Thoughts on the whole Net Nuetrality fiasco? And if you say that

It was too good to last, like everything in life.

It's total fucking bullshit and no good can come out of revoking it, but it has a chance of passing because everyone only cares about healthcare and Russia.

File: 5EkhZhJ.jpg (93KB, 1400x1050px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 1400x1050px

>>38373287
I thought this was just a Reddit thing. Or is it just a Burger thing?

>>38373481
It's an everyone on the internet thing

>>38373287
I think it should end. Government shouldn't favor one sort of business over the other, which is literally what NN is.
Also, 4chan, or any other website, isn't "at risk" from lack of NN. It's more at-risk from NN than anything, since government is the most likely organization to not like 4chan and get it regulated to death. Crying about "internet censorship" from ISP's is literally an lying scare tactic. At least the "slowing down" thing is a possibility (though unlikely - much more likely is ISP's favoring their own content), but the blocking thing is bullocks.
>>38373481
It's both a reddit thing (the propaganda part) and a burger thing (since it's US regulations involving US ISP's). Furners need not be bothered.

>>38373861
>Also, 4chan, or any other website, isn't "at risk" from lack of NN. It's more at-risk from NN than anything, since government is the most likely organization to not like 4chan and get it regulated to death
are you retarded? if that was how it worked, 4chan would be blocked RIGHT NOW

I don't even know what Net neutrality is.

But my take is this, if an ISP is providing a service why should the government the type of service they're providing

>>38373287
Government control of the internet will end in disaster and censorship. The "net neutrality" topic is a meme meant to mobilize the masses into agitating for their own censorship.

The FCC is not your friend, being unallowed to say certain words on the radio is bullshit, and the net neutrality law that Google and friends are supporting specifically OUTLAWS some types of speech online.

Net neutrality means giving the government additional control of the internet and what people can use it for.

inb4
>muh Netflix

>>38373861
Are you forgetting this incident? You're an idiot who doesn't understand NN at all.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/169079/ATT_Blocks_4chan_Stirs_Internet_Hornets_Nest.html

>>38374526
Where do you come up with this bullshit? Provide a source for any of your retarded claims.

File: 274624.gif (995KB, 240x240px) Image search: [Google]

995KB, 240x240px

The internet is just a medium like any other, and should have the same rules about corporate limitations that exist for other mediums like the cellular or phone line network. Data should be treated in a neutral fashion when passing between internet centers and routers the same way data is treated as neutral when passing between phone line centers and routers.

It's ridiculous that this scenario is even considered a problem, but I know that at least half the discussion on here and /pol/ is just people being contrarian or trying to get a rise out of others, or worse, people who take the former people seriously.

Imagine how many peoples jobs/incomes are at stake if net neutrality goes

Net Neutrality has nothing to do with making the Internet in general faster. It has nothing to do with data caps. It's about making sure each packet of data is treated the same as every other packet of data and, with Title II, makes ISPs a public utility.

That's it. Nothing else.

>>38375009
Considering how Net Neutrality has only existed since 2015, not many.

>>38373287
i'm pro net neutrality. comcast already charges me, the consumer, for access to the net. why should comcast get paid again by companies for getting accessed by lots of people or for whatever reason they come up with. it's not like comcast is losing money. they're just greedy.

File: 1497750885534.jpg (41KB, 770x376px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 770x376px

>>38373481

Its an "America has a problem so let's make it everyone else's problem" thing

>>38375708
I prefer to just move out of the way.

>>38373287
I don't support it because I hate the idea of the gubmint telling me what I can and cannot do with the internet "lanes" that I paid for and own, simply because because shit ton of people got butthurt over the prospect of ISPS blocking their favorite websites.

I'm not really worried about websites being blocked because my ISP literally only exists in my county, so they can't afford to pull that shit. There's somewhere around 2500 ISPS in the U.S, so maybe people should focus on utilizing the free market, and vote with their dollar to let companies know that they won't tolerate that shit.

>>38373287
NN shouldn't need to exist. Problem would solve itself if there was any actual competition amoung ISPs

>>38373287
As a communist, I wouldn't mind if the internet got destroyed considering how dominant the right wing is on here.No more sargon of akkad for you neets

>>38373287
I heard that they are going to have a 4chan users fee for people who browse this website on a daily basis and if that is the case most of us are better off moving to another Chan at that point but if it gets too bad i will probably attempt to create my own simple 4chan for brobots to get on and enjoy if the net jews keep fucking with us because we wont use reditt or all the other soical media they try to shove down our throats.