Explain net neutrality to me

Net neutrality is basically a rule by the government that internet service providers must treat all internet data the same and with neutrality. So if net neutrality is banned then companies could block 4chan and any other website they want from your internet for "racism" or "misogyny" or whatever they feel against. They would basically be censoring internet data that they don't agree with.

>>133447053

thanks for the reply is it true that trump supports banning it

>>133447053

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

Holy 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.

Get fucked niggers

Net Neutrality is inherintly anti-fascist. We need digital fascism to prevent the populace being brainwashed by useless information.

You're the ones LARPing as a """"Libertarian"""" and then when someone takes your stupid little internet away you cry like a big stupid baby. Get fucked nigger

There is absolutely nothing wrong with Telcom Companies setting up different Internet Deals. Afterall it is annarcho capitalistic.

Go back to plebbit, niggers

>>133447508
yes, though i suspect he doesn't have a strong position on it

net neutrality gets associated with the left because a lot of the tech world is lefty urbanites, but it's really a centrist issue

>>133447649

File: TmobileBingeOn.jpg (63KB, 1192x416px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 1192x416px

>>133444523
It's a policy that forces internet providers to be 'neutral' on the content of the data you send and receive. So for example if your power company could see what appliance your power bill was going to they couldn't charge less for powering a Philips TV than a Sony one because the made a deal with the manufacturer.

>>133447508
Republicans are generally against net neutrality because;
-net neutrality would require more laws and they're supposedly the less government is better party
-it stifles competition (but that's moot in areas where with only 1-2 ISPs)
-corporate lobbyists paying them off (on both sides)
-some other retarded stuff because government officials in general don't understand technology

>>133448902
Sounds sweet!

>>133448902
>(but that's moot in areas where with only 1-2 ISPs)

This is the real problem. If there was actual competition for internet service in the US then net neutrality wouldn't really matter, as free market would take care of it.
Where I live AT&T is literally the only option unless I want to go with shit tier satellite internet. If AT&T decides to fuck me up the ass I have no choice but to take it.

>>133449295
Yeah, it's pretty essential here. Canada's largest city only has 2 ISPs that own infrastructure and they've tried multiple times to make their own version of Youtube and Spotify and force it into the market by not charging any internet fees for them.
Thankfully the government ruled against it. They were pretty shitty services too and died off without the advantage.

It prevents Comcast from charging you to browse certain sites or slow down their competition. Comcast is losing on cord cutters, and wants to throttle the Internet to make their profits back.

>>133444523
Turn on a faucet. Water comes out. The utilities provider doesn't care if you use that water for drinking or cleaning or waterboarding a nigger, they just bill you for the volume consumed. That's net neutrality.

What (((Comcast))) and similar giants want to do is adjust prices according to what they want you to do with your digital water. You can drink from your Comcast-provided toilet with the standard package, but have to pay extra for tap water or washing your car, and waterboarding a nigger is grounds for immediate termination of service.

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

250KB, 704x1235px

Basically if you oppose net neutrality then you are a racist sexist homophobic islamophobic piece of shit bigot.

File: who is behind NN.png (3MB, 1728x2180px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1728x2180px

>>133448902
>Some other retarded stuff
Sounds like a solid take on what liberals understand of it.

No, "Net Neutrality" is yet another scam devised by those that want big companies to stay big and the small companies to never have a chance. Forcing smaller companies to adhere to the same standards as the big ones only gimps them immediately and removes the competition from the playing field.

What's that? You like the government running every aspect of your life? You must be a huge fan of the DHS and NSA datamining the ever loving shit out of every single google search and amazon purchase you make! Boy, can't wait til everyone looks and acts exactly the same under Internet Communism! What a glorious thing it will be!

Stop being lazy and do your own research. This is no small decision to make. One thing I have found is that BOTH sides in the private sector claim they're against censorship and BOTH sides claim the opposing side doesn't know what it really means. Some advice, see who supports either side and decide for yourself.

File: superior comcast coverage.png (269KB, 800x692px) Image search: [Google]

269KB, 800x692px

>Net Neutrality will protect us from big and evil corporations from throttling us :(
You mean like it's doing now? Don't make me laugh. Half the country suffers from regular throttling, while we're under Net Neutrality. It hasn't done shit to help us in the least.

>>133450743
I would argue that WITH Net Neutrality, the government could more easily pass a law that infringes on your free speech, using the internet as a medium, since all ISPs would have to adhere to the new federal standards. No, we should NOT give the government even more power over our free speech, thanks.

>>133444523
Liberal retards think highly sophisticated internet traffic works the same as groundwater

Normally you buy internet that isn't being tampered with by your provider.
Without net neutrality, Comcast can tamper with your experience. They can slow certain sites down, censor sites they don't like, let certain sites have no data caps, block all bittorrent traffic, slow down netflix, etc.

Net neutrality makes providers just sell internet without saying how you should use it.

>>133451155
It's a fallacy to imply that because one type of law passes over the internet, other laws, regardless of legitimacy would also pass.
Also protecting free speech generally requires more government intervention, not less.

>>133450988
the problem isn't throttling, it's throttling specific websites for a financial or political advantage.

>>133450887
I'm up for taking bait but I'm not sure what the point is here.
>Forcing smaller companies to adhere to the same standards as the big ones only gimps them immediately and removes the competition from the playing field.
This sounds like an argument but I can't think of an industry where upstarts are at a dissadvanate from a level playing field.

>>133450681
They don't bill YOU for the water consumed, they bill everyone for everyone's water that's consumed.

You get billed 65 bucks if you drink a glass a day or if you fill up your swimming pool everyday.

>>133447649
A reminder that fascist governments are inherently inefficient and they lost during world war two.

File: opposite.jpg (105KB, 720x541px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 720x541px

>>133450887
>see who supports either side and decide for yourself.

>>133444523
Basically, net neutrality is a movement to give government control of the internet so that the corporations won't destroy the entire internet because they're evil.

If you don't support the movement then you obviously work for the corporations and are okay with the internet being destroyed.

And by corporations I mean the corporations I don't like, not the ones I do like, like google and netflix.

>>133450887


BUT WHO WILL BUILD THE ROADS?!

>>133452561
It's mainly comcast and att that hate net neutrality, because they control the internet pipes.
Netflix wants net neutrality since it means comcast can't charge them extra to use the internet.

>>133450681
>See how easy my favorable opinion is? Nice, right?
>Everything sucks otherwise! Forget it!
So typical to make it sound like that.

No it would be more like this
With Net Neutrality: Gamers have slightly less latency because everyone has the same Federally Regulated internet speed as ordained by the Internet Regulation Agency. If said agency decides to restrict internet, even a bit, everyone suffers - despite you paying your bills on time or how you feel about it. Tough shit.

Without Net Neutrality: Don't use a lot of internet? Don't buy a big, expensive package. Use a lot and need something stronger? So long as your area has a few ISPs with those packages, no problem. Let's not forget about Fiber - a new, high demand option that offers speeds somewhere near 10 times normal and for a fraction of the cost of some other competitors. I personally am looking into Fiber in my area but they "don't provide it here" even though their website says it does ... so they referred me to BigCorp #3 who totally isn't bullying them or anything ;^) But their Fiber packages is half the cost of what I am currently paying with BigCorp#3 and is easily 10 times as fast. I really wish monopolies were regulated!

Oh wait. They are, aren't they? ;^)
Well so long as they're not "technically" a monopoly, no one can do anything about it - so tell me, how does "Net Neutrality" solve any of that? I won't even go into the aspect of "throttling", to make it easier on you...

Net "neutrality" is what kikes and redditors call handing over control of the internet to the government because muh porn and muh ebil corporations. Notice how all the nanny state faggots in this thread sperg out if you mention this.

>>133452561
That is actually retarded.
>basically, net neutrality is a movement to give government control of the internet
No. It is to protect the laws that ensure no special privileges are given to specific websites, such as partners to an ISP. This means you might have youtube blocked by comcast because they partnered with Vimeo, and you can only browse youtube for 10 hours a month before having to upgrade your plan for an extra 20$ a month.

Being against net neutrality is being for the Jews, you fucking shill.

>>133447053
Wrong so wrong. NN is about providing equal bandwidth which has no negative effect on the data you view online. Your payment plan should dictate speed not the government.

>>133452874
>If said agency decides to restrict internet, even a bit, everyone suffers


[citation needed]

You are creating a hypothetical problem that does not, and has not existed, ever.

Your premise is flawed and therefore all your logic based on that premise is flawed.

>>133451962
>Net neutrality makes providers just sell internet without saying how you should use it.
Mmmm nope, we had this debacle pop up during that Netflix throttling fiasco and it was resolved before net neutrality came around. Net neutrality just makes it impossible for fresh competitors to offer new cheaper service packages. Please stop being retarded.

>>133452973
>Net "neutrality" is what kikes and redditors call handing over control of the internet to the government
We're not handing over anything you fucking imbecile holy shit. Its to protect the current laws, the same ones that even allow you to browse 4chan without adding it to your plan because 4chan isn't going to be included in any package these fuckers offer. And you know damn well those kikes are going to charge you 5$+ to add a single website to the plan.

>>133452973
The government is demonstrably less corrupt than the cable and internet companies that currently hold a monopoly over the internet. Giving them more power will only make things worse.

>>133453153
>We're not handing over anything you fucking imbecile holy shit
You literally are. You are granting power to the government.

>Its to protect the current laws
>we need a law to protect laws
holy fucking shit please stop

>>133452996
>It is to protect the laws
Agreed. These ancient 2 year old laws need to be preserved else the corporations (again, the ones I don't like) will destroy censor the internet.

Thank God government is there to save us from this threat of the corporations (bad ones), else they would probably delete 4chan and other nefarious things that they would definitely do if these ancient 2 year old laws were not controlling them.

>>133453384
Net neutrality benefits the consumer

No net neutrality benefits the cable companies.

The entire purpose of government is to protect the people. This would fall into that category.

>>133452973
This. Look for the bullshit Orwellian naming conventions they give their plans and run the opposite way to find the truth. If they can't just call regulation "regulation", you know it's fucked.

>>133452071
>It's a fallacy to assume poorly
Of course but there's a chance of it happening. Same as the garbage the Pro-side has been spewing. It's a "what if" for days because even experts don't actually know for sure how bad either will be or can get.

>Implying they don't throttle now
We're Sorry. This Comment Is Not Available In Your Country.

>He posted so many times with such depth!
>But I disagree so it must be bait
Let's use a fine as an example.
Violate this law and you will be fined sum $15,000,000 not one cent more.

This would be easy for already large corporations that sneeze that much money without noticing. For a smaller company, this could totally wipe them off the map. If we get lazy with our laws or make too many, we WILL lose track and have more outdated, retarded laws. Legal is very specific and when we talk of regulation, it can get very messy, very quickly.

Imagine the scramble the lawyers and politicians would be in, every other year, if we need more internet for our growing population? They'd need to re-regulate everything because they'd need to allow more bandwidth etc. Every. Single. Time.

Now, how often do you think they would want to bother with such an ordeal? I personally do not trust our government with yet even more power over our free-speech medium. I think the world's governments shouldn't be allowed to decide "you said something in America that violates the law in Thailand, you're under arrest!". That's stupid as fuck. Keep government out of the internet.

>>133453384
>You literally are. You are granting power to the government.
We're not granting power to anyone. You're granting massive power to kikes in Verizon and Comcast the ability to shut off your internet because you masturbate to cartoons.

>>133453384
This is how retarded you are - you think we are advocating for the *creation* of a law, rather than the *scrapping* of a law that provides you with the very internet you know, the same one that doesn't charge you extra every month to visit this mongolian cave painting website.

>>133453449
Sarcasm will get you no where and do nothing for your arguments.

>>133447649
holy fucking shit youre dumb, enjoy your censored internet

>>133444523
If you are for it, you are on the same side as George Soros and Obama

>>133447649
>ANYONE WHO SUPPORTS NET NEUTRALITY IS A JEW SHILL
"LETS GIVE MONEY TO THE JEWS, ANYONE WHO DISAGREES IS A JEW SHILL!"
kike

>>133453028
>Federal regulated internet won't pose a problem because they'll regulate everything fairly
>I trust the government
>A problem could happen but it totally won't because it hasn't presented itself before now! :^)
>Therefore EVERYTHING you've said it false
I wonder who could be behind this post. Lazy, if nothing else.

>>133453361
>The government is demonstrably less corrupt
We can just stop reading right there. You trust the fucking social engineers in government more than corporations simply seeking profits? The motives of one are much more pure than the other.

File: 1486159879935.jpg (88KB, 717x880px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 717x880px

>>133452438
>a nation of 90 million people takes 6 years to lose to a combined population of half a billion
>flag

>>133453153
>HURR THIS LAW MADE BY OBAMA THATS ONLY EXISTED FOR THREE YEARS IS THE BEST THING EVER CUS MUH ACCESS AND WE NEED MORE LAWS

4chan isn't going to fucking disappear and the government isn't magically protecting it right now. Besides, big business kikes have shown to be demonstrably more trustworthy than big gov kikes, why do you think the likes of Soros are backing it.

>>133447649
You're not natsoc

>>133447649
So the vast majority of Americans are shills, now?

>>133448902
I just wanted to point out that little insult at the end, how ridiculous that is.

>The government doesn't understand technology
>That's why I trust them with regulating it
Just stop, leaf. Your people are already known for being some of the worst shitposters.

Go to Netflix.com right now. That should give you the answer.

>>133453757
>Federal regulated internet won't pose a problem because they'll regulate everything fairly

>he would rather have an internet regulated by a dozen different corporations, all of which are controlled by Jews, than by a single law saying "hey, don't throttle service to any website because you don't like them"
>then he implies the jews are the ones advocating for net neutrality

wow its like you're retarded or something

>>133452788
Not the Marxists. Too lazy and don't know how.

>>133453628
>Sarcasm will get you no where and do nothing for your arguments.
Not sure what you're talking about. Are you saying my pro-net neutrality posts are weak? I'm sorry let me switch to the strong arguments.
>SUPPORT THIS MOVEMENT OR YOUR INTERNET GETS IT
Wait that sounds like we're evil. Let me try again.
>YOU WILL BE BLOWN UP BY TERRORISTS IF YOU DON'T SUPPORT THE PATRIO-
wait hold on. one more try.
>JOIN OUR MOVEMENT OTHERWISE [FAVORITE WEBSITE] WILL BE DELETED/CENSORED/BLOCKED!
There we go.

Net neutrality is bad. Without it, your ISP can kill off shit websites like 4chan. The cancer will finally be cured.

>>133453859
>big business kikes have shown to be demonstrably more trustworthy than big gov kikes
>its the "you have to choose between one group of jews or another" argument
yeah ok
Soros is behind net neutrality because he isn't retarded and knows it will be cheaper for him (a consumer) to use it to spread his propaganda rather than buy off his friends to let his shill websites prosper.

File: 1497312039394.png (107KB, 610x702px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 610x702px

>>133453900
>saying that the government doesn't need to protect anime porn websites isn't natsoc

Really made me think.

Net neutrality is internet communism.

Basically it allows large corporations like Netflix to use fuck tons of brandwidth and instead of paying for it themselves, EVERYONE who buys internet has to subsidize it. This way, these companies can basically rake in ridiculous amounts of money from advertisers and subscription fees without having to pay jack shit. Without net neutrality, you would see your internet cost lower but subscription fees to certain websites would go up, or there would be more advertisements on some websites.

Inb4 "Comcast isn't going to lower their prices because they have a monopoly in many areas on internet service!"

Then why don't they increase the price right now? Because they already charge the maximum amount for internet service that they, as a company, have determined people are willing to pay. They aren't going to start charging more just because net neutrality gets repealed. The fact that some ISPs hold a monopoly is a problem, but it really has nothing to do with net neutrality.

If I only use the internet a couple times a day for 15 minutes, my internet subscription fee shouldn't be subsidizing people who watch Twitch all day long while simultaneously listening to Spotify with 15 pornhub tabs open. The brandwidth costs should be charged to the companies that use the most brandwidth. Not pushed onto the consumer. If you self-righteous morons would actually think critically and consider opposing viewpoints, you might realize there's a reason so many massive internet corporations are pushing net neutrality so hard. It isn't because they have your best interests in mind. It's because companies like Facebook stand to lose millions and might have to compete with smaller businesses.

>>133453757
Your situation is entirely hypothetical

You are deflecting the flawed premise of your point because you have no solid foundation to stand on. Put on your tin foil hat and go back to your basement.

>>133453791
Money is power. There is no difference between seeking power in government or seeking more money, the two are interchangeable.


So many children on this board, with absolutely no understanding of anything.

It doesn't change anything heh. We all got facebook accounts heh. It just stops you from culturally appropriating BBC vernacular like "based" online. Feel me cuz?

>>133454144
>EVERYONE who buys internet has to subsidize it.

>Because they already charge the maximum amount for internet service that they, as a company, have determined people are willing to pay.

These two statements cannot be simultaneously true.

>>133454144
>actually think critically and consider opposing viewpoints
The government can do that for us. The government can do anything if we just believe. Heretics like you who doubt the government will receive Federal Punishment for your heresy.

>>133453582
>The entire purpose of government is to protect the people.
Now I know you're a fucking shill.

So the FCC can censor and fine people for swearing on TV, why can't they do that on the internet?

Why aren't people mad about "cable neutrality" or "cell phone" neutrality they do all the same bullshit to you here but people still pay.

People will pay for the "social media plus" package.

The point is they """can""" but they won't you won't notice a difference. Before there was a word for this shit it didn't exist. It's just a meme by (((them))) for the facebook slacktivists that aren't going to do anything.

>>133452071
Let me put it this way, Trump is the president. I'm sure you're not thrilled of that, considering you're A FUCKING LEAF but bear with me, syrup child.

If Trump has the power to regulate the internet... Wouldn't that be a bad thing for liberals? Wouldn't you be afraid of him censoring "fake news"? See, I side with Trump but I think that's too much power to be given to anyone. I don't see how you trust the government but also don't trust the government. And you claim I'm the one with fallacies? You're a shitposting contradiction. You think more government secures our free speech? I'm sorry but I heard people say "faggot" and "nigger" more times in my high school days than I have in recent years. That was because the government wasn't cracking down on socalled "Hate Speech". Don't you see where I'm going with this? You can dislike bigotry but who decides what is considered bigotry and what needs to be censored? Just imagine if Trump came up with this idea specifically to regulate your liberal free speech. How cucked would you be? There would be no recovering from that. YOU would be the person that said "Yes, I want the government to crack down on hate speech" and YOU would be the one guilty of silencing yourself.

You can read the net neutrality rules for yourself.

http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2015/db0312/FCC-15-24A1.pdf

Page 7
No Blocking. Consumers who subscribe to a retail broadband Internet access service
must get what they have paid for—access to all (lawful) destinations on the Internet. This essential and
well-accepted principle has long been a tenet of Commission policy, stretching back to its landmark
decision in Carterfone, which protected a customer’s right to connect a telephone to the monopoly
telephone network

No Throttling. The 2010 open Internet rule against blocking contained an ancillary
prohibition against the degradation of lawful content, applications, services, and devices, on the ground
that such degradation would be tantamount to blocking.

No Paid Prioritization. Paid prioritization occurs when a broadband provider accepts
payment (monetary or otherwise) to manage its network in a way that benefits particular content,
applications, services, or devices.

>>133447508
he appointed some indian faggot that wants to get rid of it

therefore he is also pushing it

>>133454598
People give up power to the government to protect them.

This is basic civics and the fact that you don't even understand the fundamental principles of politics is quite telling.

>>133454602

so you support trump's position on net neutrality under the guise that he would fight liberals with it

>>133454170
>Money is power.
Spoken like someone who's never been around either.

No, power is power. And it's corrupting influence (particularly when wielded by the SJWs and the like in government) is far, far worse than money will ever be.

>>133454769
With Citizen's United, money is power.

The more money you have, the more power you wield, the more you can influence world events. You cannot deny this. To deny this is delusion.

>>133444523
You shouldn't support it. All it does is give control of your Internet access to the government instead of the ISPs. It's a war between content providers and ISPs, and has nothing to do with you. The real question is whether you want the government in the ring, too.

>>133447053
Remember before 2015 when ISPs used to ban you from websites? What terrible times we lived in, goy!

>>133454373
I see what you're trying to say, and you're correct in your thinking, but the first statement was explaining why net neutrality, in principle, is a bad thing. The second statement is explains why with or without net neutrality it really won't make a difference because ISPs already charge you as much as they believe they can to maximize profits. They're not going to suddenly start charging more just because net neutrality is gone.

>>133454945
>Remember before 2015 when ISPs used to ban you from websites?
No but you don't understand! Didn't you see that image that had website access packages! That's proof that they're probably going to do it!

>>133444523
Net neutrality protects us from greedy (((capitalist))) corporations who are going to censor you if you take power away from the government.

>>133455079
But your reasoning for net neutrality is a bad thing is not being demonstrated in real life.

If anything, you are arguing for net neutrality because it forces ISP's to give everyone priority and because they know they can't extort their customers as much as they already do, they can't raise the price.

It's win-win.

>>133454739
Not at all. I am against Net Neutrality, despite who supports it. I think it's a bad idea. I only pointed out how it could turn around and fuck literally everyone in the ass, depending on who has the power. It's a bad deal for us citizens. I would rather just have shitty internet I pay more than I feel I should than have the fed in my bedroom checking in on what I'm doing every hour of the evening. No thanks.

>>133455151
Oh okay I am now informed and calling my congressman!

>>133447053
>>133447508
>>133447649
https://www.dailydot.com/layer8/fcc-internet-freedom-net-neutrality/
its so corrupt, theyre abusing the language, ENGLISH, to destroy it.
the internet = communication

Watch they cant answer the discrepancies i brought up

THeyre so corrupt, they can't use their definitions consistnently, SO NON-CONSISTENT, taht what theyre usign to take it over with they stole from what it had

>>133455384
oh no, 4chan will get even slower and the masses of people looking for (you)s will go elsewhere resulting in a mass exodus of cancerous phone posters

however shall we manage

>>133444523
only KIKES and SHILLS are against net neutrality
ever heard of Netflix? that is what will happen to pol

>>133454709
>People give up power to the government
Pretty sure our founding fathers were quite insistent on never, ever, EVER doing that. But then again, you're hiding behind that meme flag so I'm sure you live in a shitty socialist country and not America.

So which option do we lose less and Jews wins less

Either option sounds really bad

>>133455502
>ever heard of Netflix?
Yeah, the issue was resolved in court before net neutrality was a thing.

>>133455270
Because the ultimate red pill on this is that net neutrality doesn't make much of a difference either way. If it goes away nothing is really going to change.

>>133455079
>They're not going to suddenly start charging more just because net neutrality is gone.
Cases where ISPs were manipulating bandwidth, throttling, and blocking:
2005 - Madison River Communications was blocking VOIP services.(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. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2007/10/eff-tests-agree-ap-comcast-forging-packets-to-interfere
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. (edit: they actually sued the FCC over this) 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 products. (This one happened literally months after the trio were busted collaborating with Google to block apps from the android marketplace)
http://www.businessinsider.com/verizon-blocking-google-wallet-2011-12
https://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/11/07/06/verizons-illegal-app-blocking

>>133455629
Don't give them traffic

>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

>>133444523
MFW we already have net neutrality institutionalised, and companies compete which will first deliver optic fibre internet. I still remember when i first pirated 1GB file in 10. God this were times. Now everything is so shit in popular culture, that if i am bothered to download 100 MB of data in month, its already rare. Just admit america, your "free market" just doesn't always work so good as you claim.

>>133455079

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. (edit: they were fined $1.25million over this)
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
2016, Netflix already has to pay ISPs to not mess with their traffic to you. https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/columnist/shinal/2016/03/29/netflix-throttling-shows-net-neutrality-life-support-column/82388890/
2017, Time Warner Cable slowed down connections to League of Legends servers, while they were negotiating contracts with Riot in an effort to strong-arm Riot into paying TWC money. Spectrum ( bought TWC ) is now being sued by the state of New York over this.
https://www.polygon.com/2017/2/9/14548880/time-warner-lawsuit-new-york-league-of-legends-netflix
So yeah, ISP DO throttle, and interfere with the services you purchase for their gain. And Ajit Pai is a fucking goddamn liar.

>>133444523
Net neutrality ensures that internet is public utility like water. It puts the power to control the internet in the hands of the people, not greedy people in suits.

>>133455629
So maybe other companies should come along and set up their own infrastructures to compete with Comcast. You pessimist fucks act like it's impossible, but it's really not. Net neutrality is a step away from ending the monopolies

>>133454170
Too typical of an actual commie to call someone else a tin foil hat conspiracist, while you morons are busy claiming THE RUSSIANS. Don't think for a second your memeflag has me fooled. Leaf? Swede? What cuck country are you from?

>You're employing simple dismissal on the foundation that "Nah, won't happen"
>I'm the one deflecting
And what's your foundation on? Right now, under Net Neutrality, we have people that are being arrested from violating laws in OTHER COUNTRIES. Laws that they didn't even know existed or should care about, because the internet IS NOT NEUTRAL THROUGH NET NEUTRALITY. The government should not have reign over the internet. You are making a big mistake trusting the government that you don't trust with something this big. Look past your hate for racist bigots for one fucking second and realize how this could and WOULD fuck you over, if you allow some congress to decide that you have retroactively violated an internet law or an international law and you are now going to prison for 40 years.
>But this won't happen because it hasn't happened yet
You're being stupid. This is what we're TRYING to avoid. Let's say you really do trust the government with regulating the internet, is that good enough reason to force everyone else into a deal they're not comfortable with?

>>133454940
Simple thought experiment for you: who's more powerful, Bill Gates or Donald Trump?

Bill Gates or the combined members of the Supreme Court?

Yes, money often correlates with power, but they are not completely interchangeable.

Now, finally, guess which one is easier to measure, quantify, discern. Which one is easier to track. The motives related to one essentially become a simple equation. The motives related to the other can be shrouded in mystery, knowable only to the one who has it.

The devil you know is better than the devil you don't.

>>133455555
With net neutrality we win because the corporations will not be able to shut down sites like pol. Corporations suffer from free expression online, your elected representatives only benefit from the existence of pol.

>>133455507
You are such a child.

You don't even understand the basic principles of voting.

Get off here and go read a book for Christ sake.

File: pseg.jpg (184KB, 2133x503px) Image search: [Google]

184KB, 2133x503px

>>133455768
>It puts the power to control the internet in the hands of the people
But the control of 'public utilities' in America is controlled by monopolies, not the people, jackass.

>>133455821
Yeah but the government makes it hard for small companies to set up their own infrastructure so we need the government to solve the problems that government caused.

Why won't you just stop resisting and join us? We have all the celebrities and tech giants and world leaders and media organizations and intellectuals on our side.

Stop resisting you fucking shitlord.

>>133455768
And just like our water, many parts of the U.S have third world tier internet

Both the ISPs and government are shit, however power ultimately needs to be taken away from ISPs and given to the people as much as possible

>>133456071
>Found the ISP shill.
0.2 shekels have been deposited in your account. kek

File: cianig.jpg (139KB, 1600x900px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 1600x900px

>>133454170
you proven no point so
>no understanding of anything
yea you made YOUR POINT you STUPID FAGGOT

File: ProfileIcon1631_Bardnik.png (158KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

158KB, 300x300px

>>133455685
>2017, Time Warner Cable slowed down connections to League of Legends servers, while they were negotiating contracts with Riot in an effort to strong-arm Riot into paying TWC money. Spectrum ( bought TWC ) is now being sued by the state of New York over this.

Oh no , DONT MESS WITH MY FUCKING GAME.

I even upgraded my route to get rid of packet loss and i still had lag spikes.And i just found the reason. I use earthlink but earthlink is associated with TWC

>>133456071
>>133456157

(((UTILITIES)))
are not the hands of people

>>133456156
The water is bad in some places because private corporations are doing fracking which ruins the water supply. If capitalism was banned they would not be able to ruin the public utility.

>>133456007
>You don't even understand the basic principles of voting
Our founding fathers were quite insistent on keeping that to a minimum as well and we ignored them and look how that turned out. You are hiding your flag, defending big government and (((democracy))), and you expect me to believe you are a regular here? This is a raid. You have to go back.

>>133456157

Prove me wrong, you filthy reddit kike.

>>133455906
Bill Gates.

The entire SJW movement was funded by Soros.

Bill Gates has roughly half of the supreme court.

While Clinton spent more physical, tangible money than Trump did, Trump got billions of dollars worth of TV time.

Trump's motives are anything but transparent and you are naive to think otherwise.

>>133455891
Quit sperging out like an autist. Either post proof of your concept or shut the fuck up because nothing of what you say has any correlation to the real world.

>>133456269
>enforcing capatalism
Hey shill whats up

>>133455768
>Doesn't know the difference between public and private
>>133456071
Ask anyone on the west coast if they're fond of PG&E. Guaranteed they will say hell no but they're the only company for hundreds of miles so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

>>133455271

well some people have brought up the argument that if things change then the internet would become a lot less degenerate since companies could block data and such

File: data5.jpg (151KB, 792x1019px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 792x1019px

Here is another example of what you can expect if the FCC has its way.

>>133447649
Being loud and obnoxious yelling "nigger" doesn't get you any attention or credibility in real life, and it won't here either.

>>133456269
>If capitalism was banned
No anon we're not supposed to say that remember? Stick to the lines we were given for 4chan.

>>133456407
oh god well so FUCKIGN WHAT
WHAT FAGOTT COCKSUCKER??
WE -- HAVE TO DEAL WITH YRU CALIFORNIA SHITT EVERYWHERFUCKGIN WHERE ELSE?!!!
BECUASE OF YOU!??

I noticed the tactics used by pro-NN people often mirror the tactics used by people who want to push Global Warming. Both speak of "doomsday" scenarios, one the world will be fucked, the other the internet will be fucked and 10000x times as nickel and diming as it was before. Except there's no evidence for any of them. Both things are supported by the same parties, the left, globalists, and their puppets at the mainstream media networks. They're mirrored narratives, they even go as far as labeling you as bought by the oil industry or ISPs if you dare to defy their narratives, the nerve you have to defy NN/AGW. Same character assassination techniques if you don't go with the crowd.

It walks like a duck and quacks like a duck.

>>133456312
You're a giant fucking retard.


>quit hiding your identity on an anonymous board

And a giant fucking hypocrite.

LET THE INTERNET REMAIN FREE FROM THE CORPORATIONS WHO DESTROY EVERY SINGLE THING HUMANITY NEEDS
#NetNeutrality IS A MUST

>>133455502
But the demicrats support net neutrality

>>133456525
https://www.dailydot.com/layer8/fcc-internet-freedom-net-neutrality/
SHILL SHILL

>>133456559
SHIL SHILL

>>133456441
Is that image from the future? Can you tell me the next winning lottery numbers pls?

File: Net Neutrality.png (166KB, 1863x950px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 1863x950px

>>133450887
Big Telco lobbying through the American Legislative Exchange Counsel in the late 90's produced legislation that created this unlevel playing fields for market entry to the point of requiring regulation in the first place. The FCC tried to write new legislation to supersede this in 2015 and was overruled by a federal court.

Until that happens repealing Title II just further consolidates their power to control the product, your access and your wallet.

>>133455821
>set up their own infrastructures to compete with Comcast
>it's that simple!!!
It costs 10 grand to run cable
for a mile.
It would cost unimaginable amount of money to even provide for 1 town, and they definitely wouldn't see any profit.

File: THIS.jpg (8KB, 200x202px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 200x202px

>>133456441
THIS

>>133456269
The fault also lies in incompetent government policies, just look at what happened in Flint.

I hate big government as much as I hate big corporations, I believe when too much power in concentrated in one source it causes laziness, incompetence and corruption. It always fucks over the average citizen in the end. A balance needs to be struck.

File: 1489817226360.jpg (212KB, 590x322px) Image search: [Google]

212KB, 590x322px

>normies have to put actual effort into reaching 4chan
>those that want to be here would dance around the issues no problem
>4chan will become an obscure, dark and fun corner once again

>>133447053
>he trusts the government more than the free market

commie pig

>>133456668
ITLL ALL BE SECTIONED OFF INTO
>FORMS OF ENTERTAINMENT
WHICH FORMS OF ENTERTAINMENT DO YOU WANT?

AND THEYLL HAVE SOME SECTIONS YOU MUST PICK
OOOH GOODY THEYLL MAKE WHO KNOWS HOOOW MANY SECTIONS
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fKXk1VhAuvE
>THIS

>>133456627
Verizon is a global company and not every country on Earth has Net Neutrality

Hopefully this much information is enough for your cro magnon brain to understand.

>>133456627
It's fact. Big corporations throttle data and force people to pay more by increasing prices and selling websites in packages. That is what ISPs always do, and why we must act and show our support for net neutrality.

>>133456157
>Ironically using a white supremacist flag to hide your cuckflag
>When you realize a liberal using a racist flag is actually unironic because they're the most racist scumbags on the planet
>Liberals want diverse dick because they think it makes them look less racist
>Wanting your own race to mix so you feel less racist
>Being this insecure
>But no, it's everyone else that is racist, truly
>Let's just put on this "white supremacist" flag because everyone on 4chan are nazis XDD That will sway them to my whim!
I swear, every time I see you leddit leftypol faggots on this board, you always stick out. Even when you think you're blending in. It's like going to hawaii and wearing cargo shorts and a flower print shirt. Everyone knows you're not from there. You're not fooling anyone. The same goes for your other discordite buddies that have been shitposting in this thread.

What is truly amazing though is how you all unironically trust the government with censoring us "bigots" and don't think it could ever turn around and bite your useful-idiot asses.

so people for net neutrality want the government to censor 4chan and people against it want to leave it to the ISP's

is that it?

File: zappa.jpg (51KB, 636x421px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 636x421px

>NET NEUTRALITY
explained
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fKXk1VhAuvE
and
https://www.dailydot.com/layer8/fcc-internet-freedom-net-neutrality/
>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWoxUvWHtB4

funny as NN wasn't around in the early years of the inet and there were no problems. granted, it's changed a lot, but to think that every ISP is inherently evil and greedy is a bit of a long shot. most of them probably wouldn't do any of this as it would drive customers away.

the REAL reason why all these companies want NN around is so the ISPs cannot charge them for access to their networks (to you). they'd rather you get stuck with the bill with rate hikes and data caps.

Netflix for example doesn't pay a fuckin dime for the upkeep of infrastructure that ISPs must maintain to keep Netflix's traffic flowing. ISPs hate Netflix.

but keep shilling. if you don't know the pros and cons of NN then you cannot make an informed opinion.

>>133456804
The government cannot censor the internet because it's a protected right.

Companies can censor the internet because they are private businesses and when you sign that contract, you also waive your 1st amendment rights.

>>133456382
>Reading is hard

>>133456658
>Instead of removing government regulations that stifle competition, we'll instead opt for more government regulations.

>inb4 BUT OUR MASSIVE ORGANIZED INTERNET WIDE RAIDS WOULD NEVER WIN OVER THE CONSERVATIVES IF WE WENT THE "REMOVE REGULATIONS" ROUTE!

>>133456888
Even heard of Netflix hmm?

Imagine
if
internet
was
as
slow
as
reading
this
comment

>>133456407
>Ask anyone on the west coast if they're fond of PG&E. Guaranteed they will say hell no but they're the only company for hundreds of miles so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Exactly, and ISPs treat their customers like shit, too. Who in their right mind would give them total control?

>>133456888
> most of them probably wouldn't do any of this as it would drive customers away.

Not when they have a monopoly in place. They can fuck over the customer anyway they want because the customer has no other choices. You either bend the knee or go without internet.

>>133456497
Not an argument.

>>133456419
That's a solid point but I still would want the internet to remain uncensored. If that means liberal circle jerks, then so be it. Free speech is for everyone, not just people I agree with.

>>133456789
>>133456790
DAMNIT YOU FUCKING TIME TRAVELERS GIVE ME THE LOTTO NUMBERS

>>133456905
>The government cannot censor the internet because it's a protected right.
for now, when the dems take the white house you can bet your sweet ass they'll try and ban this place

nothing stops the government from censoring shit they dont want, its a trust relationship with them

ISP's on the other hand are greedy public jews

>>133456905
with a free market you can always let it decide
cuase if i ran this site i wouldnt want to ban my customers,
who are my customers?

i suppose the traffic to my site that brings the dumbassses whod pay me to host their ads
right?
whats business does the government have on the internet? like none.

google, now they make money and should be shut down and hacking shouldnt be allowed..

but

>>133457077
That sounds like fear mongering, you SPIC. You fucking SPIC. BUILD THE WALL.
You are all rapists and criminals.

>>133456491
It's called Commiefornia for a fucking reason, pal. Welcome to the shit show. Now do you see why I'm against (((fed))) bullshit? See how regulated it actually is? Enjoy the next pipeline burst or power outage! Don't forget it wasn't real communism and it was entirely capitalism's fault or some retarded shit.

>>133456441
So if I use less internet I pay less? Sounds good to me.

>>133456661

Hmm it's almost like there are companies out there that totally could afford to build entire new competing infrastructure

>>133456967

i work for an ISP and yes, i know how much Netflix uses in throughput any given day, and it's insane. we have to keep that shit up while getting the brunt end because Netflix always blames us. (because they have no infrastructure)

>>133457009

the Telecommunications Act of 1996 by the FCC is the reason for this.. not ISPs. again, you guys have no idea what the fuck you're talking about.

>>133457217
>i work for an ISP
There you go. He admitted it.
These are the shills using proxies to make it appear as if pol was against net neutrality.

>>133457077
The dems had a supermajority and had control for quite a while

We're still here.


>>133457091

ISP =/= website owner

In a free market, you will pay all the ISPs that you want customers from, otherwise they will block your website.

Your customers will also pay the ISP to view your website. So your costs and the costs of your customers are drastically increased, which then reduces your revenue overall. The Free Market doesn't fix shit.

>>133457077
And yet 8 years of Dems in the WH just passed by.

File: 1494353041131.png (89KB, 1328x1140px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 1328x1140px

>Live in glorious Net Neutral Europe/America
>Download a shitty indie game
OI M8 YOU DIDNT PAY FOR THAT
*get raped by nogs in prison*
>Live in authoritarian distopian non Net Neutral Argentina
>Download a terabyte of child porn and the entire AAA game library of the year
>Upload a million copywritted videos to youtube to make fat dosh out of views
"E-e-xcuse me sir, please don't distribute that c-c-cp its ok if its for you but dont go too far " - regard, concerned police officer

>>133457190

>Hmm it's almost like there are companies out there that totally could afford to build entire new competing infrastructure

Who? Google tried to and even they couldn't afford it.

>>133456658
this is literally bitching about you making your isp.

we dont care. ive heard of these little isps they been trying to make up

they bring them up occasionally, but noone cares about it. I think they try selling out their own bandwidth but cant.

SHUT YORU GODAMN MOTHER FUCKING MOUTHS

its like bums with some wireless trying to sell their internet wifi to passing by cars, and they complain this is what that shit he posts says

we dont care, about all that. it doesnt pertain to customers of isps. YOU fuckoff with what your problem is. WE are sure free market will sort it out.

THIS HAS NOTHIG TO DO WITH US
I KEEP SEEING IT IT WAS IN THE VERY LAS THREAD ANOHTER HOMO CRYING HE CANT SELL HIS WIFI OUT HIS WINDOW WITH SPYWARE ADDED POPUPS IMBEDED BY GOVERNMENT FORCING DEFAULT IN ALL BROWSERS

>>133456441
>>133456789
you retards pushing this "pay more for extra websites" trash are the reason people are turning away from NN.

it only takes 5 mins of googling to realize we didnt have it pre 2015, and there were no packages sold like that

fear mongering, although it probably works on some idiots (maybe even you were too stupid to check), but it makes the whole argument disingenuous

>>133456888
ISPs just look out for their shareholders. In a modern internet that means attacking competition(streaming) as you see them doing now. So we have 2 options. 1 is destroy NN and then watch ISPs destroy themselves or 2 keep up NN and no progress is made. Im bored so lets take down NN shall we?

>>133456967
It
Places
The
FCC
And
Government
In
A
Position
Of
Leverage
And
Power
Over
The
Internet
And
Free
Speech

Now imagine if you had made an actual argument instead of posting
Hand
Clap
Emotes
After
Every
Word
Leftypol is full of memeflag loving kikes.

against, NEVER SUPPORT GOVERNMENT CONTROL OR REGULATION

and if you DO, don't you DARE complain about what you get.

>>133457162
hey man take it from a third worlder, shit gets banned here on the whims of the ruling class, and it will happen to you too if you dont sort yourselves out

>>133457338
yes but we didnt meme a steak merchant into the white house in those 8 years

File: IMG_5313.jpg (34KB, 185x199px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 185x199px

>>133444523
If the Internet gets censored we're fucked. Think about itguys. You may be okay with Trump at the head of what's censored but what will you think when the next democrat president comes in and censors everything apart from Mainstream media and the like?

we should all support net neutrality because the jew fucks who run the internet don't need any more money. Unless you enjoy giving them your sheckles then by all means

>>133455437
>As you might have guessed, the FCC’s proposal is popular with companies like Comcast and AT&T but overwhelmingly opposed by advocates for free speech online, technology startups that rely on the internet, and opponents of censorship. These ideals, together with net neutrality, are what have been historically known as internet freedom or “open internet” values. Now that Republicans in the FCC are pushing to eliminate net neutrality regulations, however, they’ve begun to use the same language to describe what they want to do.
>and opponents of censorship. These ideals, together with net neutrality, are what have been historically known as internet freedom or “open internet” values
You mean companies who censor people all the time such as Google and Facebook? This Net Neutrality is a big shit burger.

>>133457009
Yeah and guess what? They already charge as much as they have determined they can before people would start going without internet. THEY ALREADY HAVE A MONOPOPLY. They aren't going to start charging more just because net neutrality goes away. What will happen is people who use less internet will pay a little less than people who use more. And no there won't be internet packages. The costs will be pushed onto the websites like Netflix who will charge higher subscription rates for their service instead of people like me who don't use Netflix subsidizing the cost in my internet service bill

>>133457217
>>133457310
>>133456658
WTF are you cocksuckers talking about?
https://www.dailydot.com/layer8/fcc-internet-freedom-net-neutrality/

>>133457464
Well, from my own anecdotal experience

I was paying $25 for 2mb/s from the monopoly I have in my area before NN

After NN I pay $30 for 60mb/s from the same monopoly in my area.

>>133457310
>He admitted it
Yeah, people on /pol/ have jobs. It's not like he owns the company. Are you mummy and daddy are okay with you staying up this late to battle the ebil /pol/tards?

>>133457627
Justice never sleeps

>>133456207
is this the TempleOS guy?

why is /pol/ so willing to be corporate bootlickers for ISPs that they have no choice over and treat them like garbage but aren't willing to be corporate bootlickers for all the companies in the digital marketplace that support net neutrality?
why does /pol/ hate how regulations create an increased cost of entry into an industry, but wants to remove totally unrelated regulations that actually lower the cost of entry to another industry?
why does /pol/ hate all mainstream media for being corrupt lying leftists, but wants to make it harder for newer news websites that tell the truth to be created and expand?

>>133457566
>the jew fucks who run the internet don't need any more money
>its a faggot commie doesn't understand how the market works episode

>>133457318
??
>in a free market., u will pay all the isps you want customers from if u own a website

....????

what no i pay for anyone who accesses my website and i upload to, they pay to download from me, also their letting me know they came to my site also

this stupid fucker thinks the internet is some kind of magic

holy fuck\

im thinking wizard of oz type of shit no he's a

bumbum bum bummm https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=heplT2tB4Q8
SHILL

>>133456985
>Total control
Again, I thought we had laws that prevented monopolies. It's almost as if laws can be worked around or don't work for shit if they're not enforced.

Now imagine the internet being regulated by the fed. You want more bandwidth? Too bad, you're not a company. Enjoy your standard, like every other residential. You want to pay more? Tough shit.

Oh and when it comes time to increase how much bandwidth everyone gets (equally of course! Based Communism!) try to imagine how much of a clusterfuck shitshow it will be with politicians deciding how much we get? Oy vey, moy palms ah getting sweaty fram clasping so hawd.

No, Net Neutrality won't stop big corporations. That's a meme. They will all just grow steadily and whatever ISP you have, that's who you'll probably have forever. Don't like them? Good luck finding another one, after competition dies, because everything is federally regulated.

>>133444523
I'm torn on the arguments, but I think that Net Neutrality is ultimately a communist ideal. The biggest supporters for Net Neutrality seem to have a vested interest in the disgusting amount of TV shows and Movies they consume on a daily basis. They want to act like the cost of their data consumption is magically invisible because they have the government on their side. I always read things posted by people against Net Neutrality who want to classify it as a utility. If it was a utility, then we would pay more for consumption much like power, water, and sewage. I like the idea the Net Neutrality, but it seems too much like a communist program.

File: meme8.jpg (51KB, 1024x752px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 1024x752px

>he doesn't support net neutrality
this reminds me of something...

>>133447053
>implying google doesnt literally do this already

net neutrality is just big companies bitching about bigger companies trying to fuck them. You, the little guy, are/have been getting fucked this entire time and will continue to be fucked regardless.

>>133457517
>but but my muh nopolies and sheeit and my

>>133457627

i'm not even high up, but above customer service level, so i know how it all works on the back end. whenever i see "oohhh the ISPs are all greedy fucks who want to do nothing but fuck us over" i just laugh.

you do realize we are all just like you, right? we use the same internet you do. we want your shit to work. most of the time it's due to events out of our control when it doesn't work.

i bet most of you don't even realize that Netflix, Google, Facebook, Amazon, etc. already get "special" treatment by having direct peering links to ISPs. we do this out of necessity due to the sheer amount of traffic they produce.

>>133453937
The goal is for nobody to regulate it. The governments job is to ensure that and I expect them to.

We need to protect #NetNeutrality
Why pay more for slower internet?

>>133457566
yea man FCC is "totally" not part of the (((government))) and "totally" super duperly double ++++++ for (((US))) did i d that right guis

NN will not stop ISPs banning access to websites or complying with censorship demands.

4chan is going away, whether you like it or not.

>>133457711
>why is /pol/ so willing to be corporate bootlickers for ISPs that they have no choice over
ISPs want net neutrality. All the talk show hosts and newscasters shilling for it are owned by big corporations like Time Warner. Net neutrality would give them absolute control with zero consequence for shitty service because no one will be able to take their place. Ever. Here's a red pill:

THE GOVERNMENT DOESN'T GIVE A FUCK ABOUT YOU.

The overwhelming majority of laws that are passed are supported by mega rich lobbyists, not 'the people.' But by all means, go ahead and take Time Warner Cable's big stinking cock right up your ass.

don't believe anyone here, there are so many fucking shills in this stupid board
shills who pretend to be the opposition and act dumb, or act intelligent but play off as rude, etc.

fuck this board, the elections have seriously ruined the flow of information here
there's no escape now, the memes, THE DNA OF THE SOUL

>>133457517
Why is it always 0 or 100?

Why can't we all just agree on some form of moderation? I hate government regulations, but I support them when they keep checks on excessive corporate power. We shouldn't have a handful of behemoth corporations, they should be regulated and as infrastructure and technology increases, allow for more smaller businesses to enter the market, thus dispersing the power and giving more freedom to the people.

>>133457968
See>>133457410

>>133458085
Woah brah that's deep.

>>133457582
you takeit out of context and what you replied YOUR COMMENTS TO THE ARTICLE U GREENTEXTED TO CALL "ME"
are right and read the article again is what ID SAY
BUT
COUGH
SHILL
YOUR ONLY TRYIG TO MAKE ME AND MY LINK APPEAR BAD TO LATER ATTACK IT WITH A PROXY ATTACK SHILL PARROT BUDDY OF YURS

File: 1344307229511.png (37KB, 241x230px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 241x230px

>>133444523
Don't forget to vote
http://www.strawpoll.me/13420739

how do we stop this rollback shit
ill let the rest of the world fall apart before i let go of muh internet

File: 1499813053902.jpg (65KB, 520x442px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 520x442px

>>133457622
>It was only a $5 increase from 2mbs to 60
>Mfw your year of savings is over and you're hit with $150 more than you expected, each month, for a solid year
>Mfw you flip shit and early cancel, thus incurring the wrath of le early cancellation meme
You're full of shit or the biggest fucking kike cuck in this thread. Either one, have a good year.

>>133458085
The government's job is to infringe on freedoms to protect the interests of their supporters. I do not expect the government to regulate anything that has my interests in mind when they have so many corporations pumping money into their leaders.

>>133458279
A lot of paid shills voting for the (((capitalist))) choice.
pol is very net neutrality friendly.

>>133457582
GODAMNIT
I WAS ONLY TRYING TO MAKE A POINT
they stole the name of internet anonimity and called it the same sort of shit they also pushed the word net neutrality and made it about the companies

that story

is bullshit cause i cant follow IT IT changes its definitions very a lot. there is 0 no consistency in teh way they use definitions in that

but what im saying is what we call internet anonimity they called it the same thign and call it this godamn shit

if im unable to talk freely im just going to kill the usa

you guys are stupid faggots. anone with power
wah wah i want power

tired of your mouths..

yoru not even saying anythin you want ot do with it, and you dont gie a fuck abougt it

if i cant tlka noone givse a shit what you faggots got to say

[livign in a shit hole like that id rather do whatever i want

>>133444523
It sounds like this is just another SOPA, PIPA, TPP, etc in disguise. Another thinly veiled attempt at shutting down the entire internet and reducing it to t.v. 2.0 because too many goyim are accessing non approved information.

>>133458057
we already have a court put them in jail for breaking the constitution

free speech and privacy laws dont appply to the internet/ or something

>>133458336
No. I pay $30 forever. Well at least until NN is removed and I have to buy the 2mb/s again for about the same price.


You don't understand what a monopoly does, do you?

The whole problem with ending NN is these companies are monopolies, they already determine their prices and they price gouge out the ass.

Break up ISP's and I will support NN no problem whatsoever.

>>133458588
isps are not telecoms like in britain
their not "service providers"
breaking them up shouldnt need to be done

of course

>>133458588
>No. I pay $30 forever.
No you don't. Post your cable bill.

File: foicebook.png (644KB, 704x373px) Image search: [Google]

644KB, 704x373px

>>133458244
You can't really read an article claiming Google and Facebook are for internet freedom with a straight face. The censorship of both giants is very well known, done in subtle ways, as in FB taking likes away from right wing pages, this has happened with right wing brazilian pages often, even bans for daring to defy politically correct narratives.

Google is just as bad if not worse, manipulating their engine so some websites they don't like are shown later. Just as Robert Spencer's counter-jihad website just got downgraded recently and appears now way more down on the page than before, when it used to be the first result. Scummy practices one after another coming from those two tech giants who are compromised with the globalist agenda to the last hair strand.

>>133458568
Donald Trump supported SOPA and TPP. Another Trumpkin redditor lie. Trump is just a (((capitalist))) who wants corporations to be free from the government so they can make more profit.

>>133457711
The main problem is people on the right hate all regulation, while corporations love regulation that kills competition. So if you don't push for regulation that protects you, regulation that hurts you will only get passed.

Corporations love passing laws that give them monopoly power. So you have to push for laws that push back this monopoly power.
It all stems from how politicians are elected. The best funded politicians get elected via lobbying (campaign contributions). And those politicians have to pass laws their donors want or they won't get funded ever again.

>>133447649
>Afterall it is annarcho capitalistic
I thought it was called free market

File: illegalsgoback.png (351KB, 473x414px) Image search: [Google]

351KB, 473x414px

>>133458568
>its sopa
yes it is
>its tv2.0
no theres no such thing. they called IT what YOU are REFERRIGN TO internet 2.0.

that was to turn websites into shill running spyware shit like facebook, that cross sites references all the time and shit like that
things considered spyware and i stopped when myspace introduced it
myspace had its big exodus in 2008 cause they introduced the shit out of some spyware plugins all over the place on the comments and shit. people.. went ot facebook. they hide the same type of exact shit better, using the site. it wasnt plugins from users comments

so your spyware isnt even customizable now

FUCI YOU GUYS YOUR RETARDS LEARN TO USE A COMPTUER OR SHOVE A PHONE UP YOUR ASS

>>133458705
I DIDNT READ IT my piont is that they are using the same word we made up for internet freedom i guess youd call it

to try to push this shit they tried in 2015, the bill or whatever it was with the fcc, for them. not by them as they have NO power. The second they get it put in, it will they will never be removed, the usa will crumble as communication is lowerd to JEW

You should support it as It gives vast powers to establishment players to squash scrappy new comers by codifying AI censorship bots into law making it far to expansive to compete.

The advantages to you are you will get more and more watered down corporate entertainment made to appeal globalist markets, news will chocked down a funnel of homogeneous pro-Democrat MSM affiliates and social media will be limited to one political view and cheerleading of the latest Ghost Busters remake.

In all honesty NN is probably gonna get taken down because people here have so many different ideas on what NN actually fucking is nothing will get down because knows what the fuck it even is therefore making any legitimate discussion about it impossible

File: space jews.jpg (619KB, 1488x1114px) Image search: [Google]

619KB, 1488x1114px

>>133458588
>Forever
I only wish I could be there to see your reaction when that 13th bill reaches your doorstep.

>NN is supposed to protect us from monopolies
>Monopolies exist
>NN isn't doing what it's supposed to?? WHY???
>30 dollars for 60mbs is price gouging
Caught you're lying ass. Advice for you, since you're obviously either lying or in denial, when that 12th bill comes in, you better agree on the early cancel or you will be in a world of hurt. Not joking, you might even lose your car. I know how broke you SJW liberals can be and if that happened, I wouldn't want you blaming that on Trump too.

>>133458164
>Net neutrality would give them absolute control with zero consequence for shitty service because no one will be able to take their place. Ever. Here's a red pill:
Net neutrality is completely unrelated to the currently existing laws and regulations that make it impossible for a startup ISP to form. And if ISPs want net neutrality, why were they the ones who tried to kill it in the first place?
You've taken too many shill pills, good goy.

ISP's hate net neutrality because it forces them to play fair. Comcast used to throttle Netflix, but their StreamPix garbage was working perfectly well. It was an attempt to stifle a startup, and the only way to fight it was to already be a big company who could throw money to them. Netflix this year said they didn't care about net neutrality, because they are now big enough to pay Comcast, whereas StreamService#3 will be unable to compete. Also, there is a reason US internet is so slow. Because they have monopolies, ISP's push data caps on customers instead of updating decade old tech. If Net Neutrality stays in place, ISP's will slow to a crawl if they don't update their network. If they go that route, even the small town governments they bribed to create monopolies will start trying to create their own ISP's, because slow internet can cripple am economy.

>>133459003
https://www.dailydot.com/layer8/fcc-internet-freedom-net-neutrality/
why do i post this a thousand times and you ignore it!?
it was said in 2015 they done this

NOT THE ACTUAL ARTICLE ITSELf just the POINT that it makes theyre usign the smae name
for this shit theyre trying to do

its just this godamn corrupt. its like saying hey want this free bible you go sure then i got ok, the blow your head off

GOODDAY MOTHER FUCKERS its called consistency of definitions

>>133459091
there ARE NOT ALLOWED TO THROTTLE
.JPEG
OF ALL THE LAWSUITS THEYVE HAD TO POAY FOR ATTEMPTING TO DO THIS

SHILLL


SHILLLLLLLLLLP

>>133459003
>SOO many different ideas!
It's really one or the other. Simplest way to figure it out is to see who's backing what. Go with what you think is right. Despite the shitposting or what's said here, we both are against censorship and don't want anything bad to happen.

>>133458705
What you've stated is absolutely true; how does net neutrality contribute to this state of things/prevent it from happening? However, ISPs are not guilt-free in this case: CNN exposed that poor plebbitor, and it's owned by Time Warner ISP. If anything, seems like Net Neutrality is the only thing that stands in the way of complete normification of the Internet (endless cats, no dissenting views)

>>133459091
THE ONLY ARGUEMTN TO LET THE FCC TAKE OVER THE INTERNET IS

>YOU CANT SUE WITHOUT MONOLOPOLY COMPANY AND YOU HAVE TO TAKE THEM TO COURT TOO BTW TO TAKE THEM OUT IN COURT WITH HAVE TO HAVE BIG MONOPOLY TYPE COMPANY MONEY
YEA THAT WAY THEN YOU CAN GET SOMETHIGN DONE.. RIGHT..

THIS IS THE THINK TANKS AT THE CIA IN REAL TIME MAKING UP LIES ON TEH INTERNET SAYING SUTPID NIGGER SHIT
IM GONNA KILL YOU SHUTUP FUCKIGN DUMBASS

>>133459268
Why do you type like a fucking retard?

>>133459178

They still do it. The old rules let them throttle, and eventually get sued for it. Congrats, they made 200 mil by strategically throttling, but SURELY the 1.5 mil fine will disencourage them

>>133459178
>there ARE NOT ALLOWED TO THROTTLE
>OF ALL THE LAWSUITS THEYVE HAD TO POAY FOR ATTEMPTING TO DO THIS
so you say they're not allowed to throttle, admit that they did and got successfully sued for it, and you are against net neutrality because it keeps this system in place?
also are you drunk or just braindead?

>>133459365
hjow many more shills we need to pretend you guys have anyone who fuckign thinks what yo udo?
u know noone cares and you just ahve to act like anybody gives a shit

name one thing the FCC wants to do?

File: g weighs in.png (273KB, 1779x795px) Image search: [Google]

273KB, 1779x795px

/g/ explains it very well

what google does IS illegal why dont you dumbass mother fufkers respond to this?
https://www.quora.com/Can-search-engines-index-websites-without-permission

>>133459510
there is no fcc on the internet

they watch over communications and money involved in it

thats already enough to warrant the arrest of google for port scanning >>133459543
read ok

>>133444523
Paying $50 for 1.5 mbps, called them up and they said it was all they could give me.
Two years later, now my connection sits below 1 and my net cuts out ever 30 mins. They sent a guy out here and he 'fixed' it. Problem went away for a few months and my speed was back to normal, but it quickly went back to the way it was right before

>>133459365
People who don't support net neutrality have low IQ and low EI. These people are mentally handicapped, so you shouldn't expect them to write well.

File: 1498154229120.png (924KB, 608x764px) Image search: [Google]

924KB, 608x764px

>>133447508
yes.

>>133459469
because it keeps
you fuckign nigger
you think im stupid

oh what if we dont agree to NEW SHIT THEY MADE UP THEIR GOING TO THREATEN US WITH DESTROYING
FIRST AMEDNMENT
AND FOURTH AMENDMENT RIGHTS?

>>133459543
>quora
>not a bunch of shills

Pick one and only one.

Now, watch me, I'm gonna LARP as you now:

>what time-warner-owned CNN does IS illegal why dont you dumbass mother fufkers respond to this?

>>133459469
We currently have Net Neutrality and it is not protecting us from being throttled. We get throttled daily, all over the globe. If you were in a population dense region, you would know this. Even being *close* to one, you would feel the effects. >>133450988

If we already passed a law that helps Net Neutrality, what do you think this NEW Net Neutrality law actually is? Think about it for a second. Why do they need a Part 2? To assume direct control, obviously. Don't do it.

>Another memeflag that wants commie internet
Imagine my shock.

>>133459703
can you try rewording that post in a way that makes fucking sense to people who speak english

>>133448711
t. Plebbitor

>>133458543
stop drinking.
get a job.
grow up.

>>133459625
You're going to hate me but how often do you reset your router and flush your DNS?

>>133459655
net neutrality was just made up

GODAMNIT THESE HOW BAD THESE JEWS ARE

I KEEP POSTING IT
https://www.dailydot.com/layer8/fcc-internet-freedom-net-neutrality/
THEY STOLE THE WORDS WE USED TO DESCRIBE LIKE AN INTERNET CONSTITUTION TO MAKE THEIR SHIT UP IN 2015
https://www.quora.com/Can-search-engines-index-websites-without-permission
>muH FUCKING MONOPOLIES

>>133459824
MAKE ME DO ANY OF THOSE THINGS

>>133458543
Drunkposting is really an adventure sometimes

>>133459625

This shit? This shouldn't happen. There's a reason ISP's are the lowest rated companies out there. Their profits constantly go up, year over year, but their service constantly declines. If they didn't have monopolies, fucking NN wouldn't be needed. But they do, so let's push NN and then take it out when we can find a way to end the fucking ATT/Comcast duopoly

https://www.quora.com/Can-search-engines-index-websites-without-permission
port scanning

>>133459845
Aw, is the wittle baby upset people aren't reading fake news? :(

>>133459249
I don't know, I don't trust any initiative with Google and Facebook behind them. ISPs aren't saints, but Google and Facebook have far more power, they can decide what people will find about others, ie. filtering searches to make someone look bad or good depending on what Google wants.

There's something also very weird about it, I keep hearing how ISPs are ging to charge for everything in a subscription model, but why haven't they done that before if it was so simple to charge tenfold compared to what it is now? It seems like baseless fearmongering, but what for? More internet regulation by the government, which is aligned with Facebook and Google? I know for a fact Facebook took money from the communists of Brazil who were in power, and then suddely right wing pages started being blocked, harassed by the thought police of Facebook and so on.

Those people are often on the wrong side of history, and I'm leaning towards this being yet another case of those globalist-funded companies trying to fuck the internet over. It's also red flags when you see all the people on the left crying for this shit along with their globalist-funded cohorts in the mainstream media.

>>133459824
Convict rapists.
Remove refugees.
Stop being a globalist cuck.

Not so easy, is it?

>>133459895
you mother fuckers are doing nothig BUT SHIT POSTING FAGGOTS
>>133459909
>Need net neutrality
>>133459469
>keep net neutrality

JEW UP MORE FAGGOTS

>>133456748
>> He trusts the corporations more than the free market
>> Disgusting

Access to all webpages should cost the same, otherwise they wouldnt be competing on equal ground and that is the basis for a free market.

>>133459655
Idc mang, it just seems very suspicious how hard Net Neutrality is shilled for by the worst groups of people (plebbit, ACLJEW, jewtube, etc.), I wouldn't put running a false flag to make their opponents look as retarded as this>>133459703...ahem...person

>>133459983
>There's something also very weird about it, I keep hearing how ISPs are ging to charge for everything in a subscription model, but why haven't they done that before if it was so simple to charge tenfold compared to what it is now?
Because it's not legal?

>>133459756

That's not throttling. That's a lack of band width, which could be fixed by reinvesting in infrastructure instead of just doing nothing cause who the fuck else you gonna switch to

TL;DR
>Net neutrality laws are being argued for by giant internet companies
>Net neutrality debate in the legislature revolves around how broadband (the internet / traffic) should be regulated
>Proponents of so-called net neutrality simply want to give the FCC more regulatory power over the broadband market
>Never mind the fact most of the companies arguing for this legislation have the deepest pockets to lobby with the FCC
In other words, supporting current legislation guarantees that the richest internet companies will get their (((special interests))) taken care of at your expense.

>>133460102
run yoru nigger mouth how about i find you and kill you
oh look at you the pussy now on the internet with their life threatened
i bet yur like peeing yourself rightnow arent you ? so how do you look

File: tr2.jpg (38KB, 750x781px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 750x781px

>>133459691

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

147KB, 1280x303px

>>133459510
Better explanation.

>>133447649
Fuck off with your copypasta's faggot.

>>133460156
no first anyting but dont mind putting yoru propoganda out there as i have been RUNING THIS THREAD

THERE IS NO FCC ON THE INTERNET

I PROPOSE KILL LAW BREAKERS

THERE NOONE HAS BROKEN NO LAWS
AND CERTAIN>>133460102
COMPANIES ARE NOT AROUND TO BE
>MUH MONOPOLIES

>>133447649
>everyone stop replying to this bot response

>freedumb land president restricting freedom

>>133460102
Sounds like baseless paranoia. You've fallen for fear mongering.
There is nothing to worry about, it's just the government (you elected) making sure greedy capitalist companies can't have full control over the service they provide. It's a good cause.

>>133460302
>Yes Goy, it's your right to choose!
>Now, do you want to get fucked in the mouth or get fucked in the ass, your choice goyim!

>>133460105
Because before Obama, none of them owned content providers. Now ATT and Comcast both do, and with Obama gone they're gonna try and capitalize hard.

File: Robert-B-Comcast--640x420.png (265KB, 640x420px) Image search: [Google]

265KB, 640x420px

Libertarians want to prevent NN because it interferes with the interests of the ISP monopoly. Don't fall for the "Libertarians want free markets" meme.

>>133460392
LOOK AT THIS STUPID
GODAMN
INBRED
RETARDED STUPID BASELESS ILLOGICAL SCARE TACTIC
BULLSHIT
HORSESHIT

>>133460392
Nobody got fucked before 2015 when there was no NN

>>133460369
Giving regulatory power to the government isn't freedom

>>133460379
There's probably no reasoning with him. Most "NatSocs" who frequent /pol/ are just racist libertarians who suck corporate cock all day.

>>133460193
it's teh interwebz mane somebody threatens my life at least once a day
>>133459983
>ISPs aren't saints
Now that's an understatement. Every single liberal fake news website is run by them, and I do mean every single one
>NBC=Comcast
>CNN=Time Warner

>>133459968
>butthurt memeflag larper from leftypol discord
>hates capitalism
>thinks a government regulated internet will be faster and less invasive
>ironic shitpost with "1984"
>changing memeflag several times over
>overly aggressive Trumpisms and racism as a failed attempt to fit in
>social media posting mannerisms
>"FACT"
>Let the internet remain free - by making the FCC and Fed regulated it!
>But did you see my facebook meme?
>More "I hope they think I'm one of them" memeflag changes
I decided, since you're posting so much, I should go back and read everything you've posted.
You really are sticking out painfully, leftypol. I hope you know that. You should probably stop posting.

>>133452874
Those aren't net neutrality. Different packages have always existed.

Net neutrality means that if you want to host a website, Comcast can't mess with your traffic depending on where you host it.

It has nothing to do with "gamers"

>>133460102
Its shilled because its something every non retard can agree is a good thing. Like how would be all shilling against the idea of legalizing armed robbery or something stupid like that.

Not only does net neutrality guarantees that the free market works as intended (by prohibiting ISP from charging extra to access certain webpages), it also guarantees free speech, its that balance that gets together people that are usually in disagreement over other subjects.

>>133460477
fuck off kike shill, Soros is the biggest source of money for the Net Neutrality campaign and Comcast supports it because it hurts the competition

>>133460477
>"Fascist" chastising natsocs for being "racist libertarian shills"
Good goy.

>>133460032
Ha ha! Oy vey the goyim knows, amirite?!? XDD!!!!1!11!!

>>133460537
>it also guarantees free speech
Germany has NN and blocks thousands of conservative websites. You've been brainwashed by Soros' $180 million campaign to shill for net neutrality.

File: net neutrality doomsaying propaganda.jpg (69KB, 585x390px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 585x390px

>>133460105
I mean before NN was approved, how come ISPs weren't going full jew with those supposed subscription packages for each kind of service.? Pictures like this >>133456441 scream FUD propaganda to me. A bunch of empty threats being used for some ulterior agenda.
>approve ______ or else you're doomed
That's not how decisions are to be made, sounds more like a desperate group who wants something done quick, so they just appeal to emotion instead.

it also gives me similar impressions to the Global Warming thing. Give the UN carbon tax or else the world will be engulfed in climatic chaos! Give us Net Neutrality or ISPs will engulf the internet in chaos! Just seeing a pattern here of doomsayers not really making a point but rather trying to coerce people into adhering to something. They also tend to accuse people like me of being ISP shills, just as people who talk against AGW are oil shills, yet they're often backed by globalists who vastly outmatch the other side when it comes to money.

>>133459983

Google and Facebook are evil, but they make money by people using the web. Google wants NN for the same reason they started Fiber, more internet usage=more ads. Google is in it purely for itself, but it's goals align with most internet users at the moment

>>133447649
Fuck off comcast shill kike

>>133460302
THAT GUY COULD JUST STOP AT FUCKIGN A
CAUSE EVERY SIT THATEVER DONE THAT I STOPPED GOING TO, BUT NONE WELL VALVE DID

THAT THOU NEVER AHPPENEDD
VALVE STARTED CLAIMING EVERYTHIGN WAS "STOLEN" FROM THEM IN 2005 AND STARTED STEALING GAMES TEAM FORTRESS 2 FROM CUSTOMERS
THEY HAVE BEEN THE WORST PIECES OF SHIT EVER

BUT AS YRU EXAMPLE IT SUCKS. THEY WOULD GO DOWN IS WHAT WOULD HAPPEN

SAY 4 CHAN DOES THIS. I MEAN TYPING IN THE CAPTCHA FOR ME ISNT 2 SECONDS I SEE A POINT SORTA AND ID RATHER HAVE MY ANONIMITY RAPED LESS IN THIS WAY BE WITH THE CROWD THEN DEAL WITH THE SHIT OF
HERES MY BANK INFO WELL BACK TO CALLING EVERYONE NIGGERS AND UPLOADING PRETEEN GIRLS
AND ALSO LETTING 4CHAN DEAL WITH THE CUSTOMERS HAVING NOONE TO TALK TO IF THEY RUN EVERYONE OFF AND THAT LITTLE DEAL
SO I KNOW THEY CANT GO TOO FAR AWAY FROM ME
ITS THE FREE MARKET

>>133444523
It is basically allows the Government to take control of the internet regulations instead of the ISP itself. That can have a drastic effect on content, costs and speeds depending on the ISP.

You should be against this if you are a Libertarian. Both Left and Right wing governments are capable of pushing for this.

>>133460510
There we go again with the delusional paranoia and insane incoherent ranting.
Ironically without government regulations you will not be able to post your racist bigoted crap online.

>>133460604
I don't hate natsocs. I hate larping faggots like you who pretend to be natsocs.
>>133460548
He probably has money in google you dumb nigger. Not to mention, removing net neutrality will stifle competition because the internet monopolies who's cum you like to guzzle so much will be able to censor competing companies on the web.

>>133460678
Comcast supports Net Neutrality, dumb cunt

File: ss (2017-07-12 at 02.00.55).png (610KB, 576x837px) Image search: [Google]

610KB, 576x837px

>>133460281
OY VEY!

>>133460668
FUCK YOU STUPID GODAMN MOTHER FUCKER

YOU ARE FOR GOOGLE EVEN THOU THEY SEEM TO BE SOMETHIGN YOURLYING

EVERYONE HATES GOOGLE

EVERY ONE YOU ARE A JEW IF YOU LIKE THEM

ANYTHIGN THAT SEEMS TO BE LIKE THEM LIKING ANONE HAS BEENDONE INTENTINOALLY
IVE NEVER USED A GOOGLE PROGRAM BUT THE MAPS

I HATE GOOGLE.

>>133450681
I see you also watched the TB video

>>133460516
Do you think different packages will exist once the government regulates the internet? I find that unlikely.
>still trying to define what Net Neutrality is, because you disagree with how I define it
>Gamers have nothing to do with the internet
This is on par with the "gender" argument.

>>133460742
>comcast engaging in PR for something means they actually support it.
You are one gullible nigger.

Is NN a USA thing or does it affect the relevant world as well?

It's like any 'Help the Babies bill / Patriot act' that's named to sound good, but (from my understanding) turns the internet into a Utility, which then means the government can choose to levy regulations, taxes and the like upon it.

Don't get me wrong, 90% of people who oppose it are retarded corporate cumguzzlers who unironically support ISP monopolies because people are making it a partisan issue, but that doesn't make the Net Neutrality bill any good. It's existed unmolested and without issue for 30+ years at this point. And if any one company tries to make that move people are going to abandon them like crazy.

File: 1499925011051.jpg (98KB, 656x1024px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 656x1024px

>>133460742
Wrong.

>>133460281
LOL never thought this would be made

>>133456441
I don't see anything wrong with that.

>>133460853
It's been around for a while famalam.

>>133460821
If NN goes away you can say goodbye to Netflicks.

>>133460302
>food analogies

File: 1499428300059.gif (1MB, 450x450px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 450x450px

>>133444523
> Explain net neutrality to me

Ok:

>jews butthurt they lost the election because of internet leaks
>decide to implement ways to block future interruptions because the government will be able to control what you see the internet

Really makes you think.

File: provision.png (23KB, 841x309px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 841x309px

Net Neutrality includes a provision that allows government to censor the internet and imprison you for posting obscene material.

Congratulations, this is why Soros, Facebook, Google, Microsoft and Comcast support it. Keep sucking liberal dick, dumb motherfuckers.

Luckily Trump will repeal this piece of shit and we'll go back to pre-2015 when none of the shit promised by libtards ever happened.

>>133460793
>Do you think different packages will exist once the government regulates the internet?
Like they already do? You realize we have net neutrality right now, right?

>>133460496
Google and Facebook are also neck deep into the globalists pockets, Hillary's campaign and whatnot. Why should I trust them when they have done nothing but persecute right wing websites? Now they're all for freedoms? Nah they're part of a bigger agenda. Suckerberg even said he wants Facebook to replace fucking churches, he wants to take over religions, and do some kind of worldwide sect.

>>133460642
Angela Merkel is against net neutrality. One of the biggest enemies of the West is against net neutrality

https://www.thelocal.de/20141204/merkel-speaks-out-against-net-neutrality

Germany is an enemy of net neutrality

https://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2014/12/10/germany-emerges-as-net-neutrality-antagonist/


Your fake news dont work here you disgusting jew. We know what you are up to, the day of the rope is coming for you and the rest of your people.

>>133460918
I don't watch Netflix or other TV. What about important things, will I still be able to shitpost on /pol/?

File: 1494526730511.png (306KB, 500x504px) Image search: [Google]

306KB, 500x504px

>>133460719
Yes, because the government saw what I posted and allowed it. You're so good at roleplaying but could you pretend to be less retarded?

>Memeflag fake nazi calling me out for my racism
NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER Stay mad, commiecuck. You make me wish Net Neutrality would pass just so fucking idiots like you would get censored, even if only for 7 more years. Why even bother coming here during one of your pathetic little raids, leftypol? Just to get btfo by some solid opinions until you devolve into an ad hominem PTSD triggered mess?

>>133448902
If ISPs weren't subsidized by the government into becoming oligopolies based on region then I'd be against net neutrality because many small ISPs would probably exist to connect the nation. However, because they were subsidized in the first place I wouldn't be against the need to keep the platform neutral because otherwise it stifles small businesses and individuals from having equal opportunities and more choice/competition on an anarchic platform, which is bad because they're the backbone of working free market economies. Furthermore, if ISPs were forced to pay back all their subsidies, they could sell some of their infrastructure to smaller players to raise funds for this and allow more influence from the free market. This would probably be the preferred option.

>>133461030
I know we do but will it be the same after Part 2 is past? You realize Part 2 is an addition to what we already have, right?

>>133461073
>The principle of net neutrality was legally codified with the latest amendment of the telecommunications act (Telekommunikationsgesetz, TKG), § 41a TKG, enacted in May 2012.

>The principle of net neutrality was legally codified with the latest amendment of the telecommunications act (Telekommunikationsgesetz, TKG), § 41a TKG, enacted in May 2012.

>
The principle of net neutrality was legally codified with the latest amendment of the telecommunications act (Telekommunikationsgesetz, TKG), § 41a TKG, enacted in May 2012.


The principle of net neutrality was legally codified with the latest amendment of the telecommunications act (Telekommunikationsgesetz, TKG), § 41a TKG, enacted in May 2012.
The principle of net neutrality was legally codified with the latest amendment of the telecommunications act (Telekommunikationsgesetz, TKG), § 41a TKG, enacted in May 2012.

DUMB FUCKER

File: kumadoor.jpg (121KB, 960x544px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 960x544px

net neutrality is basically no company being able to slow down or deny access to websites
if you're against that it means you want megajew CEOs to censor things that go against things the company favors
anyone who disagrees is a shill
who cares what reddits or le SJWs think, 4chan has a bad reputation and a lot of ISPs will try to censor it

>>133460879
Imagine if you want to start a new website to compete with fb or amazon but you are not in any of those packages.

Not so nice isnt it? That image only consolidates the power of giant corporations by liberating them from the constraints of the free market.

>>133461090
You will not be, so you need to show your support for net neutrality while you still have free internet access. Even the 4chan admins agree.
You can start by going on twitter and tweeting with the #NetNeutrality hashtag.

File: this is your average anti NN shill.jpg (72KB, 842x512px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 842x512px

>>133460742
>COMCAST: In 2005, the nation’s largest ISP, Comcast, began secretly blocking peer-to-peer technologies that its customers were using over its network. Users of services like BitTorrent and Gnutella were unable to connect to these services. 2007 investigations from the Associated Press, the Electronic Frontier Foundation and others confirmed that Comcast was indeed blocking or slowing file-sharing applications without disclosing this fact to its customers.

Yeah I am sure they are really supporting NN and its not just a PR stunt.
Fuck off kike.

File: 6fa0a7b5aa3b46f9ea187484c2d6cacd67245292_hq.jpg (9KB, 198x198px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 198x198px

>libertarians argue that without net neutrality, things will be the same
>so why not just leave it in place then?

>>133460742

No dumbass, just like Verizon doesn't. They change the definition of Net Neutrality and then say they support their described version. Verizon literally sued the FCC to get rid of net neutrality, so the FCC had to make the internet Title II. Comcast is forced to vocally support Net Neutrality until 2018 because of their purchase of NBC, at which point they can start shorting on it overtly instead of just through lobbyists

>>133461189
>> 2012
>> Both of my articles are of 2014

Jew, you have no power here, your lies do not work on us, begone you foul beast

>>133460988
Congrats, you found the CDA from 1997. It has literally nothing to do with net neutrality, and the parts about indecency were removed (Reno v. ACLU).
>Congratulations, this is why....Comcast supports neutrality
If comcast supports it, then why is comcast spending so much money trying to get it repealed, along with Verizon, AT&T, Time Warner (Who happens to own CNN, what a coincidence) and other big ISPs?
>Luckily Trump will repeal this piece of shit and we'll go back to pre-2015 when none of the shit promised by libtards ever happened.
You mean none of this shit that happened that net neutrality was passed to prevent?
https://www.freepress.net/blog/2017/04/25/net-neutrality-violations-brief-history

>>133460988
there is no going back to pre 2015 internet for americans. it's either gov control or corp control

>>133454677
>access to all (lawful) destinations on the Internet.

>make 4chan illegal

>profit

>>133461357
Law is still in place, dumb motherfucker. Merkel can't repeal laws with wishes.

>>133460642
>Germany has NN and blocks thousands of conservative websites.

Oh yeah link me those thousands of conservative websites I am apparently blocked from. I am waiting.