Net Neutrality

>>383764689
Did video games exist before 2015? Were they better or worse than now?

Hopefully

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

88KB, 717x880px

Friendly reminder in the pic

Games will be fine.
Only Google/FB and their astroturfers will whine.

WHERE ARE THE FUCKING MODS

Either way, we're fucked.

>>383764774
But reddit is literally in support of neutrality.

>>383764764
>Did video games exist before 2015?
Yes; the first video game (Halo) came out in 1998.
>Were they better or worse than now?
They've always been fucking terrible.

Said it before and I'll say it again.

Net neutrality is just the jews trying to save shekels and brainwashing the good goys to back them up.

>oi vey, goy, the government will slow down your vidya and porno, goy. you don't want that do you?
The reality is net neutrality is like not taxing trucks on the highway. The trucks carry goods for jews, and the goys pay for the roads. Without net neutrality, companies can set up toll booths for the roads and charge the jews their dues.

57.5% of ALL INTERNET TRAFFIC is jewflix, jewtube, and kikebook. Remember that when you're defending the jew and preaching "net newtralitee" like a good goy.

>>383764815
If my internet bill goes up just one cent I'm going to be really mad at you

File: 1369165940299.jpg (23KB, 232x197px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 232x197px

>lose no matter what I support
>it's the presidential election all over again
boy this country is shit

>>383764774
Seriously, I thought /pol/ didn't like Trump so much any more because he was reneging on campaign promises. Why are people going so far to defend him as to say this isn't happening under his watch?

>>383764689
Only if you play online multiplayers.
and if you don't have a deep wallet.

>>383764974
What do you lose supporting net neutrality?

>>383764908
not r/the_donald

>>383764974
That's easy, start supporting things you don't want. Solved.

>>383764974
Don't worry, when it gets REALLY bad we'll do something about it; it'll probably be too late by then but eh.

>>383764976
>caring about trump's promises
>not just electing a meme president to show what a massive joke this country is, on both sides
It will be forever be remembered that the democrafts lost to him. It will also be forever remembered that Jeb lost to him.

so all the proof people have about the internet packages are ''the tv folk did it''

>>383765037
The FCC censoring the net and 4chan getting banned. You think the same people who don't let naughty things on the radio or tv are going to let this site continue on ?

>>383764882
They're busy deleting video game and trap threads instead of this.

Make me a mod for a week and you shitstains won't be able to thank me enough after the purge.

>>383764689
Games will probably not be significantly affected by net neutrality one way or the other. At least, not within the short-to-intermediate term future. Beyond that, it's anybody's guess.

The Internet as a whole will suffer a tremendously without net neutrality, however, which could have significant indirect effects on video games. Had NN not been the de facto way things worked throughout the 90s and early 2000s then the MMO genre may have never gotten off the ground, for instance. Unless you have some parallel universes we can peek into to see how things happened in different scenarios, then it's impossible to know for sure, but the threat of a chilling effect without net neutrality is very real.

>>383765156
ISPs are the TV folk, and ISPs actually talked about the idea of this shit in the past, so, there's reason to be afraid.

Everyone arguing that Net Neutrality is bad needs to seriously re-evaluate their lives. You are arguing against your own interests just because it pissess off some people you don't like. That is absolutely pathetic, and petty on a level that even elementary school children would find embarrassing.

ISPs only have your best interests in mind while NN wants to take their freedom to give you good service away for good.

>>383764928
Of course sholomo if we could get rid of NN we could get cheap streaming with no data fee and think about the poorfags on mobile who get free data for spotify.

File: 1237438568292.jpg (79KB, 768x576px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 768x576px

>off-topic NN thread made on /a/
>deleted within a minute

>off-topic NN thread made on /v/
>2 threads have already hit 700 posts

>>383765037
The government getting oversight on the entire internet? CnD's over pirating?

>>383765037
Uh, not cutting the regulations on the ISP monopolies that keep trying to fuck consumers will give the government big scary 1984 powers... somehow.
At least that's what comcast said when they paid me to post this

File: 1499705488001.jpg (94KB, 909x909px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 909x909px

NET NEUTRALITY DOESNT EXIST IN MOST COUNTRIES YET ALL THAT REDDIT SCAREMONGERING OF LIMITED BANDWITHS AND ANTI PIRACY IS BULLSHIT
YOU ARE MORE LIKELY TO GET JAIL FOR PIRATING A SHITTY INDIE GAME IN NN UK THAN IN NON NN RUSSIA OR ARGENTINA
RETARDS

Genuinely asking. How would this affect video games? I mainly play on Steam and PSN.

>>383764
when was the last time your internet bill didn't go up? when was the last time it went down? And I do mean when you were with the same provider.

>>383764928
This ia fucking terrible analogy, also what the fuck do jews have to do with this? Its regulating ISPs, it doesn't even fall within stereotype parameters.

>>383765224
/v/ is shit and this has slightly more to do with vibeo gaymes than it does with animu

File: cirno ice.jpg (175KB, 584x800px)

175KB, 584x800px

>>383765209
>telling people they need to reevaluate their lives
>on 4chan

Remember, you're here forever.

>>383764928
>and charge the jews their dues.
And you think that the jews will simply take it and not push the expenses to end consumer, smart guy?

>>383765163
Net Neutrality in no way grants he FCC the ability to censor the net or ban sites.

Net Neutrality is just a set of rules that prohibit limitation of access over ISPs to prevent an uneven playing field.

Like verizon throttling netflix so their own streaming service looks better, which they actually did.

That's all net neutrality does.

>>383765163
>The FCC censoring the net and 4chan getting banned.
fucking how. 4chan has been around for how long? and it hasn't been banned at all during that time.

not to mention if NN gets axed the govt STILL HAS THE POWER to fuck 4chan if they felt like it

>>383765224
Videogames are directly affected by it since multiplayer games=lots o' internet usage. They literally sell internet to people based on "dis is gud 4 gamez".

At least, in theory. I'm sure torrenting and streaming over on /a/ uses just as much, but here it's got a little bit more "legitimacy"

>>383764689
No. AAA devs can easily take the hit and one of the digital gaming platforms will open their doors to indie devs on a sliding scale so they can still produce.

>>383764928
So cable companies charging you for an internet connection, netflix for an internet connection, and then netflix (and indirectly you) to be able to connect to each other is ok? It's double dipping and it's not ok. When you purchase internet service it's implicit in the agreement that you're paying to be able to connect to the rest of the servers on the internet.

>>383764764
FPBP

>On April 13, 2015, the FCC published the final rule on its new "Net Neutrality" regulations. These rules went into effect on June 12, 2015.

>>383765163
>don't let naughty things on the radio or tv
This hasn't been true for years. I can turn on hbo or showtime or something and see tits and extreme violence, I can also turn on sirius and listen to jim norton talk about fucking a tranny.

>>383764928
>Without net neutrality, companies can set up toll booths for the roads and charge the jews their dues
>companies

>bigger jews charge the smaller jews "their due"
>bigger jews also jew you harder as the consumer
>everyone gets jewed harder by the biggest jews in the industry
Oy vey Goldstien, this really is a good plan! We'll be rich once our bonuses from Time Warner arrive. Good thinking my brother! Repeal NN, goys!

>>383765209
proponents of Net neutrality also
tend to ignore the fact that network capacity
use and the profit motive will provide very
powerful checks on overly restrictive carrier
activities. Carriers make money only by carry-
ing more traffic. “Capacity utilization” is one
of the most important concepts in the net-
working business. A broadband network
without subscribers is like a plane with
empty seats: a recipe for financial disaster.
BSPs will
not
want to restrict traffic flows or
encumber Net-surfing activities for fear of
diminished capacity use as frustrated con-
sumers “consume” less of those networks, or
leave the network altogether.

>>383765251
ISPs could theoretically throttle Steam and PSN to reduce download speeds, then tell consumers to pay extra to stop throttling.

File: 1499906308373.gif (3MB, 320x165px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 320x165px

>>383764928
This is so shortsighted, and entirely misses the point. Net Neutrality prevents ISPs from throttling traffic to specific sites. The biggest issue here isn't that our traffic will be throttled. It's that these huge, corrupt corporations will be the ones deciding it. In literally no way is handing the corporations that power a good thing. It only serves to make the internet worse for us, because they can, and ABSOLUTELY will take advantage of it and fuck us over.

>>383765238
it exist in every country that matter, except australia

>>383764689
http://www.reviews.org/internet-service/comcast-xfinity-internet-review/
Already have tiered internet while in this "net neutrality" utopia. lmao
We have laws that prevent internet providers from throttling or blocking websites, faggots and it was in place BEFORE net neutrality.

Verizon vs FCC
Comcast lawsuit throttling bittorrent
Verizon lawsuit throttling Netflix

Liberals tricked into believing repeal is bad with bullshit what-ifs that are already protected against by law, and the rest of you eating up the lies. Soros foundation is also behind the net neutrality protection.

>>383765320
Oh and prevents ISPs from selectively blocking content at their discretion, like if comcast blocked anti comcast sites or stories.

>>383765238
Anytime they considered doing the pay for facebook shit in the past normies reeeeee'd like no tomorrow do they actually think they'll just accept it now? Bunch of hyperbolic nonsense

File: 1482455559320.jpg (21KB, 471x480px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 471x480px

>>383765323
I don't see why the government would want to get rid of such a useful tool to them.

>>383764976
All I wanted was an end to sanctuary cities, increased border security and deportation of illegals, and restricted immigration, specifically from islamic shitholes. He's delivering in this regard and it's all I care about. Too bad those damn california courts keep getting in the way.

>>383765224
/v/ is a dumping ground, mods know it's a lost cause

>>383765156
Want to know who the top TV providers are?
DirecTV, Verizon Fios, AT&T, Dish, Time Warner Cable and Comcast.
Want to know who the top ISP's are?
Comcast, AT&T, Time Warner Cable, Century Link, Charter, and Verizon.

File: 1499857510205.jpg (91KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 400x400px

>>383764815
Don't forget the useful idiots from reddit that read the blatantly false title and decided they were experts.

The left loves to pervert words beyond all recognition.

To the anti-NN guy who kept replying to me in the last thread that died before I got to post:

I just wanted to respond one last time (the original guy you replied to by the way). If you are so tribal you imagine everyone who disagrees with you to be a literal stereotype then YOU my friend have become the stereotype. Seriously, though we may disagree on this I just want to give you my two cents. The world isn't black and white, not everyone you dislike is a Hillaryshill feminazi jew slave, and the people you follow online aren't infallible. Take a step outside and interact with people in the real world because getting some perspective could do you some good. I have been a shut in most of my life, but getting a job and dealing with normal people has had a really positive effect on my understanding of the world. Good night and stay safe friend.

File: doomed.png (95KB, 215x301px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 215x301px

What's the fucking point about whether or not the internet gets its rates throttled, its prices raised, etc. etc.

The internet as a whole is on borrowed time. It has too many malicious uses for governments to simply ignore all the issues. "Free" internet is at a higher risk than "expensive/slow internet"-- in the future there will be more obstacles in letting people use the web how they want. It'll be controlled to keep us safe, and how fast it's being delivered to us will be the least of our worries.

Name your class in the upcoming revolution rpg; I'm thinking a sniper who specializes in traps.

>>383764928
what the fuck is this analogy. It has almost nothing to do with what's happening at all.

>>383765373
nice trolling mate.
AM doesnt exist
FM doesnt exist
Broadcast TV doesnt exist
Basic cable doesnt exist

>We get Title II classification for ISPs
>Finally, everyone can host their own servers
>Poorly
>Internet dies in a firestorm of botnet-induced DDoS

>>383765156
You understand that the "tv folk" are the ones who also provide internet access, yes?

>>383765501
>To the anti-NN guy
>not just directly replying to the post number
Further proving that idiots like you are coming here directly from reddit.

>>383765403
>Soros foundation is also behind the net neutrality protection.
>muh boogeymany
Provide proof.

>>383765430
>everyone at the CIA just really fucking loves /int/ memes

>>383764928
>57.5% of ALL INTERNET TRAFFIC is jewflix, jewtube, and kikebook.

So let's make it 100% by removing net neutrality and remove the chance of anyone else to compete by slowing them down to a crawl because they cannot go sing million dollars contract with Verizon or Comcast or WarnerT&T

File: 1330450989462.jpg (114KB, 633x758px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 633x758px

All I do is play video games, watch/download porn, chat online and stream movies from sites like putlocker.

Which way should I vote to protect my own personal interest?

>>383765448
are you kidding me? /v/ mods are autistic as fuck and probably the worst on this site. Literally 10 threads today alone I type a reply and his post
>the specified thread no longer exists
Sometimes its 3, 40, 100 replies in out of nowhere. Some topics that are relevant to video games or just occasional random fun threads get deleted by those autism fueled kike /v/ mods. They suck the life out of this board

>>383765502
This is the start of that, and people are trying to fight it.

>>383765403
You idiot, that's tiers of download speed. The download speed is applied equally to all connections you make. That's the point of net neutrality: it prevents isps from providing less than your maximum download speed to select services.

>>383765543
well if hbo and sirius can exist with the fcc why wouldn't sites like 4chan?

>>383765492
All they go by are imaginative what ifs instead of fucking facts. Its infuriating. However, it has given me a new purpose for entertainment, and that is to look up liberal lawyers and see how horribly BTFO they've been on cases.

>>383765547
you understand selling a cable tv sub and internet access is a completely different business ?

>>383765443
/pol/ wanted a literal cement wall.

>>383764976
Only reason I voted for Trump was to stop the war with Russia that Hillary was pushing.

>>383764928
Thank you. I even used the truck weighing metaphor in the last thread.

Google has a 5,000,000 tonne land ship, and pays the same at the weigh station as a guy driving a u haul.

That's all it is. That's why nothing changed for the consumer before or after June 2015.

>>383765614
If NN loses, say goodbye to pirating movies.

>>383765614
This is not something people vote on.

Probably pro nn for you.

>>383765614
in that case you'd stand to lose a lot if if the regulations were cut if you're an american.
I don't think you even get to vote for it though, that time has passed.

>>383764764
you sound like a flat earther

>>383765380
The vast majority of people live in areas where they have no choice in their internet provider. The ISPs know this, and work very hard to keep it that way. When your only choice is a terrible internet experience from a shitty company that will do everything in their power to suck every penny out of you, or have no internet at all, they can do whatever the fuck they want and you will just have to accept it and pay for it.

There is absolutely no postivie outcome of Net Neutrality dying. Unless you're the CEO of AT&T, Comcast, Time Warner, etc, of course.

>>383765238
The thing is, you can't compare america to other countries. You just fuckin' can't. Our people think and act differently, our government acts differently, our corporations act differently. Not better, not worse, just differently. Also, if you pirate any video game without any type of vpn or proxy, you deserve to be raped in jail for being fucking retarded, so that's not an issue.

The fact that some people on 4chan don't support net neutrality shows how far this place has fallen

But even then, I live in a different country, so good luck, americans

>people on 4chan actually arguing against net neutrality.
You guys do realize that this would be one of the very first sites to go right? 4chan doesn't pull a profit now so it will get horrible speeds since they can't pay.

Not having a neutral internet doesn't work when there is a gigantic amount of traffic on the net that is non-commercial. I can see how you might argue against it if corporations and businesses were the only people using the internet but they aren't.

File: COLLAPSE.jpg (89KB, 624x658px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 624x658px

>>383765639

I want the government to keep its hands off, but I also want ISPs to deliver their internet equally to every consumer because information in this age is practically a human right. I just want to keep striking the middle ground somehow -- seems impossible.

>>383765734
The vote for it was in 2016 and we got what we voted for.

>>383764774
Yes /v/ and /pol/ have always opposed governments regulation of Internet

>>383765163
You have a fundamental misunderstanding of what net neutrality is. Net neutrality does not in any way, shape, or form grant the FCC anything resembling censorship power over the Internet. Net neutrality has to do with behavior of ISPs, specifically with how they charge companies and customers and manage network traffic. The goal of net neutrality is to prevent the ISPs from being able to favor their own services over competing services (by prioritizing their own services data traffic, or by not counting their own services towards data caps, for instance).

>>383765664
When they come from the same company, they will be treated the same if the company is able to.

>>383764976
Only reason I voted Trump was to sell America to Russia like he was pushing.

"Net neutrality" is a memephrase

>>383765786
take me with you
I'll suck your dick

>>383765734
If you get mad enough at the people who do vote for it they won't vote for it.

Mid-term elections right around the corner.

>>383765689
Yeah it was retarded and I laughed at those who took it seriously. Trump's been working to beef up the existing fencing Bush put in, and add to it, exactly what I expected and satisfied.

>>383765805
The government is the only thing that can stop the ISPs from getting their way tho. As shitty as it is, it's the lesser of 2 evils by far.

Even /tv/ has a thread now:

>>>/tv/84901385
>>>/tv/84901385

Didn't realize they had so many SJWs

File: 1490302095203.jpg (50KB, 550x733px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 550x733px

>>383765858
You're a meme.

>>383765805
Sometimes its better to protect the little guy and shoot down monopolization for the small hit that is government intervention.

>>383765502
You are paying for your internet.

>>383765565
It seemed pointless to use the post number from a dead thread, especially to a post that really had nothing to do with my reply.
Also,
>using the fucking reddit boogyman
That's enough evidence of newfaggotry right there.

>government is the only thing stopping ISPs
>government is why ISP monopolies exist
Which one is it /v/?

>>383765251
Your games would probably download at 50kb/s, your multiplayer games would have ping no less than 200, and you'd be charged for the privilege of bringing those speeds back to the already ludicrously low speeds we have today. So, you'd be charged three times for PSN, basically; once for the internet at all, once for speeds faster than dialup, and once to use PSN.
Some say they might even charge you for the privilege of using steam and PSN at all, like categorizing them under "gaming" and making it an extra cost per month.

>>383764928
Exactly this. If anything, we the end user consumer are defacto subsidizing the cost for Google and crew with our bills while getting inferior streaming.

File: Otter dislikes watermelon but can't stop eating it.jpg (92KB, 600x662px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 600x662px

No point in arguing with /v/ about this. This place is full of edgy troglodytes who will support anything as long as it promotes human suffering. Fascism, genocide, monopolies, whatever. Doesn't even matter if those things would fuck them too, or if they benefit from the things they argue against. They'd probably cut their own dicks off if you convinced them it would make liberals mad.

>>383765927
This has nothing to do with tumblr bro

>>383765786
It's all just shitposts, or people who don't understand the issue. Net Neutrality is unique in that it's genuinely a black and white thing. Either we win, or the ISPs win.

>>383765614
You should oppose NN. Without government meddling your ISP could offer a tailored Internet package. Cheaper and better

>>383765805
I'm on a same boat as you. But I can't agree with AntiNN having to go on the side ISPs support is too much.

>>383765786
I used this in the last thread but
>1939
>French Jews glad they aren't Polish right now

>>383765786
It just shows you don't know how to read a law and are a low information voter, newfaggot.

>>383766019
Did you get trolled or something?

File: image.png (138KB, 1068x1549px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 1068x1549px

>>383764774
(You)

>>383765805

The government is already deep in this shit. It's regulations that make it so that you have at best 2 real choices for internet in any given area. All Net Neutrality is, is asking it to fuck you a little softer.

Guys, you realize that if NN goes away, you're going to need to convince your parents to buy the "gamer" package from your ISP in order to play games online at a decent speed, right?

>>383765805
what purpose does the government have if not protecting that right?
That's literally why we have laws.

File: 2504050-111613153521_zps3f92f5ec.gif~c200.gif (36KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 200x200px

>>383766019
>reddit getting this upset over /v/ not wanting to subsidize google's bandwidth costs
Too funny. Stay mad you fucking moron.

>>383765927
I'm not sure you know what SJW means.

>>383766003
Both. The government being shit caused it in the first place, and now they're the only ones who can stop it too. Problem is, they're still shit...

>>383766003
They have no interest in fucking with latency. Only download speed. Not because they don't have the bandwidth to provide neutral download speeds, but just because they think they can get away with it.

File: POW.jpg (79KB, 615x677px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 615x677px

>>383765805
>he fell for the "cripple the governments power to enforce regulations, cut its funding, then complain about the government being bad at its job and argue that we're better off without it altogether" meme

>>383765515
He just wanted to show off his ability to make it about the jewish conspiracy he read about on /pol/ even though he doesn't understand it at all, because associating The Jew means he can call you ignorant/a jew if you disagree.

>>383765803
Is that why 4chan didn't exist before NN passed in 2015? Before it had ads and was hosted out of some losers bedroom?

>On April 13, 2015, the FCC published the final rule on its new "Net Neutrality" regulations. These rules went into effect on June 12, 2015.

>>383765163
You clearly don't understand the issue. Net Neutrality only regulates the ISPs that provide the internet, not the internet itself. In fact, without net neutrality, your internet would be censored by the ISPs, and with net neutrality, your internet wouldn't be censored at all.

So if it did pass how could people fight it?

>>383765990
It's both, because most people over 12 understand that the people who make up the american government change all the damn time and with them change the policies.

ISPs got government money in the past to build lines.
ISPs lobbied local and state governments to make it near impossible for anyone to lay their own line and compete.
ISPs established territorial structures that prevent the big guys from competing against each other to a significant degree.

This all happened, and the only thing that can push against it now is government intervention, because google proved that even with hundreds of billions of dollars you can't break in to this business to compete because of how closed the system is.

>>383765990
sweating_man.jpg

>>383766167
I never understood why this was a tactic.
People in america don't seem to care though.

>>383766108
Believe it or not, some of us are over 18 and have jobs and our own place to live.

>>383766151
>>383766043
If you actually think this, you don't understand the issue. Read more about it.

>>383765785
>We are special snowflakes !1
Fuck off reddit
If you need a VPN to pirate your internet is not neutral

Here's a fun little experiment.
How many choices for internet providers do you actually have, and how many of those have a max speed and availability you would be happy with.
I have 4 total choices, and only one actually offers a speed faster than 30 mbs

http://broadbandnow.com/

>>383766097
I dont give a shit about /pol/acks but kekistan fags belong to reddit.

>>383765664
It's the same fucking company you stone-dumb fuckwit

>>383766235
Not very many

>>383765838
No I don't. You are correct in that the theoretical concept of Net Neutrality has nothing to do with the FCC. However, in the US every major Net Neutrality proposal has included a provision for the FCC to have the final say on anything Internet related.

>>383766108
>net neutrality is relatively recent
>prior to NN there no packages like everyone is describing
>somehow getting rid of NN will cause all these horrible things that never happened in history
yea go back to redit goyim.

>>383766019
Sorry, I'm not subidizing your shitty astroturf circlejerk's bandwidth, Redditfag.

do so of you fucks really think NN didn't exist before? since the very beginning of the internet?

File: 1463500009226.jpg (9KB, 379x374px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 379x374px

>keep seeing the word censored and throttled posted
guys, is this going to turn american internet into chinese internet? you're scaring me.

>>383765990
>the govt is one person
>or a small group of people with the same ideas
>or has always been the same administration with the same leanings
This is why you have the power to elect representatives

>>383766019
Hi, this is how 4chan has always been
Influx of kids make it seem that this behavior is somehow "new"

>>383766207
not online. Any sites that try to fight it and get enough attention would be throttled to the point where they would be usable.

File: 1497895722229.jpg (56KB, 733x505px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 733x505px

>>383766019
This

>>383766340
It wasn't called that so it didn't exist.

>>383766181
>implying the net wasn't neutral prior to 2015
/v/ doesn't know jack about shit outside vdya mechanics. I don't know why these threads are surprising me.

File: stock-photo-robbery-isolated-robbery-scene-169403138.jpg (416KB, 1500x1100px) Image search: [Google]

416KB, 1500x1100px

>>383764689
>Will abolishing it destroy the video game industry?
Yes. ISPs will throttle torrents and thus piracy. As we all know, piracy increases sales by a large factor (10x). Removing piracy will thus cut sales by 90% and thus the industry will crumble like a house of cards.

>>383766261
1.

I have 1.

There are 3 options, and the second best is less than 1/10th the speed of the best option.

>>383766340
>On April 13, 2015, the FCC published the final rule on its new "Net Neutrality" regulations. These rules went into effect on June 12, 2015.

How retarded do you feel right now?

>>383766261

I have 7. Only 1 offers internet at a decent speed and it has data caps.

Damn lads what wont ISPs throttle, i bet i wont even be able to buy food

>>383764928
No one has ever claimed the government would slow things down. The enemy is the companies, who are against net neutrality. You dipshit.

>>383766349
Pretty much

>>383766261
I only have 2 that offer more than 20 mbs, and it's fucking Comcast and AT&T.
>people actually think the free market will fix this

>>383766235
I'll gladly get fucked in the ass by Jewish ISPs because it pissed those damn libtards off!

You know how verizon and tmobile and shit has an additional, chargeable service where you have data just for netflix and spotify streaming specifically?
NN is the only reason comcast isn't doing that on the computer

>>383766365
>Hi, this is how 4chan has always been
Maybe since 2012 or so. It was never this bad before gamergate.

>>383766369
Seeing a bunch of fat neck beard fedoras or skeletons marching a mile would be pretty funny.

>>383765156
>companies that provide TV did really shitty awful things with TV
>but those same exact companies that provide the internet won't do that with the internet even though they have proven time and time again that all they care about is making an extra dollar no matter what it takes
??????

>>383766215
Why haven't NN opponents, particularly democrafts, put an end to ISP monopolies? Hell, there are more red states with google fiber than blue states.

>>383766431
Memes aside, is there statistic evidence behind piracy increases

>>383766349
Don't listen to astroturfer anon. the NN bill they are referring to has only been around two years.

>On April 13, 2015, the FCC published the final rule on its new "Net Neutrality" regulations. These rules went into effect on June 12, 2015.

>>383766196
I have read many papers on the issue and I am well versed. The reality is the FCC gets the final say in all these proposed net neutrality schemes. Pro NN don't like to highlight this fact but its the truth.

>>383766423
he's been repeatedly reposting the same quote for like the past 2 hours and doesn't have any idea what the concept of net neutrality is.
Or he's just a shitposting aussie

>>383766337
>keeps pushing this only reddit supports NN bullshit
This entire site minus your fucking shithole supported NN until the last year or two due to endless astroturfing from /pol/ to convert 4chan into its playground. Seriously, fucking kill yourself, newfag.

>>383766181

> new "Net Neutrality" regulations.

You realize that new mean there's an old right?

File: 1492984741362.jpg (30KB, 750x573px)

30KB, 750x573px

>>383766181
Jesus fucking christ. If you obviously know nothing about this issue, why are you even posting?

>>383766328
>Why on Earth would monopolies tighten their grip on those that have no choice but to use their services. Gee I can't think of any historical precedent where monopolies fucked everything up!
>Goyim
>Reddit
Just stop, you are convincing no one but yourself.

>>383766349
Yeah, except your ISP will decide what you see, and in a sense what services you get to use by throttling things they don't want you to use and leaving the ones they do (ones they own) pristine and speedy.

>>383766328
You realize NN was put into place specifically to prevent ISPs from implementing all the negative things people are worried about, right? Various major ISPs have been talking about trying to implement "fast lanes" for certain sites/services for years, and now they are fighting against the thing preventing them from doing exactly that. They aren't going to not ruin the internet and screw people over if they win.

Think about your internet bill. When was the last time you got a speed increase? If you've ever gotten one at all, I'm willing to bet that also came with a price increase. Hell, I'm willing to bet you've had your bill increased several times over the years without any improvement in service whatsoever. Do you honestly believe that your ISP is not going to take advantage of a ruling that will allow them to charge you more money while simultaneously making the product they sell you worse?

>>383766450
no not really, you're the one who should.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality
there was no need to label the concept before because it wasn't violated.

>>383765640
It shows that they are pushing tiered service no matter what the subject but mainly I pasted the wrong site like a faggot.

If you googled "Verizon vs FCC" (which includes Comcast in a separate lawsuit, same situation with blocking websites) you will see they tried to do exactly that which the bullshit infograph that is being passed around pretends will happen, that these companies have tried and failed to tier services and access already.

https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/3AF8B4D938CDEEA685257C6000532062/$file/11-1355-1474943.pdf

Read that. Its extremely educational when it comes down to "the internet" and what exactly service providers can "regulate". A tl;dr - they can't block shit at all, since they have no control of what is on the internet.

>>383766652
This.

>>383766365
It was actually mostly fine/contained in /b/ and /pol/ before gamergate and frogposters appeared

>>383765872
Sorry. do you really want to go to Mexico?

>>383766521
Most of the legislation that makes competition impossible was lobbied on a local city, county, and state level, so there's several layers of bullshit to go through.

The only real things the federal government could do to really smack this system into place are

1.) Keep net neutrality
2.) Break up the ISPs from their parent companies, so as to destroy the conflic of interest that exists in ISPs owning things like TV cable service, TV networks, streaming sites, etc.

The conflict of interest is a core facet of the problem.

>>383766652
nope. Verizon rolled out Fios nearby but not to my location. As a consolation they upgraded my DSL to the fastest plan possible and I only pay the slower speed price.

File: maxresdefault.jpg (77KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 1280x720px

>>383766652
>They aren't going to not ruin the internet and screw people over if they win
LMAO. What fucking planet are you living on? You give those fuckers an inch, they'll take a mile. There's literally (LITERALLY) a 0% chance they WON'T use it to fuck us over as much as possible. If you don't think so, you're too naive.

>>383766581
The 2015 law is what is being repealed anon. Net nuetrality as a term to describe the system we've always used has been around a long time, but this bill is just stealing the name to plaster on a corporate handout to silicon valley Democrats who gave massive donations in order to cause confusion, kneejerk emotion reaction, and conflation.

Learn to do your own research.

>>383766261
I have one that is real internet, the rest are 5mb/s garbage. I am stuck sucking Cox until I get out of this shitty city. Oh and they all have data usage limits.

File: 9s.png (266KB, 564x644px) Image search: [Google]

266KB, 564x644px

>>383766261
3 ,one actual unique provider at abysmal speeds.
And apparently a AT&T fiber connection that only 1% of people near me use.

>>383766328
>whining about jews
>pro-corporation
The irony is so thick I can almost scoop it right out of my screen

>>383766820
I've been to mexico, it was nice.

>>383766837
They did that to keep you as a customer, not as a favor to you. If they were the only game in town, they would have told you to deal with it.

>>383766860
Meant for >>383766328

>>383766616
Not an argument; project harder.

>>383766837
>As a consolation
Unless you were already about to pay for increased service, they have no reason to console you. You didn't lose jack shit, and they would have had no reason to charge you less or give you more.

>>383766639
But that's a great thing. Amazingly fast service and constantly improving. ISP are going to compete with each other and we will get rid off shitty non-ISP owned services like Netflix and Facebook.

>>383766860
You might want to work on your reading comprehension

>>383765805
It is a UTILITY. This isn't a hardware store. This is about infrastructure often already subsidized by the government, be it federal, state, or local, and then used by large companies that monopolize certain areas for major profit. There's not way not to involve the government just like there isn't with roads, water, electricity, etc.

All getting rid of net neutrality will do is allow companies like Time Warner (who owns CNN, Cartoon Network, TruTV, HBO, etc) to throttle or tax access to their competition to make their services appear better or be the only option. There is no free-market solution here because these companies already have monopolies over areas, even in large as fuck cities. NN is the only thing stopping them from abusing it worse.

>>383764764
Everything operated under the same principles of Net Neutrality already prior to 2015, its when the jews of ISPs tried to pull a hoodwink on us is when it was put into law.

>>383766956
Fine. This is tho. >>383766693. What do you have to say to that?

>>383766972
You should tag that as sarcasm.

>>383766860
Uh, the guy you're replying to was clearly saying exactly that: ISPs will fuck us over if net neutrality is cut.

>>383766337
You are a bad shill that can't even blend in. Please, turn off your computer and take a hard look at your life.

>>383766693
Uh, dude. There people on your side posting multiple examples of ISPs pulling that shit and being stopped, fined, and punished long before net nuetrality bill was even a twinkle in Zuckerberg wallet.

Might want to get your story straight with them

>>383766940
DESU I have american citizenship, if I had time and if you were serious I'd unironically go for you

>>383766729
So you're saying that there were laws preventing them from doing what you're talking about even without NN in place?

>>383766994
>>383767071
I didn't mean to reply to him, sorry. I'm tired. ;_;

>>383766820
I've actually always wanted to.
My friends from guadalajara and monterrey always make it seem so nice. Besides whatever government problems they say it has.

>>383767039
Yeah, people seem to want to forget the fast lane court cases that started sprouting up that urged this to be put to law.

Why would anyone want to have less control of their Internet? It's like those left millennials that wants freedom of speech to be change just so hate speech is gone

>>383767116
Yes.

If ISPs try to fuck us over I'll just go to a competitor for internet service.

>>383767040
See
>>383766874
>>383767106

>>383765224
Net Neutrality affects online vidya heavily, its relevant.

>>383766431
THAT'S MY PURSE

I DON'T KNOW YOU

>>383767194
Doesn't that make NN redundant?

>>383767221
Nice meme

>>383767112
I'm a different guy, no dick sucking from me; I have family in mexico so if things get to bad I can just bail.

>>383767187
You think theres not paid people and trolls here?

>>383767221
That's a great plan if you live in an area with more than one ISP. Most people in America are not in that situation.

>On April 13, 2015, the FCC published the final rule on its new "Net Neutrality" regulations. These rules went into effect on June 12, 2015.

Wow, it's fucking nothing.

>>383767221
Oh, wait, there isn't one...

File: 1338498339758.jpg (111KB, 1200x1481px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 1200x1481px

so, let me see if I understand this
>NN is abolished
>companies like at&t and verizon can now decide how they want us to internet
>at&t has their own streaming service
>customers that use it receive 100% internet speed while browsing their streaming site
>same customers receive 50% less internet speed while browsing a competitor like netflix or hulu
>if at&t wanted to they could put certain websites into a package deal and charge customers extra if they want to browse those sites
is this correct?

File: image.jpg (318KB, 645x773px) Image search: [Google]

318KB, 645x773px

Can this "net neutrality" problem come to Europe?

>>383765502
If you kill net neutrality and give ISPs power, they will throttle the internet to dialup speeds, charge hundreds of dollars for the privilege of what we currently have, AND, to top it all off, THEY WILL GIVE THE GOVERNMENT ANY INFORMATION/SPYING ACCESS THAT THEY WANT. This is not fucking hard to understand. At least with Net Neutrality, only one group has unbridled power to buttfuck us, not all groups.

>>383767221
ok, which one?
>>383766261

>>383767084
Swing and a miss. Been here since 07 newfriend.

>>383767342
Oh, I didn't mean with the dick sucking, sometimes I just say "fuck it" and do things so that I can talk with people, no matter the cost

>>383767357
They should try to do something about that. Something that doesn't involve federal-level regulation.

>>383767382
Pretty much spot on. ISPs could throttle your net if they don't like your history.

>>383766956
>Not an argument
A student raises their hand and says Ancient Rome invaded North Korea how do you respond? What kind of reaction do you expect to receive for saying something so empty of reason?

>>383767382
>>same customers receive 50% less internet speed while browsing a competitor like netflix or hulu

You forgot to add that AT&T keeps demanding more and more payments from netflix to maintain even that quality of service, which ultimately just hurts the customers.

>>383766652
makes me feel good that i'm not living in america. upgraded my plan to gigabit ethernet plus home line for 10 dollars cheaper than my old 350mbps plan, all because my government pushed hard for more telco licenses and more competition in the telco market

>>383767357
>Rural and suburban retards
Who cares

>>383765224
oh it's going to be a topic when it fucks with your vidya.
It's bad, anon, it's very vidya related.

>>383767221
that would be fine if everyone had that option, sadly many costumers are stuck with only one.

I had only one for over 15 years. only recently came a 2nd one.

>>383767382
This is all stuff they could do. It doesn't mean they will, but it also doesn't mean that they can't. What really matters is if you are willing to take that risk.

>>383767382
no. NN never existed in the US.

>>383767187
Anyone opposing NN is either trolling or has no idea what they're talking about.

>>383767490
Yeah, just like they did from the beginning of the internet all the way until 2015, huh?

>On April 13, 2015, the FCC published the final rule on its new "Net Neutrality" regulations. These rules went into effect on June 12, 2015.

>>383764689
was the video game industry destroyed before net neutrality existed?

>>383767484
>Something that doesn't involve federal-level regulation.

Too bad there's no actual solution that doesn't.

>>383767564
Yes. 1983

>>383767560
Don't you have a different pasta to copy? You literally have 0 idea what you're talking about

>>383767559
nice generalization faggot.

File: 1499848196585.jpg (55KB, 1207x899px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 1207x899px

>>383767539

>>383767495
Kind of you to ignore the absolutely empty word salad I replied to, projecting fuckstick.

File: Kuchiba.png (85KB, 586x386px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 586x386px

>>383766261
>spectrum is the only cable ISP that's widely available
>fiber only available to 1% of the area

>>383767529
There are major urban areas with one landline ISP due to cities colluding on the bullshit to try to save money when putting in fiber or copper. Enjoy your satellite internet speeds

>>383767384
Expect the EU to find a way to add "stopping the spread of white supremacist views" in there somewhere and enjoy!

>>383767384
obviously
And europe will be affected by UA decsion too since plenty of websites are american.
The big "jew" one like youtube and amazon and shit wont be affected since they have billion of dollars and CDN everywhere on the planet.
Smaller websites will struggle and some of them probably will have no choice but to charge subscription to manage to offer better service

>>383767559
Last thread, every time someone opposed it and got hit with either a source or a hard question they just ignored it.

It was sad.

>Competition will fix this.
>Not even google can afford to actually lay fiber due to the lobbying ISPs did, so competition is impossible
>LALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU LALALA

>>383767651
Facts aren't pasta. Sorry if the truth is inconveniencing your narrative, shill.

>On April 13, 2015, the FCC published the final rule on its new "Net Neutrality" regulations. These rules went into effect on June 12, 2015.

>Argument against Net Neutrality: government will be able to get information and spy on us!!!!!!!
>If net neutrality is defeated:
>ISPs begin dialup speeds & the equivalent of "network" and "cable" packages of websites/services, charging extra for things like steam and 4chan and having the already relatively bad speeds we have now
>ISPs give the government any information/surveillance access that they ask for anyway
>no new companies can create alternative services
I really find it hard to believe that anyone is so brainwashed that they actually oppose net neutrality.

>>383767384
EU already has laws for NN

>>383767560
Listen, fuckboy. Don't post if you obviously have no idea what you're talking about.
>>383767039

>>383767138
I'm from mexico, it's not nice, everyone wants to fuck you or rob you if you are an outsider, probably your friends want to sell your lungs,do not come to mexico if you want to stay safe.

File: 11111.png (182KB, 355x355px) Image search: [Google]

182KB, 355x355px

>>383767539

File: goose reaction.jpg (58KB, 728x546px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 728x546px

>>383766489
>these smaller ISPs won't fuck me over but they won't give me the same speed as comcast or AT&T so I'll give my money to Comcast or AT&T thereby denying another ISP the ability to improve their infrastructure with my money
>BAWWWWW WHY AM I GETTING JEWED BY COMCAST AND AT&T SAVE ME GOOGLE
You people can't be serious.

File: 1497565183472.jpg (155KB, 540x540px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 540x540px

>>383767560
>Been told how wrong he is over and over but continues to post the same quote over and over like a mongoloid because his brain can't process it

>>383767765
Let's see this hard hitting stuff, shill. Don't tell me the fat lady sang, bring her out and let her sing, you fantasizing faggot.

>>383767656
FCC's "Network Freedom" principles from 2004 are not Net Neutrality.
FCC Open Internet Order (2010) are not Net Neutrality either.

File: 1429088424609.gif (823KB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

823KB, 400x300px

Friendly reminder that companies like Nintendo, Sony, EA, ect. cream themselves at the idea of taking net neutrality away from you.

>>383767479
I wish I could talk to people, typing is all I know.

>>383767769
>shill
>supports mega corp monopolies

>>383767652
It's the truth tho. NN is a pretty unique issue in that it's completely black and white. It's us vs the ISPs. If you aren't on their payroll, NN WILL negatively effect you. Not only that, but it's a very slippery slope. As bad as this situation is, if it gets repealed, things will get much worse very quickly.

File: 1357503001414.jpg (147KB, 726x590px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 726x590px

>>383767539
wish I had a better reaction image to show how fucking retarded you sound

>>383767296
NN is destructive for consumers and allows websites to ban, block, or shadowban anyone they see fit, even if the person was just speaking their mind and being law-abiding. Basically, it allows Facebook, Youtube, Twitter, Google to ban, block, suspend any accounts that are saying things they don't like, IE: right-wing. Before NN, they could not do such things - only if they were truly abusive by FCC standards. It also allows companies to do anything they want with cookie data freely, even target you for ads, which in a way is invasive.

>>383767821
>thereby denying another ISP the ability to improve their infrastructure with my money
It's actually likely impossible for that other isp to improve their infrastructure due to local legislation the bigger isp services lobbied for.

Ask google how much it costs to try to lay line and compete with big ISPs.

They've only been trying for most of a decade and barely made progress at huge costs.

>>383767796
Not an argument, shit for brains.>>383767835

>>383767896
What?

>>383767769
you're talking about the updates wheeler approved for Title II, correct? The concept of net neutrality was debated for like 10 years already.
Earlier that same year they actually rolled back on regulations and reclassified internet as a utility, something ISPs are currently trying to overturn so they can charge more for uneven services.

>>383767927
Eh, the thing is most people are assholes, if someone tried to me make friends with me, even if he was spergy as fuck, maybe I'd do it

>>383767896
Can you retype that like a normal person? I honestly don't know what you're asking

>>383766261
2 Cox and Century Link. Paying $50 for 15 mbps which I don't think is to bad. Century link offers 25 mbps for $50 but there customer service seems terrible from all the reviews and people I've talked to.

>>383767896
There's literally an example in that post.

Free market correction of any ISP abuse is impossible via no chance of competition.

>>383767821
so what isp do you use?

>NN Stays
>Shitpost all day everyday
>NN Goes
>Actually given a reason to go outside and do shit with my life

Either way Idc anymore desu

File: 1498007294413.jpg (38KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 500x500px

>>383767992
A-are you actually retarded? The post you quoted is the very thing I just disproved. Those laws protecting net neutrality were only passed in 2015 because that was the first time that NN was threatened. Before 2015, it wasn't even an issue.

>>383767796
Not an argument, shit for brains.
>>383767835
Not an argument, try again underage weeb. Make an actual defensible argument instead of claiming someone maybe did before.

Also, since it seems to be ultra triggering the shills:
>On April 13, 2015, the FCC published the final rule on its new "Net Neutrality" regulations. These rules went into effect on June 12, 2015.

>>383767962
>and allows websites to ban, block, or shadowban anyone they see fit,
Websites have always had this right under every system and net neutrality changes nothing about this, whether it exists or not.

Did you just get on the internet for the first time today?

File: pepeshock.jpg (4KB, 250x231px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 250x231px

>>383767382
Complete nonsense. How can anyone support this?
It's like providing legal basis for shafting the customers in previously grey area. Are Americans retarded?

More at 11.

>>383764689
MMOs, definitely. They all need to die anyways, especially WoW. It may also kill off your CoDs and BFs; a very nice plus.

File: Somanyoptions.png (90KB, 1117x801px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 1117x801px

>>383767821
Yeah, my options are fucking amazing. Maybe if you stopped sucking corporation cock you'd realize how shit the market is.

So /v/ hates dlc but thinks trashing net neutrality is ok? What the fuck?

Dlc exists because publishers couldn't get away with charging $200 for games. They butcher a finished game, split it into 6 parts, sell the base game for $60, and nickel and dime you with the dlc. Isps can't get away with charging $200 a month for an internet connection, so they want to sell you a base connection and then charge you extra for the 'privilege' of using google, facebook, netflix, etc.

This isn't even perfectly analogous to dlc because sometimes dlc provides significant new content. Isps double dipping on service fees is purely rent seeking. When we pay for internet service we're paying for our isp's fixed costs of providing that service. Their costs don't change no matter how much we download. They might have to throttle everyone's download speed if they're all downloading at the same time, but the act of throttling doesn't cost them anything they wouldn't be paying if they were at only half capacity. The second service charge would not be given in exchange for any new value. You might argue "well if the market will bear it then it should be ok for isps to charge it!" The market would also bear paying a premium for running water if water utilities were allowed to charge what ever they wanted. That doesn't mean they should be allowed to do so. It's a waste of my money for the benefit of telecom companies that are already frighteningly big.

File: tumblr_mmpo6akXom1qfrrv2o3_1280.jpg (102KB, 703x456px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 703x456px

>>383767671
If you can't read that I think you have bigger things to worry about than net neutrality. 4chan and sites like it will obviously suffer in a world without net neutrality. Just because it existed during a time when ISPs weren't even trying to throttle connectivity of sites they don't like is proof of nothing. Enjoy sucking that corporate "fuckstick" in the name of a monopoly's "free market" lmao.

>>383767958
you are the retarded one.

Are any ports blocked by your ISP ? You don't have NN.
Does your ISP offer a business subscription with additional network usage privileges ? You don't have NN.
Does your ISP zero rate anything ? You don't have NN.
Does your ISP having any non dumb pipe peering arrangements ? You don't have NN.
Does your ISP do any QoS above the link layer ? You don't have NN.

>>383767935
You mean like Google, Facebook, twitter, and Reddit?

Oh wait that's the mislabeled NN and you.

>>383767901
Um, what? Net Neutrality is the concept that ISPs shouldn't be able to selectively throttle connections to certain websites. Net Neutrality isn't a law. Up until 2015, it was a nonissue, but in 2015 the ISPs realized they could try to squeeze even more money out of our pockets by doing that, so regulations were put in place to stop them.

>>383768202
You know what's really funny?

You probably can't actually get most of those at your house. They may be present in your zip code, but not in parts of it.

For me it lists 3 ISPs and I know that one of them doesn't actually serve my area.

>>383766261
I have one.
One.
And they charge $60 for 3Mbps.
Fuck being anti-NN.

>>383767539
>net neutrality existed
>nobody ever called it "net neutrality" because it had never been challenged
>~2010s arrive, comcast and time warner have finished their (((lobbying))) and have succeeded in making sure no new competition can ever have a chance, so they decide to start working out a plan to fuck over the internet like they did with television
>government says "hey go fuck yourselves the interNET is NEUTRAL" and creates the idea of net neutrality
>now, 2017
>people actually expect anyone to believe that there is an argument against net neutrality
How much is comcast paying you?

>>383768170
You're taking that out of context. Those laws protecting net neutrality were only passed in 2015 because that was the first time that NN was threatened. Before 2015, it wasn't even an issue.

>>383765224
/a/ is no fun allowed.

>>383766261
4 choices, 3 I'd be satisfied with, 1 of them I'm using right now which is Spectrum. I definitely don't want the fancy name for Time Warner having free reign on my traffic.

If a company decided to block certain websites, wouldn't this violate freedom of speech?

>we don't like that 4chan website
>you no longer allowed to view it

>>383768310
this.

>>383768158
Let me see if last thread was archived. There is literally a list from people on your side that proves you wrong. You have in disproved anything except your potential ability to not need spoon-feeding.

>>383768341
I've checked. AT&T and Comcast are the only two providers that I can get.

>>383768450
nope. they're a private business

>>383768208
Don't worry. Anyone anti NN is literally just a troll, or completely uninformed. Don't lose faith in humanity just yet.

>>383768271
Websites you don't have to visit compared to ISPs you cant avoid using.

>>383768379
nigger net neutrality is from the early 2000's. Learn who Lawrence Lessig and Tim Wu are.

>>383768450
its not that they would block it, they would just make it take a very long time to load. There is nothing stopping you from actually seeing that site, its just if you have the patience to wait that long.

>>383768450
Nope because private businesses have as many ass-fucking negatives as they do positives.

File: you go now.jpg (69KB, 856x667px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 856x667px

>>383768271
There are jews on both sides /pol/.

>>383768450

No...

Once again, freedom of speech only applies to the government.

>>383767974
Why don't they just lobby for legislation that the bigger ISP lobbied for?

>Ask google how much it costs to try to lay line and compete with big ISPs.
Apparently much less in non-democrat states, going by their map.

>>383768073
Anything other than comcast or at&t? What's the point of having slightly faster download (emphasis on download, not latency, most people don't actively use >10mbps download anyway whereas latency is key for gaming online) if they're just going to more than make up the difference in assfucking and uncompensated downtime anyway.

You fags somehow want to have the best service on paper yet don't realize the service these companies offer comes at a bunch of shady costs elsewhere.

>>383765543
>basic cable

This might have changed but cable doesn't face the same kind of FCC restrictions as the broadcast networks - they just keep stuff in line with them close enough so as to not lose advertisers.

It's the same reasons why you won't find big name studios making/stores carrying AO rated titles. Why the hell would anyone risk losing out on all that cash and getting a bad reputation as smut peddlers because of some uptight soccer mom.

>>383768405
So what was this first unprecedented incident?

>>383768465
Alright, show me what you're talking about, then

>>383765163
>The FCC censoring the net and 4chan getting banned.

That literally is not going to happen holy shit are you retarded?

One, Net Neutrality has NOTHING to do with the ability to ban websites. Its the opposite. It's like saying the government having laws against murder means that the government is going to legalize an annual The Purge.

Two, the FCC does not have broadcast regulation over the Internet nor did Net Neutrality give it such authority.

Two and a half, the FCC only has such authority over broadcast media according to the Supreme Court because of its ready public availability. It's precedent that predates the concept of child safety software.

The FCC can NOT regulate the Internet like broadcast television and radio this has been made clear over two decades ago. Supreme Court precedent forbids it.

Three, the federal government already has the authority to take down websites, but its the FBI that does it for illegal activity.

Four, I don't think you understand how fucking Iron Clad the First Amendment is in the Supreme Court, even with the liberal justices. Any government attempt to so much as throttle "offensive" websites would be struck down.

We literally had such a case like a month ago that the Trademark Office has to accept otherwise valid trademark applications even if they think its "racist".

We have direct precedent that goes entirely against your concerns.

>>383766547

No you aren't well versed because "but then da FCC will ban websites they don't like" is the opinion of someone who hasn't even bothered to research into NN other than being a contrarian.

>the reality is the FCC gets the final say in all these proposed net neutrality schemes.

No, the Supreme Court does. Literally google any Supreme Court case with FCC in the name.

Nor does Net Neutrality open the door to such rules. For fucks sake this is the exact opposite. The internet is not nor was it ever completely unregulated. This is not how it works.

>>383767962
But the doc you post >>383766729 already described what Net Neutrality is.

>effort to compel broadband providers to treat all Internet traffic the same regardless of source - or to require, as it is popularly known, “net neutrality.”

Or are you saying there's another regulation called Net Neutrality that has nothing to do with what is described above?

I've been on this site for a dozen years now and I've NEVER ONCE seen it even remotely against net neutrality and now out of the blue there is a large contingent that wants it abolished?

Either this site has been shilled the fuck out since the election or people here have become the most retarded fucking goy on the planet. Probably a combination of both.

>>383766261
>4 options: charter, "brown dog," "wisper," and "king street"
>everything that's not charter costs more than charter and has abysmally low speed and is fixed wireless, not wired
It's pathetic.

>>383768472
You should check their speeds, because I have the option of At&t here and it's literal dogshit speeds for way too much money no one with a brain would buy.

File: 3ps.png (122KB, 1024x510px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 1024x510px

>favorite server has a 30 ping
>net neutrality is canned
>server now has 300 ping

File: image.png (1MB, 736x586px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 736x586px

>>383767762
Damn, how do you americans can prevent this, I mean, I saw that there is a petition, but does it have a real value against this shitty deal?
>>383767793
I'm ignorant, what do you mean?

>>383768683
>Why don't they just lobby for legislation that the bigger ISP lobbied for?
Because then it becomes your money vs their money until one of you runs out of money.

Does a startup ISP have 100 billion dollars to fights comcast with?

>>383768758
that seems like a safe bet

File: 700a2ba8226aedb3d402ccdbe9bfa7db.png (406KB, 560x345px) Image search: [Google]

406KB, 560x345px

>/pol/ always going on about dah jews
>Actively defends something that would allow the kikes that are ISP heads to extort more money from the majority of the U.S. all because Republicans are the ones proposing it

>>383768620
Except if you repeal this 2015 bill it's exactly the way things were before except for the silicon valley donation thank yous from the Democrats.

>>383768702
>on April 23, 2014, the FCC reported a new draft rule that would permit broadband ISPs such as Comcast and Verizon to offer content providers, such as Netflix, Disney or Google, willing to pay a higher price, faster connection speeds, so their customers would have preferential access

That was the big one IIRC

>>383767510
This is what makes the whole anti-Net Neutrality thing all the more baffling. America already has some of the worst internet in the world. We pay significantly more than most other countries for significantly lower speeds. And now people are fighting in favor of the ISPs to make things even worse for us. I just don't get it.

File: 12.png (301KB, 520x678px) Image search: [Google]

301KB, 520x678px

>all these anti NN shitposts
You guys need to stop, or newfags will start taking you seriously.

>>383764689
I hope so. and 4chan/youtube while we're at it. fuck the internet. we were better off without it.

>>383768581
>lol just wait 2 hours, 10 for the pictures, no one's stopping you lol
Fucking neo-jew corporate shills

>>383768867
and that's if the larger ISP doesn't decide to just buy out the smaller ISP

>>383768729
That guy was wrong, but opposing NN is still moronic.

>>383768830
So you had this problem before June 2015 as well?
>On April 13, 2015, the FCC published the final rule on its new "Net Neutrality" regulations. These rules went into effect on June 12, 2015.

>>383768880
See
>>383768887

>>383768683
Google is trying, but every time they try to fight the rules in court it turns into a legal quagmire because the established ISPs can just drag it out indefinitely until google quits.

>>383767529
Yeah, who cares about most of the population

>>383768758
sorry i'm bringing up the boogeyman, but its the_donald, they'll literally shill anything to the ends of the earth if its what their "god emperor" wants.

>>383768962
it's like one guy, and at least his retardation is allowing people to have a conversation about it I guess.

>>383768832
>how do you americans can prevent this
We have to just call our politicians and beg them to vote for net neutrality and hope that they feel like siding with their constituents instead of siding with their wallets

>>383768867
There is more than one way to lobby, such as supporting a new candidate for office because everyone hates the current one for being a comcast shill.

>>383768695
nope basic cable is still restricted. You need a separate subscription service for it to be in the clear. Basic cable is not considered a subscription service by the FCC but HBO for example is.

>>383769003
right, and at the same time they are also suing the smaller isp for infringing on their line territory.

>>383768758
Trolls. It's just trolls.
>>383769009
Those laws protecting net neutrality were only passed in 2015 because that was the first time that NN was threatened. Before 2015, it wasn't even an issue.

File: 1499920997460.png (51KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 1200x800px

>>383768758
I WONDER

>>383769012
Who is responsible for that legal quagmire?

>>383769009
>>383768908
>Given an argument with a date and event
>Blatantly ignores and posts the quote again
Alright heres your last (you) friend, since thats all you're actually posting for.

>>383768758
I honestly believe its just empty attempts at trolling at this point. Maybe a couple shills and genuine retards but I figure most of it is "look at these people get mad at my dumb opinion on the internet."

>>383769057
These rules were set up at all levels of state government possible in most places.

an ISP would have to effectively buy off the whole state's governments to do this.
At the same time, you'd have to hope the other ISP STILL doesn't just do the same thing to keep their shit.


There's no avenue where it doesn't become your money vs theirs.

>>383768758
It's nu/pol/. I wish I was kidding, it's become a fucking blight.
I doubt those underage fucks even remember 4chan during SOPA/PIPA.

>>383769041
so just give up?

>>383768996
I'll admit, I could have written my post better. I was trying to say a way in which ISP's could prevent you from seeing a site without straight up blocking it.

>>383768729
nice reddit shilling attempt mate. I have read all Tim Wu's papers on Net Neutrality and considering he invented Net Neutrality he is a lot better at explaining it than you.

RIP Trump thread

>>383768758
phoneposters

aka kekistan fags

File: 1481980383433.jpg (108KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 400x400px

Alright, faggots. Lets see what /v/ really thinks

http://www.strawpoll.me/13423012/
>http://www.strawpoll.me/13423012/
http://www.strawpoll.me/13423012/
>http://www.strawpoll.me/13423012/

>>383768832
>I'm ignorant, what do you mean?
EU has net neutrality by law

>>383768178
our government is literally corrupt and now thanks to the current administration, being openly run by corporate jews

>mfw there are probably comcast flunkies monitoring this thread too

>>383768994
We absolutely are not

>>383768908
So after looking it up, it sounds like those companies would have paid more to keep up their speed and massive bandwidth use, and now instead they get to use a majority of the bandwidth with equal speeds to every other site for free. Neat.

>>383769125

The rules they have to fight over:
ISP lobbying of city, county, and state governments for thirty plus years.

They wanted the quagmire. They built it.

The neverending delayed court battles:
The nature of our legal system and how it can be exploited by the wealthy for extremely long drawn out delays.

>>383768243
My cursory googling is not giving me any reason to believe it is an economic necessity for my isp to charge netflix (and indirectly me) extra to deliver their content. The argument here is that there is little competition in the internet service market to keep costs down, so should an isp be allowed to abuse what are often local monopolies to maximize profits? I don't know if all that other stuff you mention is ok or not, but that's an argument for another day.

>>383768887
>>383769009
But if its repealed how do you expect a free market to form if it is impossible for even google to start an ISP. All i can see from this is ISPs going full jew with no competition and no limits.

>>383769135
See>>383769276


Stay fanny flustered, shill.

>>383769183
Which state governments specifically?

>>383769297
I should add, that second issue is way more than a hundred years old.

Even the man who invented television first was delayed in court for YEARS by a big business who wanted to invent television and sell it before he could. They fucked him HARD.