Net neutrality. Let me explain to you why it's a bad thing.

File: ixtxr.jpg (32KB, 480x270px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 480x270px

>>133755392
>Net neutrality. Let me explain to you why it's a bad thing.


Sage

KYS shill

decentralized internet... so like a concurrency network or something? do it then fag

>>133755890
>decentralized internet

nigga you retarded, the internet is already decentralized, thats why even china can't control all of it.

>>133755886
hello shlohmo
>>133755890
i dun no how 2 computah my friend, only ponder

>>133755392
You know, we have ISPs for a reason. Because like... you know... infrastructure is you know.... FUCKING EXPENSIVE.

ISP's infrastructure connect person to person, forming the internet. Because of this, ISPs hold all the power. Removing Net Neutrality gives ISPs even more power. With our without Net Neutrality you still have to go through an ISP to communicate over the internet, nothing will change that. Encrypt, proxy, whatever you want, how ever many times you want, you still have to go through an ISP, unless you're telling me you're going to but your own satellites and form some kind of underground ISP service. In the end we still come to the same problem. Your plan of "let them destroy the internet" to force growth in the security sector is a dumb idea, when we could just vote "don't destroy the internet" and cut out the whole problem instead. Nothing is preventing the security industry from growing right now, we don't need to destroy something we will never have a chance to get back just for some gains that ultimately won't matter because we still have to go through and comply with ISPs.

>>133758102
Again just to reiterate, all the encryption and security in the world doesn't matter when the ISP that you have to go through makes all the rules. All they simply have to do to bypass all of your security and anonymous measures is to simple require that all traffic you create cannot be encrypted. Just as simple as that and all of your security is gone. Once they have the power, it's their game now, not yours, they can do anything they please. You have to sign their contract to use their service, and when they can literally make up any rule, it will be their data, not yours. They can read the data, sell the data even manipulate that data, no security will be able to defend against that, not when it's their game. Fuck, even governments will be able to intercept your data. Keeping Net Neutrality is the only option to keep your data safe. This isn't even about companies jewing you, the very security and freedom on the internet is at stake here.

>>133758102
WRONG

Im not interested in growing the security sector we need to bring back complete anonymity. ISP's don't need to be destroyed for a new internet to come into being. If it has to be physical so be it. I remember hearing about some lazer you can use to transport information between rooftops

>>133759454
That... no...

So you are saying we need every single person, to install this laser on their roof. Okay lets pretend everyone in a city did that. Alright. Now how do you connect that city to the next, say 20 miles apart through rural territory? How do you connect those then? More lasers? Whose land are you going to use? Are you going to buy up that rural land just to stick some lasers to connect the next city? Did you think of the throughput and bandwitdh require to connect a city of 20K people to another city of 20K people? Your little home routers won't keep up. Who is going to shell out the money for the industrial ISP routers that cost 60K a pop? You're going to need an entire room full of those fuckers. Who is going to pay for those and their power? We still have to stick this building somewhere, what land. Oh btw we have to connect another 200 cities across the world for our private laser internet.

The point is when you get to the logistics of it, creating another "internet" isn't really feasible. Even for the sake of a private or anonymous sector.

Connecting you and your friends house with a private laser connection is doable. But when you get to the scale of the internet you need some serious infrastructure.

At that point you should have just spent the ten minutes calling your representative at congress to save the internet instead of reinventing the wheel.

>>133761340
Like shit, even if everyone became their own network node the routing table and broadcasts would be out of control. Like at 500+ devices a network starts to chug, and we're talking about hooking up 20K houses like industrial or not the routers would just implode at that point, so you would have to centralize your private "internet" at some point anyways. Maybe you could organize districts or something and someone opts for being the central node in the route. But now you need a backbone and a fast lane of laser arrays to channel this and oh god. You can't just stick lasers on your roof and expect to recreate the internet what the shit. Not to mention like when you get that big the goberment and real ISPs can just poison your network anyways, becuase you are making them lose money and they don't give a shit. Either just crippling it through sabotage or filling it with honeypots that invalidate the whole point of it being anonymous in the first place. Man this plan is all sorts of doesn't work.

File: 108563.jpg (86KB, 960x894px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 960x894px

>>133759454
do you know how it is that we have come to have the fastest internet in europe and second fastest in the world?

through fucking rooftop networks

in the early days of the internet we only had dial up
dial up was not suited for massive porn downloads so we took it upon ourselves to make local networks between adjacent blocks and buy a fiber and share the costs
the only way ISPs were able to compete at a local level was to bring us fiber to our doorsteps at a cost similar to what we contributed in our little networks, something like $10 for 1gbps unlimited data (that's what i pay)
while this concept in the free market drastically changed how big ISPs competed and generated the fastest and cheapest internet around these parts it was still done in a free market and big ISPs still got their way
the only reason it's still this way today is net neutrality

any form of throttling that ISPs are allowed to do will be detrimental to the internet, even if you make alternative networks and force them to compete, they have all the money, they have all the cards, they will buy you out eventually and you will still follow their rules

>>133755392
the internet is already cancer who cares