these jewish controlled universities

Also, not that much work.

Think of it like a chess game. You want to put your chess pieces (money/assets) in a certain place at a specific date and time, then move it somewhere else strategically at a given date and time.

Life if temperatures break record highgs, more power usage for A/C, Utilities skyrocket, put your money in Utilities, then sell with profit, then move it to another area or industry (sector rotation)

Financial and commodities markets are like a giant global RTS MMORPG chess game with players everywhere

>>133439709
>Give comcast $400/month if you ever want to see your rare pepes again.
Nah, I'll give my money to the cheap non censoring ISP next door that opened up after the Comcast monopoly was broken up.

>>133439545
Sit on my lap and we can watch it all unfold with shocked looks on our faces. Like this :O

>>133439797
You are betting a lot on the fact there will be a Boost Mobile ISP.

File: Screen Shot 2017-07-13 at 03.35.45.png (140KB, 978x786px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 978x786px

>>133433619
Four big main ones: BT, Sky, Virgin and TalkTalk.

There are other smaller ones too.

>>133439797

>that opened up after the Comcast monopoly was broken up.

Literally not going to happen, no matter what the result of this is.

How would banning net neutrality remove the monopoly?

>>133439797
That ISP won't exist because the current (((ISP's))) sue any potential startups into oblivion whenever they try to establish themselves.

File: IMG_0244.jpg (250KB, 704x1235px) Image search: [Google]

250KB, 704x1235px

NET NEUTRALITY IS GOING TO FUCK US

THERE IS NO REASON THAT THE LEFT WOULD BE SHILLING THIS HARD FOR IT OTHERWISE

ITT People who don't understand TCP/IP

File: qrn1lWb.gif (988KB, 500x280px) Image search: [Google]

988KB, 500x280px

>yfw the deluge of retards from the election have turned this place against net neutrality because shills put ((())) around the word

>>133439541
Merging is unlikely but business deals would be guaranteed. Imagine a system where no one is "throttled", but large entities can pay to have their content delivered at higher speed, causing sites that don't pay to be throttled by comparison.
>Companies like Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, Buzzfeed, Facebook, Google, etc pay to have their content delivered faster
>Large mainstream media corporations pay for faster delivery than fringe news sites
>Competing companies make deals with ISPs competing in the same area, getting into bidding wars to have their content delivered preferentially over their competitors, with the end result being the user receiving increasingly restricted content

>>133435134
>image
JUST

I pay $80 for 1 gig down and 500 up.
AT&T rolled into my area which was comcast, and they are driving these kikes out of business.
Fucking faggots, serves them right.

File: 1483675259536.jpg (851KB, 1900x2428px) Image search: [Google]

851KB, 1900x2428px

>>133439541

That's how the dice roll sometimes. That's capitalism at work. If you don't like paying service providers for their services, then go live in Appalachia or something

Also, I don't want the FTC regulating content.

>>133440035

Net neutrality will only screw over those who value certain websites less than the set prices to access them.

>>133438104

You seem to be confused.

You're under NN, right now.

>>133440110
AT&T is only of the only two ISPs where I live. They just put data caps on.

>>133433070
Yeah, except it hasn't happened in years, corporations get away with almost literal murder, and there is no problem right now keeping net neutrality as it currently is.

The only people winning from getting rid of net neutrality are the jews running the fraud news networks and media conglomerates

http://www.strawpoll.me/13420194/

>>133440035

YOU ALREADY LIVE UNDER NN

>>133437105
>I can tell you for a fact that that map is false
It's LITERALLY directly from the FCC
https://www.broadbandmap.gov/number-of-providers

>>133440261
where do you live?

>>133431883
>drop ISP for one that doesn't

This guy still lives with his parents. I can almost guarantee it. Hey moron! ISPs have monopolies in certain regions of the USA. Ex. Time-Warner has a monopoly in SoCal. Comcast has a monopoly in the MidWest. There is no fucking competition.

>>133431883
>ISP bans [insert website here]

For what purpose would they do this

>>133440385
Georgia. We have AT&T, Comcast which is AT&T and charter.

File: retarded sad pepe.jpg (57KB, 619x453px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 619x453px

>>133430675
>tfw can no longer post reaction images because I didn't pay for the 4chan bonus package for $4.99/mo
>tfw can no longer torrent because the ISP has a partnership with netflix
>tfw my basic package only allows me to browse blacked.com for porn and need to pay $19.99/mo for non-cuckporn options

File: 1483677065545.jpg (304KB, 1280x1920px) Image search: [Google]

304KB, 1280x1920px

>>133440256

No, access to internet services is still equally valued under my current ISP (Optimum). After NN, certain websites will be grouped together and in order to access these different groups, you must pay an assortment of prices in order to view them.

>>133437105
>>133440322
Satelite internet is a thing too.

File: Screen Shot 2017-07-12 at 10.42.55 PM.png (113KB, 1154x510px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 1154x510px

>>133440394
oh sweetie, i'm afraid you're wrong. private businesses exist.

>>133440418
competition is the obvious answer

>>133437319
There has never been a time in human history when people suddenly started having the quality of "greed", let alone corporations.

>>133440261
>>133440494
What is your cap? Mine is unlimited with fiber now, and before it was 300gigs a month with uverse.
Which I never even came close to touching.

These ancap flags has to be fucking Jews. Hey, Schlomos! We're not fucking stupid.

>>133440514

NN was passed in 2015.

Are you drunk?

>>133440582
And competition is an issue completely outside net neutrality.

So go ahead and increase market competition. You can do this and net neutrality can remain in place while you do so.

>>133430675

>free market
>we subsidized the fucking ISPs into monopolies or duopolies with no real competition

I am all for free market, but we already broke it way to fundamentally to make it work this way.

new internet when?

>>133437648
This is cheaper than what comcast offers now though.

File: 1499234604534.png (108KB, 250x246px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 250x246px

>>133432713
>posts this on an image board
Literally the grandfather of social media

>>133440514
You retard, net NEUTRALITY means keeping the speeds neutral. Not having net neutrality is what allows the tiered services. Holy shit.

>>133439059
Sounds good to me as a customer.

>>133440577
>implying these businesses have quality products

I live in Chicago and I know three more ISPs than Comcast. I've tried them all. They're all fucking spotty and unreliable. So I'm forced with Comcast. Fuck off, retard.

>>133433577
The fuck? Anyone can make a webpage. You can't make your own cable channel.

>>133440670
I mean that without NN an ISP could throttle sites that they are competing with, such as news sites or Netflix for example

>>133439991
>That ISP won't exist because the current (((ISP's))) sue any potential startups into oblivion whenever they try to establish themselves.
Well I suppose we'll just have to create legislation to protect them. All you're telling me is that the problem is rooted how much power the ISPs have. So why give government bureaucracy control when we could just eliminate the power the ISPs have and let the free market solve the problem?

File: 1445125253979.jpg (153KB, 960x640px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 960x640px

>>133440828

Whatever, if it goes out the window I'm moving to wherever there's an ISP that blocks CNN.

>>133440514
4chan is getting fucking raided right now by shills. Nobody is this fucking stupid. DO NOT FALL FOR THIS SHIT! They're trying to shill the internet's subculture into spreading their lies.

>>133432713
This would be so fucking awesome if it happened.

>>133432724
Your shitty map considers any choice to be a valid comparison.

If you're willing to drop down from 100Mb cable to 12Mb DSL, then yeah I guess that counts as a "choice."

What "net neutrality" means depends on what the US Congress and their donors are thinking while they write these laws. For whatever it's worth, the biggest proponent seems to be motherfucking Comcast.

>Comcast
>verb
>Dropping someone from an online game to punish them for their packets passing through Comcast's routers without being a Comcast customer.
>example: "did our support just get Comcasted?"

>>133440940

It also neglects that just because an ISP exists there, does not mean they provide residential service.

File: iCWOGrq.gif (638KB, 300x220px) Image search: [Google]

638KB, 300x220px

>>133440733

Are you fucking stupid? Do you know how radio/television evolved from like 10 channels to the outrageous assortment of packages we have today? You can thank the FCC for that.

I'm saying this will happen to internet too. Right now, it isn't really what net neutrality is intende to do. You fucking moron

>>133440514
>"I don't know what net neutrality is."

>>133440733
Be gentle. A LOT of people have been shilled to fuck over this by fraud news networks so they don't actually know how it works and need to be educated.

Just a reminder:

Time Warner owns CNN
Comcast owns MSNBC

These companies want to get rid of Net Neutrality.
Does anyone really think they have OUR best interests in mind? Or do you think CNN and MSNBC might be slavering to start censoring 4chan once net neutrality protections are torn down?

Yes, we DO have a market competition issue. But that isn't actually involved with net neutrality. It's outside the scope of net neutrality, and it definitely needs to be dealt with. Scrapping net neutrality laws WON'T do that.

>>133440035
>leftists are in favor of something, therefore it's bad!
Even a broken clock is right twice a day. Leftists aren't wrong on *everything*. For example, most leftists used to be against free trade and walmart/china/etc and only started shilling for MUH FREE TRADE simply to be contrarian to Trump.

Look at the people in favor of getting rid of NN. It's all of the cuckservative shills like Paul Ryan, as well as the kikes in charge of the media, such as (((Brian L. Roberts))), CEO of Comcast.

>>133440757
>They're all fucking spotty and unreliable. So I'm forced with Comcast. Fuck off, retard.
And they keep it that way on purpose. They sue any ISP that wants to come on the scene with cheaper, better, non censoring, non data selling service. You are advocating that they continue to have such power, and we also give power to the FCC to do as they will.

This is not a fix.

A fix is destroying the monopolies and opening the market to small ISPs who can come in and offer a better service. They will then corner the market, forcing all ISPs to not fuck over their customer base the same way.

ANYONE WHO SUPPORTS NET NEUTRALITY IS A JEW SHILL Anonymous
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7J1o67-Qjo

Hol fucking shit, this video drops hard fucking redpills.

Net Neutrality is jewish in nature and brainwashes our children.

Enjoy being docile human beings for the rest of your life.

File: Laughing_Marx.jpg (141KB, 480x563px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 480x563px

>>133432719

File: Screen Shot 2017-07-12 at 10.47.51 PM.png (116KB, 1180x818px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 1180x818px

>>133440757
>guys 4 ISPs is not enough for one city! it's a monopoly!
oh wait, you have 13 providers in your shitty nigger infested slum. many rated higher than comcast.

it's funny how you shills are so passionate about attacking comcast rather than defending NN. maybe it has to do with this being comcast vs netflix

>>133441013
I'm starting to believe that these anti-NN shills are paid by these companies to go here and spread their shit.

>>133430675
Verizon VS FCC 2010
Law prevents companies from hiding any website or content from consumers. We already went through this before net neutrality, and corporations lost. This fucking net neutrality scare that even the faggots at 4chan are plastering at the top of the page should be ashamed of themselves.

>>133440886
CNN = Time Warner. They have a huge monopoly in a large amounts of the US.

Good luck moving to somewhere they don't already control or won't control in the near future.

>>133432724
>>133432765
you obviously live with youre mother and have never shopped for internet. please get rope and utilize it to extinguish your life.

>>133441079

Do you honestly think this low-tier gaslighting will be successful?

>>133440886
>if it goes out the window I'm moving to wherever there's an ISP that blocks CNN.

Why? Is someone forcing you to read CNN right now anon? Just don't go to the site lmao

So many pro-NN corporatist shills on this board

>muh free market
>muh hate liberals hahahahh liberals are so dumb hahahha

Jesus we are fucked. They just use some buzz words and popular phrasing and you idiots lap it up.

>>133440940
I know for a fact the only reason my part of Montana is on that list is because we have Charter and then we have some satellite internet service that provides dial up level speeds that people get for their cabins out in the middle of nowhere.

>>133433073
This 100%

Time Warner would not like supporting conservative or alt news

>>133441131

Yeah, I'll probably end up in bumfuck Montana or something.

Whatever, worth it.

>>133435266
Who. The. Fuck. Cares.

>>133431883
this would be fine if ISPs weren't monopolies

go shill elsewhere pls

>>133432789
are you retarded or just getting ripped off? theres no way thoes amounts are correct. ask your mom to show you the bill again.

File: 1483676830629.jpg (835KB, 2100x3300px) Image search: [Google]

835KB, 2100x3300px

>>133440888
>>133441009
>>133440733

Goes back to what I was saying about markets you dumbasses. This is how capitalism works. Net neutrality = internet version of ridiculous satellite TV packages. Right now, this is not the case. But it will be. It will be.

>>133430675
Wouldn't a VPN allow access to everything since the ISP wouldn't be able to see your traffic?

>>133441168
Did you mean anti-NN?

>>133430675
Can someone explain to me why this is an issue? Net neutrality was passed in 2015, I don't remember any issues before that. Is this all just a retarded meme?

>>133441096
Wow, this faggot is really trying hard. Have you ever actually tried to live on your own? These ISPs are complete fucking shit. Their equipment is not par to the big ISPs. Fuck off with your shilling, Schlomo.

>>133440605
Honestly it's 1000gb because somehow I never got into a plan. They tried to get me one a while back so I can have "unlimited" data, but like you I never get close to what I have now. Plus it would of been a down grade in mp.

>>133441013
>Yes, we DO have a market competition issue. But that isn't actually involved with net neutrality. It's outside the scope of net neutrality, and it definitely needs to be dealt with. Scrapping net neutrality laws WON'T do that.

Precisely. All of the anti-NN people keep arguing from the stance of what they think ought to be the case, rather than what actually is the case. Yeah yea yeah, blah blah "if it were a real free market, this wouldn't be a problem!!!" and all that shit. We don't have a free market for ISPs.

A huge part of the problem is that a lot of the lilbertarian/cuckservative guys are so dogmatically attached to arbitrary axioms like "always side with deregulation no matter what" that they stop looking at actual issues and ONLY look at this.

>>133441131
I actually attempted to get Time Warner cable, but was forced into Charter time after time. I even looked up a location on the internet, and when I finally got there it appeared to have been very recently bulldozed. Now the two ISPs are merging, mine and that one.

US has been facilitating cronyist monopolies for decades. They write our laws and pick our judges.

>>133441112
They 100% ARE.

That's why they keep trying to misrepresent facts and lie to people.

Save a few posts you think are good at explaining the situation. The best weapon is the truth. Inform everyone how net neutrality actually works, who is involved with trying to get rid of net neutrality, and how net neutrality has NOTHING to do with market competition.

Preserving internet freedom is so incredibly important. Without it, we would never have had Trump. There'd be no 4chan, none of the fun, none of the investigations, none of the swamp draining. The internet would look like mainstream television and we'd be continuing our rapid slide into despotism.

File: cable.jpg (14KB, 300x168px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 300x168px

you don't like paying more ohhhh im sorry

>>133430675
>Fake image
>Fake problem
>Fake bogeyman
>Paranoid fanfiction
OP is a genuine faggot.

>>133441257
LMAO! You're not about to fucking make be believe that, Schlomo. Go away!

>>133441168

It's okay to be stupid, you don't have to show it though. Just go back to believing that national socialism is the most economically viable system.

Retard.

>>133440940
Sedans and sports cars are very different in terms of price, speed, and luxury... that doesn't mean that a car lot with one Audi and twenty Toyotas only has one "real" choice.

As a consumer, you get to decide what's important to you and how much you're willing to pay.

>>133432719
Monopolies only exist because of the damn FCC government monopoly on radio waves.

>>133441294
Sorry, yes that's what I meant

>>133441310
so if comcast is dominating the market with superior equipment, why do you want a government regulated market that stops competition from coming in?

File: incredulous.gif (4MB, 400x224px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 400x224px

>>133441450

You don't have to read my replies nigger

>>133441303

They're trying to obfuscate the whole issue.

They're trying to disingenuously act like it hasn't happened yet, and that the repeal is actually a passing.

Shit's fucked breh, it's a good disinfo campaign.

>>133441303
Even if things were fine before(they werent really ISPs were throttling Netflix), there is no reason not to put neutrality into law

>>133430675
Net Neutrality is a regulation to undo to effect of an over regulated internet market. There's no reason Google should be able to roll these guys with a killer service, but utility access is far too bogged down in local regulations it does something like triple the cost of rolling out new lines.If the internet market were actually free this sort of thing wouldn't be a concern. You could kill a bad ISP in a month if it decided to throttle its customers and everyone jumped ship.

>>133437706
how the fuck are you paying for lines to run your internet across in the first place? you have to build lines or buy pre-existing lines and that's one of the biggest problems with making a startup

>>133441121
>Law prevents companies from hiding any website or content from consumers
Yeah, that's outright banning. Now what about throttling? They can make certain websites downright unusable by giving them the lowest possible priority.

It's akin to shadowbanning in the sense that an actual ban would be too obvious, so places like reddit and twitter shadowban you so you THINK you're making posts that aren't actually being seen. Likewise, they want to use throttling because it's not as obvious as outright blocking sites, but will still cause people to be dissuaded from certain sites towards others.

File: mudlip.png (215KB, 1024x1458px) Image search: [Google]

215KB, 1024x1458px

>>133430675
This is so fucking disgusting that you support corporations to restrict your internet and make you pay more for shit then before. you have to be a shill

>>133441288
No, because they'll just cut off the website instead.

Can't visit 4chan if 4chan can't get any hosting anywhere because none of the ISP's will allow it unless they pay exorbitant amounts of money, or let the ISP police content.

>>133441538
That's not what fucking net neutrality is ! YOU ARE NOT GOING TO FOOL ANYONE !

Net neutrality = equal speed of access to all sites.

WE ARE NOT STUPID ! WE ARE NOT FUCKING STUPID !! STOP YOUR SHIT !!

File: 1499785701102.webm (3MB, 204x360px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 204x360px

oh look the black and yellow faggot is at this again

>>133430675
> I see no problem for charging me extra for a worse version for something I already have

Imagine if you had to pay a water tax for water you use for coffee, that's how retarded this thing is

>>133441196
That map is JUST broadband, not satellite, mobile, etc.

THIS is what the map looks like with everything >>133432765

>>133441538

Why do you think net neutrality has ANYTHING to do with infrastructure regulations?

>>133441303
The media conglomerates like Timewarner/CNN want to repeal net neutrality so they can control content on the internet.

It's really that easy and simple.

>>133441454
I wonder what it's like being such a low life piece of shit to participate in destroying the internet, one of the greatest tools of the past century and all humankind for your own selfish benefit.

>>133441477
Pretty sure If I want an Audi I can just go to the Audi dealership, I'm not forced to buy an Audi from Toyota.

Your analogy is shit, because it's prefixed on there not being state sanctioned monopolies by ISPs.

>>133441777

>>133440998

>>133441679
where in the net neutrality act does it say equal speed of access to all websites?

as far as i can recall, that comes from the FCC suing an ISP in 2010. 5 years before net neutrality came about.

>>133441755
>he doesn't know it's illegal to collect rainwater in most of America

>>133430675
This isn't capitalism, no markets are being created. What we have now is a captive market, an oligopoly, which is why countries poorer than us have fiber optic internet and we don't. The telecoms have an agreement with each other not to push for fiber optic internet, because if one did, they all would, and it would bring in zero additional income.

Capitalism works in a pure market, with little barrier to entry and lots of competition. ISPs do not fall under that category. I'm a proponent of capitalism, but you have to have some regulation. Pure capitalism doesn't work because of markets, which are based on human nature, which is inherently illogical and short sighted.

File: 1498321494376.png (86KB, 320x320px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 320x320px

>>133430675
>NN Repealed
>ISP bans 4chan
>ISP's Locations across the region mysteriously burn to the ground

don't lie to yourselves

>>133441626
https://techcrunch.com/2009/12/22/comcast-settles-bandwidth-throttling-lawsuit-for-16-million-thats-4-hours-of-revenue/
No internet company may throttle nor offer internet plans. That was on torrent throttling. Even Verizon got fucked for throttling Netflix users.

Law protects us from this shit BEFORE net neutrality. Net neutrality is only for the large telecomm companies and liberal social media sites to fuck people over. Its a bag of fucking shit wrapped in a nice wrapper. You think its something nice, but underneath it is terrible and you are misled.

This thread is such a fucking timewarp. Most everyone seems to agree that allowing ISPs to throttle speeds on certain websites is a bad thing, but the argument is about what to call the situation that does not allow it. What has happened to our social reality? How can so radical a disconnect exist?

>>133441915
>The telecoms have an agreement with each other not to push for fiber optic internet
They are doing everything in their power to cockblock at&t and google expanding fiber, and it pisses me off.

Fuck these niggers.

>>133441777
Weird. Then it must just be a business service provider I've never heard of
.

>>133441909
That's not the point.

Once you get water, you can use it however you want at the same price per gallon, if you use 3 gallons to wash your car or to bathe, it's the same price for that water. Currently this applies to the Internet, ISPs can only charge for data you use, not for how (or where) you use it

File: Robespierre.jpg (562KB, 939x1190px) Image search: [Google]

562KB, 939x1190px

>>133441808

Jesus Christ man, quit being hyperbolic. You'll still be able to use the internet, it's not like it's going away or anything.

Besides I'm sure once they start implementing this stuff there will be huge backlash from the public, even more so than these shitty website blackouts. They'll probably amend some of the bill to please all of you liberal socialists.

You know, the people that flip cars and loot buildings whenever the 'system' oppresses them.

File: gettyimages-527852114_sq-35a5cee2ff2a120f2053aa9450e231b20d11730a-s300-c85.jpg (17KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 300x300px

>Thanks for helping me get elected, suckers!

>>133441605
>Even if things were fine before(they werent really ISPs were throttling Netflix)
Except there were ISPs throttling netflix, and this is what led to the law.

Do you understand how laws are made and implemented? What happens is companies find an "exploit" if you will. Some way of doing things that's not illegal that they can easily use to their advantage. After they start using this, everyone else sees what's going on and says "what the fuck, this is fucked up". That's when politicians step in and make a law as a RULE PATCH, so to speak. The point here is that a law is only made after the exploit is identified.

It's disingenuous to say "oh, well the law was only made in 2015 and the lack of NN wasn't an issue beforehand anyway!". Why? Because it wasn't until shortly beforehand that ISPs realized they could do this for their own benefit at the detriment of customers. The internet is young; the fact that no one realized they could do this before 2015 doesn't mean it's not an issue that should have been addressed.

There is no reason to be against NN. Stop being a ZOG shill.

sooo many (((people))) trying to blacklist NN by associating it with jews...

so fucking stupid, yeah dumbass lets just let them do to the internet what they did to TV and radio.

File: goodtimes.jpg (188KB, 850x478px) Image search: [Google]

188KB, 850x478px

>>133430675
oh how the times have changed, back then 4chan would support net neutrality and free speech and occupy wall street, then all these normie the donald plebbit trash newfags came in and ruined original chan culture it's fucking disgusting, bet you 50 dollars most people on here found out about 4chan through memes and /pol/ and came after moot left. kill yourselves nu-4channers; Also, 4chan was originally anarchist stop sucking the rich 1%'s dick newfags

File: 6.png (9KB, 1677x125px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 1677x125px

>>133442120
Saving this post for future NN threads

>>133441414
I understand NN, but Im not sure how handing over regulation of content to the FCC and FTC is any better.

WHat happens when the Dems get their way and can finally legally label sites like drudge, infowars, gatewaypundit, etc as fake news? You dont think they FCC and FTC wont step in and take them down?

How is that to be combatted?

>>133442120
This is how these corporations work. They don't have to have creativity or ingenuity anymore, it's past that point. They can simply afford to buy out the competition.

>>133442195
I'm for Net Neutrality though, not sure why you quoted me

>>133442120
Yes, but the internet didn't "suddenly" start working that way in 2015 when the legislation was signed, it's been like that since day one. That's the point here.

>>133442127

Your posts are willfully obtuse.

I.E.

>>133441257

Actually, you live under NN RIGHT FUCKING NOW, and it isn't like that.

File: 143825942.png (315KB, 716x560px) Image search: [Google]

315KB, 716x560px

>>133442307

It is inevitable. This is what I'm trying to tell you guys for fucks sake. YOU CAN'T STOP IT. It'll be manipulated and named something else if people start rioting or whatever.

Just stop crying over it and move on to the next telecommunications market.

File: save_internet_aib_youtube.jpg (58KB, 635x391px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 635x391px

>>133432724
>>133433073
>>133436448

Whether you're a nationalist or a globalist, a Trumpette or a Libtard, the internet needs to stay free and open:
https://www.battleforthenet.com/

Do what needs to be done.

If ISPs take control - you, me, and all other consumers are going to be the big, fat losers. You aren't a loser, are you?

Let's embody some of that grit and determination Trump showed when he took the Presidency from Washington, and make sure the open internet is never taken from us.

(Am I speaking your language yet? :P)

>>133442349
No, because the FCC and the FTC are gutted organizations - guess who's gutting them? Republicans. Do you really think Dems will restrengthen these organizations when they're back in power and NN is removed?

The American people is getting spitroasted and the people here are eating up the anti-NN shilling.

>Wanting the government to,control the net when drumpf is in office.

Come on. it's only a matter of time before he blocks more than just muslims for """""fake news"""""" l. we can't let this cheeto get those nuclear codes or our internet!

Give our ISP back to the people! make connections not fire walls!

>>133442503

>Just stop crying over it and move on to the next telecommunications market.

How much do you get paid to do this?

>>133442349
I'd rather not lose net neutrality and not get restricted access to the internet and be forced to pay for shitty packages instead of losing some tin foil shill news sites

>>133442349
It's not actually regulatory content the way you think it is.

The FCC isn't able to say, "No you can't have this on your website", and even if they DID do that - you have grounds to sue through the courts. The constitution doesn't allow the FCC to make this kind of decision and The PEOPLE don't want the FCC to be censoring shit like that.

What the FCC is actually doing however, is saying, "No, Timewarner, you cannot throttle bandwidth for people trying to connect to google, NYT, or 4chan"

That's what the "regulation" is. And the shills try to make vague statements about regulations like they're preventing market competition, but what's ACTUALLY preventing market competition is the way the ISP's are creating lock-in situations with cities, where only the ISP can offer internet, and then the city is stuck with them for 10 years or whatever.

THAT is killing market competition and creating monopolies, not net neutrality.

Net Neutrality is preserving places like 4chan's existence.

File: Citigroup.jpg (2MB, 4368x2912px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4368x2912px

>>133442636

I'm just angsty tonight and I'm tired of seeing all of you liberals complaining about muh internet wahhhh

Verizon vs FCC
Comcast lawsuit throttling bittorrent
Verizon lawsuit throttling Netflix
ALL prior to "net neutrality", and means that it is against the law for any company to do this. Stop pushing this bullshit scare what-if infographs because people who make massive amounts of money are pushing them, backed by moron liberals who don't fucking bother to read facts and eat up what-if scenarios as truth.

>>133442639
It didn't happen for the last 30 years without NN legislation, it's not gonna suddenly happen now.

>>133442639
>tin foil shill news sites
>pushing a tin foil conspiracy that corporations with shareholders will start blocking all your websites unless you fork over $1000

>Internet literately owned by one company as they owned all communication line here
>No NN
>None of the shit pro NN people say will happened happen

it is not a NN problem.
It is a (((them))) problem

>>133442592
>>133442639
>>133442694

Thanks for the replies.

>>133442741
>you liberals

>/pol/
>liberals

Nah, man. I'm a hardcore white ethno-nationalist. Fuck off, Cohn.

>>133442636

Also,

>getting paid to browse pol

Now that would be badass

>But then the internet will be just like cable!

Right, it will suddenly cost a gorillian dollars to start up a website, there will only be about 500 websites in existence, and ISPs will start having to pay websites to host them on their tiered packages.

OH WAIT, WEBSITES ARE NOTHING LIKE CHANNELS/STATIONS AND LITERALLY NONE OF THIS WILL HAPPEN OR HAS HAPPENED IN THE LAST 20 YEARS

>>133442592
>Do you really think Dems will restrengthen these organizations when they're back in power and NN is removed?
Of course they'll give it a shot like they always do.

>>133442041
It would cut into the earnings of their business class internet offerings.

>>133431883
>leave current net provider for only other option in region
>same speeds, same ISP bans of [insert website here]
>0 competition because oligopoly.

Worked like a charm! Love them free markets. They always just incentivize competition so much! Definitely don't incentivize cooperation once you get large enough that there are only a few players.

>>133432724
Here in St. Louis we have two cable broadband options: Charter and AT&T. Both average around 25Mbps, frequently drop connections without reason or warning, cost $60 a month, throttle competitive services (Netflix), and have awful customer service. It's been this way for 8 years now. Google Fiber would totally crush them, but they lobby the local government to ensure Fiber will never set up shop.

I don't recall the economic jargon, but there's a phrase used to describe this situation. One company knows the competition is complacent, so it will also be complacent. The regional market is a duopoly, but ultimately it doesn't matter with who you pay for. The service is lousy regardless.

tl;dr: you're wrong.

>>133442741

>y-you're a liberal!

Nah, I'm just not a total retard that disingenuously conflates issues for a corporate purpose.

You're trying to act like NN isn't already the law. That it's an upgrade to repeal it. That it would somehow have anything whatsoever to do with with the infrastructure regulations that created the monopolies.

>>133442792
Wow, I'm starting to think there are bots in this place.

>>133442465
Wasn't that legislation made to keep the internet working or something?

Or maybe as a ground legislation from which to expand further in the following years.

>>133430675

>isps
>free market

The isp industry isn't a free market. The main method is to get cities to pay for them laying fiber lines in exchange for 50+ years of exclusive fiber rights. When that doesn't fly, they often negotiate to the fact that competing isps are allowed, but they have to pay to use their fiber lines and no one is allowed to lay competing fiber lines.

I know because I help them do it. They're getting rich because your city politicians love dem sweet, sweet (((donations)))

File: f95f7a5d50690ba0788cf40879673b6c.jpg (235KB, 2048x1024px) Image search: [Google]

235KB, 2048x1024px

>>133442503
You have to be a fucking shill getting payed to say this shit, being a pussy won't solve anything, we can atleast extend net neutrality until the rich fat cats get the memo and stop trying to remove NN otherwise their proprosals to keep removing NN will continue to get veto'd and this website you're using and your gay porn won't get restricted

>>133442636
He's sort of right, they're not going to quit. There is too much money at stake for them. The internet just killed their monopoly on television and radio, people don't HAVE to listen to their shitty kike content anymore, they have options. And when books were popular they monopolized the printing presses. The same thing is happening here, people don't want their shitty content so they're going to buy the system out that's killing their business. They're going to throw everything they have into it. If some new NN bill pops up every 6-12 months, do you really think people are going to keep caring? The shock value is already starting to wear off. It will become normalized.

It's fucked up. Too many people are too greedy to care about the actual progress of mankind and community, they would rather have money and control.

>>133442855

Anyone who complains about having to pay for a service they are being provided (you are not forced at gunpoint to have certain websites given to you on a silver platter) is a communist idiot. Acces to websites equally is not a right. If you believe this then you probaly also believe that you have the right to be provided certain types of healthcare, or certain types of food.

Is there anything the federal government (congress or executive) could realistically do to stop this problem >>133443053

>>133443057
>the rich fat cats get the memo
you mean the government? and the memo not to keep regulating

>>133442792

Then why repeal it?