reminder that net neutrality has been around for less than five

>>134510105
you are literally confused and apparently very uneducated

I heard a watchdog group is suing to see Obama's studies on net neutrality. They aren't public.

File: 9.png (170KB, 1891x282px) Image search: [Google]

170KB, 1891x282px

>>134510105
Net Neutrality's existed for the better part of 20 years, and almost everyone followed and abided by it like a gentleman's agreement, in part because nobody could see how the internet could even work if they didn't.

File: 1500159599995.png (216KB, 1402x555px) Image search: [Google]

216KB, 1402x555px

>>134511395
However, not everyone has followed the spirit/rules of net neutrality.

Here's a list of reasons why we got it enshrined into law in the first place:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

>http://www.pcworld.com/article/169079/ATT_Blocks_4chan_Stirs_Internet_Hornets_Nest.html

>2017, Verizon caught throttling customer data in direct violation of FCC Net Neutrality rules - https://www.rt.com/usa/397163-verizon-admits-throttle-netflix/

>>134511395
>NN means that ISPs cannot discriminate against data
but that's not how it fucking works, it's never worked like that.

>>134511523
You forgot to archive that
>https://wired com/2011/01/metropcs-net-neutrality-challenge
https://archive.is/LwLMM
>http://businessinsider com/verizon-blocking-google-wallet-2011-12
https://archive.is/YlqZs
>https://washingtonpost com/blogs/post-tech/post/fcc-fines-verizon-125m-for-blocking-tethering-apps/2012/07/31/gJQAXjRLNX_blog.html
https://archive.is/MzqNt

File: 20.png (28KB, 1880x241px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 1880x241px

This blog describes how youtube gets throttled in South Korea, which has no net neutrality rules:

http://www.azimuthblog.com/2016/07/some-thoughts-on-net-neutrality/

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

9KB, 1677x125px

This blog describes how the countries without net neutrality also have the highest bandwidth costs in the world:

https://blog.cloudflare.com/bandwidth-costs-around-the-world/

>>134511633
>all bits are equal
THIS HAS NEVER BEEN TRUE

>>134510105
(((they))) are fighting net neutrality so vehemently because it is the natural progression of a capitalistic internet.
It is inevitable, eventually the internet like everything else is a capitalistic society should be based around supply and demand.
Right now, we have an unlimited internet access but we only visit a small fraction .. lets say 0.0001% of the internet on any given day. but the remaining 99.999% of the internet we do not need. Irrespective of that isps have no incentive to provide better service to the 0.0001% of sites we need.

Once again, net neutrality will be gone in our lifetimes. It is the natural progression of capitalism.

Verizon is currently getting sued for throttling Netflix traffic to users. Thats illegal (and should be), yet they still did it. Imagine if the monopolies could fist us freely?

NN is needed when a few ISP giants are allowed to exist. I'm all for down with regulations, but until the ISP arena is cleared and smaller ISP's are allowed to compete, we need buyer protections.

>>134510105
Nigga net neutrality has been around since the 90s. Stop being intentionally ignorant.

File: 1490226211684.png (68KB, 500x380px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 500x380px

>>134510105
If net neutrality goes away, so does the progress of our networks. If they can slowdown data, it means they don't have to innovate or put more data lines in. The IP companies will stop maintaining their equipment because they won't have to keep up with consumer demand for bandwidth.

In 10 years, we'll have soviet tier shit internet. All data and all websites need to be treated the same. Otherwise it's data companies being cheapass and roundabout censorship.

>>134512051
For that matter, it's important to note that the actual problems with competition in the marketplace stem from the ISP's purchasing monopolies, or near monopolies.

For example: They will sign a contract with a city stating that only 5 companies can provide internet access. Then 4 ISP's will be spun off to offer low-speed dialup and cable, maybe 1 Mbps if you're lucky. The last of the 5 will be the large monopolist like Verizon or Comcast, who will be the only one offering high speed internet (at exorbitant rates).

This way it looks, at face value, like there is competition, and the monopolist ISP's are able to avoid anti-trust lawsuits, while still controlling >95% of the marketshare.

Nothing needs to be done about Net Neutrality. What we need is to break up the monopolies and prevent any future ones from imposing non-compete contracts on cities and municipalities. It's the monopolists themselves buying the regulations creating the monopoly structure.

File: jewdot.jpg (4KB, 124x124px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 124x124px

>>134510105
OH LOOK, ANOTHER SHAREBLUE THREAD.
>wonder who's behind this post

File: bd39db7959488a44f8adaf32b3dbf83ce8401741bf18f46d78f0f4b7183bf6af.jpg (29KB, 414x389px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 414x389px

>>134512051
>>134512416
I love you two.

>>134512517
You really only need to look for those >1 post by this ID OP's to know whether it's a shill or not.

File: bullets.jpg (600KB, 1192x893px) Image search: [Google]

600KB, 1192x893px

>>134512416
This. I live in California, the Bay Area (San Francisco/Oakland/San Jose)
"Good ISP" was DSL based sonic dot net
Only static IP cable option is business class Comcast, which costs me $110 a month for basic static IP cable the lowest tier they offer. I need a static IP to stay current with various internet services (DHCP/DNS/WWW/CGI/SSH) so I run all that, and keep up with firewall software. And see how hostile the raw internet is, I'm constantly under attack and remapped my ssh port just to avoid probes. Example attack:
[1330660.927949] [UFW BLOCK] IN=enp3s0 OUT= SRC=103.207.36.104 DST=/censored/ LEN=52 TOS=0x02 PREC=0x20 TTL=111 ID=26494 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=52937 DPT=22 WINDOW=8192 RES=0x00 CWR ECE SYN URGP=0

That is a probe of port 22, ssh.

File: 1353209659788.gif (82KB, 768x576px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 768x576px

>>134512416
>Nothing needs to be done about Net Neutrality.
but that's bullshit. Net neutrality "regulation" is more like anti-regulation. It's forcing companies to keep things simple. I'm glad my neighborhood doesn't get less electricity than another, richer neighborhood. Everyone gets the same current. With the internet, everyone gets the same data stream.

This is a simpler solution for the short term than breaking up the monopolies. If you give up on net neutrality, you could lose the battle AND the war.

>>134513284
under attack from who?

>>134513375
Net Neutrality was enshrined into law in 2015 by the last FCC chairmen.

Preferably it'd get put into law by congress instead so that we can't have any new chairman coming in, like this idiot pajeet, changing it up again.

>>134513284
Have you installed fail2ban?
>>>/g/hsg

File: IMG_1346.png (53KB, 656x773px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 656x773px

>want a wall
>get net neutrality removed and medicade cut
Wow fuck this country.

>>134511395
Leaf has swallowed the kool-aid.
What they tell you NN is is not what the laws and regulatory oversight of the FCC actually mean.

File: 1343796348638.jpg (115KB, 725x550px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 725x550px

>>134513578
>Preferably it'd get put into law by congress instead so that we can't have any new chairman coming in, like this idiot pajeet, changing it up again.
This is America. We can't pass shit with our congress. They are utterly out of control and useless. They are predicting a "budget crisis" months away with one political party in absolute power.

What we need is a Supreme Court ruling. That's the only way to get shit done now. Last I checked, there wasn't anything on the docket in the Supreme Court that even touches this shit.

Our Senators and congressmen are fucking garbage and they don't do their jobs.

>>134512590
Uuguu~

>>134511703
That blog literally doesn't mention net neutrality once you lying fucking cunt shill.
Fuck off and take your script with you. FCC oversight of the internet is a power grab and it is not net neutrality.

>>134511737
>and should be

Why? Why should it be illegal?
Do you have any idea how much of the traffic of the internet comes from just a few big sites?

"Net neutrality" is stopping huge profitable corporations like Netflix and Google for paying toward the infrastructure that they overwhelmingly benefit from.

>>134513969
It mentions that they have ISP monopolies specifically. Information that they lack net neutrality laws on top of it can be found elsewhere, like in the previous post talking about south korea.

File: 16.png (14KB, 1878x157px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 1878x157px

>>134514144
>Do you have any idea how much of the traffic of the internet comes from just a few big sites?

And those sites pay for the traffic. What's the issue?

Did you somehow think they got internet access for free?

>>134514144
And likewise, google and netflix are against repealing net neutrality because they are in direct competition with the monopolist ISP's now.

Once net neutrality is gone, the ISP's can, and will, (and HAVE) throttle youtube or netflix while allowing their customers to access the ISP's competing service without issue. No shit they're against the repeal.

Repealing net neutrality is like instating regulations to kill fair market competition.

>>134514144
>"Net neutrality" is stopping huge profitable corporations like Netflix and Google for paying toward the infrastructure that they overwhelmingly benefit from.
lol, no. Car companies don't have to build the roads.

We used to have rail lines and trolleys in the cities. Henry Ford convinced congress and local governments to be in charge of maintaining the roads and now we have the national highway system in America. Our country and freedom of movement wouldn't exist without it. It's a similar thing with our data lines; we need them built because the benefits outweigh not building them.

>>134514386
The Liverpool and Manchester line was a private enterprise.

>>134514144
>We also give qualifying ISPs the same Open Connect Appliances (OCAs) that we use in our internet interconnection locations. After these appliances are installed in an ISP’s data center, almost all Netflix content is served from the local OCAs rather than “upstream” from the internet. Many ISPs take advantage of this option, in addition to local network interconnection, because it reduces the amount of capacity they need to build to the rest of the internet since Netflix is no longer a significant factor in that capacity.
https://media.netflix.com/en/company-blog/how-netflix-works-with-isps-around-the-globe-to-deliver-a-great-viewing-experience

>>134514254
>And those sites pay for the traffic. What's the issue?
No they don't. They pay for their own infrastructure, their own servers and data storage.

>>134510105
shut up, shill.

>>134510105
Just wow! You're an honest to god idiot!

>>134514385
If ISPs are already doing it today when it's illegal, why have the law?

>>134514881
They're now getting into legal trouble for doing it.

Which is the point of having the law.

This is the only thing that the dems actually got right.

File: image.jpg (380KB, 2048x1783px) Image search: [Google]

380KB, 2048x1783px

wtf, I hate net neutrality now

File: 1477026553489.jpg (166KB, 864x864px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 864x864px

>>134513533
Under attack from botnets that continually search for backdoors. My apache log has many requests for admin pages for software I don't have installed.
Example:
221.11.229.226 - - [21/Jul/2017:21:01:10 -0700] "GET /currentsetting.htm HTTP/1.1" 400 0 "-" "-"

Really if you just plug a jack into the internet you'll find it's very noisy. Apple stuff is particularly chatty.

>>134513593
> fail2ban
No but I just read about it. My analysis is that these are drivebys and enumerating them would be a fool's errand. That is, they just try IP addresses in sequence and will likely never talk to me again.

why don't we just start up our own low-cost internet company?

>>134515777
nice trips faggot

>>134515107
What? They didn't even manage to do anything. The FCC only declared the internet a public utility. I don't know why idiots refer to it as the Net Neutrality Law, which got defeated. All they did was simply declare it a public utility. And they did that so they could give it away free to poor people.

>>134517509
The ISP monopolists purchased regulatory laws that prevent competition against them.

>>134517509
regulations prohibit it

>the internet existed for 20+ years without this regulation and none of these fallacies took place.
because normies werent on the internet then

>>134517839
>>134517861

maybe in your cuck countries, sure. here in america, monopolies are illegal.

>>134518015
That's why they pretend not to be a monopoly by having a couple other companies providing dialup or slow internet.

See: >>134512416

All the pretense of not being monopolies and avoiding antitrust lawsuits while still controlling the market like a monopoly.

File: 1500172101586.jpg (10KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 225x225px

>>134518015

i actually work for an ISP (above customer service, so i know how it works) and believe it or not we are just like you. we use the same inet as you. i am not in the higher echelons but can give you some insights.

what OP says is pretty true. the larger cloud companies such as Google and Netflix already have direct peering links to major ISPs. Google even has the GGC (global google cache) team which does nothing but manage cache servers/CDN to keep common content locally available. these peering links are often huge in bandwidth - Netflix, where i work, can easily top 50-60Gbps a day during peak times - that bypasses the main ring of the infrastructure to keep that huge amount of traffic off of it. these are PAID for lines that are only there because of customer demand, since Netflix and most other cloud companies do not have large fiber infrastructure of their own. if all that additional traffic was dumped onto the main ring it would be disastrous for everyone else not trying to watch Netflix.

the real reason why (imo) that these companies push so hard for NN is that if it wasn't there, ISPs could -legally- charge them for access to the network and ultimately to their customers. we can't do this currently. they don't want this so naturally they shill NN.

>>134514649

this is hogwash. they don't take into account all the optical equipment that needs to be installed and upgraded to handle the additional bandwidth. data can only pass as fast as the optical shelves can process it from one hub to another, the fiber maintenance, and other misc stuff. ISPs are practically forced to do this anyhow - see above rant.

>"Net neutrality" is stopping huge profitable corporations like Netflix and Google for paying toward the infrastructure that they overwhelmingly benefit from.

is the right idea.

File: commie asshole.jpg (150KB, 1057x680px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 1057x680px

>>134511523
5 Star post right here.