Redpill me on Net Neutrality. How on EARTH can this be a bad thing...

Redpill me on Net Neutrality. How on EARTH can this be a bad thing, other than theoretical situations gleamed from Keynesian economics?

Other urls found in this thread:

asianslave.biz/submissive_escort_fees.htm
fightforthefuture.org/news/2016-11-29-urgent-the-fbi-cia-and-other-law-enforcement/
google.com/amp/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/netflix-agrees-to-pay-comcast-to-improve-its-streaming-1393175346?client=ms-android-verizon
qz.com/333313/milliions-of-facebook-users-have-no-idea-theyre-using-the-internet/
idd.com.au/internet-service-providers.php
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

The government and big business is shilling for it. It's not going to benefit you.

im actually kind of excited to watch netneutrality die. If comcast/verison etc want to cut their customers off from torrents, tor, and fake news, let them. not even throttle, 100% cut them off. Please let comcast become AOL, let verison become its own shitty version of myspace. Let them do it! Why?

What happened to AOL and myspace?

If someone you really hate wants to shoot themselves in the face with a shotgun why stop them?

The only bad thing about net neutrality is when you're at war against another nation, you don't necessarily want hostile countries to have access to your country's online services.

I mean, why shouldn't you shut off access to all websites hosted in your country when they try to access from the same country that's trying to kill your people?

Beyond that though, yes, net neutrality should be respected.

people that use more bandwidth should have to pay more

net neutrality prevents this

The web should remain neutral, otherwise you ge someone like Trump elected, and Trayvon Martin looks bad.

I HEREBY REDPILL YOU GO FORTH AND BE REDPILLLED

asianslave.biz/submissive_escort_fees.htm

Net neutrality doesn't prevent bandwidth metering. What it prevents is "$0.25/GB but free unlimited Jewtube and Faceberg" which is what some service providers absolutely want to do

We don't have infra for alternatives and the only new options would be built and owned by google or Facebook directly

I've seen ISPs do this already though.

...

We don't have strong neutrality law in the US, there are some new rules from the FCC as of 2015 but it's fucking complicated so idk. No clue about the situation in Middle Earth.

AT&T made their new DirecTV streaming service not count toward data on their mobile plans. FCC says this violates net neutrality - they want to make you pay for something you would otherwise get for free.

Are your phone companies allowed to give free access to their own website ( without even having a plan/any data left)?

The media Jew was going to give me a sweet-treat with no strings attached and the big bad regulator stopped them! I am very mad about this!

For a short while many people will have to rely on old fashioned modems. But this will encourage the market for ISDN or DSL. It might be slower, but it's still an alternative.

If you have a telephone lan line then you can get DSL. More DSL subscribers will mean the provider can expand. This will NOT happen if people are comfy with comcast's version of the internet.

I imagine this would be allowed under the principle that the rules should be written and enforced by people who aren't completely autistic and lacking in common sense.

>rely on modems

Nobody will want this if they can't get their streaming videos from jewgle or facebook. Normies just won't care.

It's fucked

I've yet to see any proof from ISPs that they will divide up sites. It's just speculation from those supporting NN.

NN wasn't passed until 2015, why didn't sites do it earlier?

For at least the last 15 years we've been told how internet companies plan to prioritise traffic for certain users for the sake of profiteering and at the expense of freedom of speech. It never fucking happened. Furthermore, it never will happen because it's not good business and it's not good publicity.

Net neutrality is a made up issue that only has basis in the most fevered nightmares of the left wing. Anyone who tries to sell it to you is speaking out of their socialist ass.

in many situations comcast didn't lay the lines it uses in the grand scheme of things. the infrastructure allows for quite a few alternatives actually in many areas.

Give jews complete control of internet? Sounds like a fucking great idea.

>wanting free (((facebook))) and (((youtube))) but pay 10 $/ GB to monopol-maffias for anything else

You are a special kind of retard.

How exactly does this work if I can just tunnel to a VPN outside the country?

Give telecoms literal monopolies over area.

Give monopoly the ability to set prices

Create a direct incentive for ISPs, despite the transfer of wealth from customers and websites to them, to not upgrade their services to encourage companies to continue to buy "internet fast lanes" because there is no point to buying these if service is good.

???

you're a cuck. You don't give companies monopolies and go LUL MUH FREE MARKET. Also telecoms are naturally monopolistic because of the extremely high cost of entry, especially in Canada.

>Be telecommunication company get sweet cash to maintain lines.

>Decide to not upgrade people's internet speed,but take government money to do so.

>Decide to set data caps

>Decide to throttle Sup Forums, try to make chink moot pay or we will throttle his I.p. making his site slow as fuck.

>Making Huffington Post fast cause they payed.

>Decide to fuck Netflix and create my own stream site, make my site quick as fuck and Netflix slow.

Also telecoms have been repeatedly subsidized to expand internet access and every single time they did it they lied to an extreme and never upgraded their services as much as they said they would.

The point is you don't get rid of left-wing regulated monopolies starting with expanding the monopolies ability to profit at the expense of literally everybody else.

So when has an ISP forced users to pay more for sites?

This is actually surprisingly common, many companies have a practice of "zero rating" where access to specific sites on their network are completely free, whereas other websites cost money to access. In other cases, like Zuckerbergs internet.org, certain websites like facebook are also given speed priority.

The point is to direct all traffic on the internet to these favored websites and currently many jews are saying they will expand internet access to the third world if they get rid of net neutrality so they can do this. Essentially guaranteeing the third world will be their customers. The poos actually kicked them out of their country for this because they're based.

Stop being cooperate monopolist shills Sup Forums holy shit.

You pay different price for different bandwidth, what can possible be bad or illogical with that?

You didn't answer the question. When has a tiered package be offered?

People were unknowingly throttled.

Like breaking down network neutrality is LITERALLY being used by (((zuckerberg))) to control the third worlds media.

I'm not even fucking kidding about this. And Sup Forums is shilling for network neutrality to be torn down. Useful idiots.

Gee what happens when we make it cheaper and faster to access the jew sites than the rest of the internet???

Why don't people see it the same as TV? You want more channels you pay more.

Of course now more people are canceling subscriptions because there are other alternatives.

>Payed

Opinion deemed irrelevant.

We just had a law case over net neutrality here.

"Telia" one of the biggest ISP here had some offer that meant you could use some social media and spotify without it taking any limited data on your phone.

It got shut down. Pretty good, just make

It's not about different bandwith, it's about prioritising some sites speed to others. You can get Fagbook instantly, but have to wait 5 minutes to open Sup Forums.

You didn't ask about a tiered package, you asked when ISPs had forced users to pay more for sites.

The tiered package memes are indeed actually a left wing fevered dream often posted ironically by Sup Forums users that know it's bullshit. The way this works is they make their own websites free, and everybody elses the same price. Or they make their networks access websites faster that pay them more.

We don't like the T.V. subscriber model, why the fuck would we like that on the internet?

Does this bs affect countries outside of US?
Because I don't want your bs influencing my internet access.

>you asked when ISPs had forced users to pay more for sites.

And when has that happened?

Realistically of course, they will only throttle alternatives to the extent necessary to preserve Fuckerberg's monopoly

Oh wait, I'm sorry, they will never "throttle" anything, just "accelerate" facebook. And retards will think they got something for free because they can't into marketing

Pointing out the backlash from it now.

> Corporate profiteering isn't even real go- i mean guy, you're just being alarmist!

Do you have downs? I already gave an example, and other people in this thread are giving examples

>be ISP
>build internet backbone
>maintain internet backbone
>see way to increase profit off thing I built and maintain
YOU DON'T OWN THAT!
YOU CAN'T CHANGE PRODUCT YOU OWN TO PROFIT!
REEEEEEEEEEEEE!

ALSO, DIG LINES AT A LOSS OUT TO BUMFUCK NEIGHBORHOODS, HERE'S A DOLLAR.

Net neutrality has NOTHING to do with throttiing bandwith, it's all about CONTROLLING THE FLOW OF INFORMATION.
PERIOD!

Fuck off anti-corporatist communist cuck

>A FUCKING LEAF

Retard.

Ricochet Wireless Internet, just needs street lights and you have infrastructure. This could happen if comcast actually just cut off sites they didn't want you to see.

Throttle encrypted traffic.
Third world countries have facbook doesn't count guys for cellphone data.


Why sell the whole cow when you can. It up in chunks and sell each chunk for more?

> Be business
> Have costs of operating
> Try to minimize costs by utilizing unethical practices
> People don't like it.
> REEEEE GIVE US MONEY GOYIM! ANTI-CAPITALIST FILTH!

What could it all mean?! I don't understand this crazy world!

The weird computer nerds will always find ways of accessing their obscure Himalayan watchmaking forums. This is not the issue at hand.

Perfect situation. Reminder that all the poorfags who try to use my paid special access are violating the NAP

Leafs are IT oriented, especially on Sup Forums, and are getting raped in the ASS by telecoms. We are literally paying the most money for mobile data IN THE WORLD. The conservatives tried to introduce a new competitor to our telecoms, they failed, and our telecom cartel laughed heartily.

I have no idea how we managed to get more raped in the telecom market than Mexico.

We come to warn you of the telecoms assraping ways. Don't get rid of network neutrality, it's a jewish trick!

this. tech moves faster than bureaucratic regulations. there will always be ways around this shit

>I have no idea how we managed to get more raped in the telecom market than Mexico.
Let me take a guess... CHYNA

Why do people believe companies will suddenly cap the intarwebs once net neutrality is trashed?

Will they profit more?
Will they attract more customers?

I mean wireless mobile had caps and now we have infinite plan because people wanted it.

>Build rails
>Any trains can use the rails at any speed
>This leads to excellent trains thriving and shitty trains failing
>Along comes the end of rail neutrality
>Trains owned by the rail company get priority in everything
>Shit trains become the norm since they own the rails and no one can compete.

In the US.

Net neutrality is more than just "free youtube". Someone, e.g. Netflix or Pornhub, might pay your ISP money to ensure you get the latest releases of Game of Thrones and Blacked faster you get other content. This would give them an advantage over e.g. local NZ businesses that don't have as much money as American corporations.

The debate is between those who see that advantage as legitimate and beneficial, and those who see it as monopolistic and anti-competitive.

I'm surprised ours is so average, our internet's notoriously expensive for how shitty it is.

Do you not have unlimited data packages on your phone's?

I was using my phone Internet as the Internet for my apartment for a while. I could stream in high Def with no problems.

Wasn't reliable enough for gaming so I got proper Internet.

They will profit more if they are paid by content providers to put their sites in the fast lane. Or if they just straight up merge with media companies, which is happening.

Normies don't give a fuck about having a neutral marketplace with real competition, they just want their TV shows and gaming streams.

Not an argument

"Its not gonna happen"
Nigga it already happened.

Being on Sup Forums and against neutrality os pretty amazing. Hope you boyos dont get a headache

>internet is fine
>pass this legislation goy so we can make it just as fine as it always is
>computers become blacked boxes
>press a to suck dick

The telecoms actually got their network neutrality ban overturned, but then they got BTFO by Tom Wheeler who regulated them as a utility with Obummers blessing, so violating network neutrality remains illegal.

So I'm not sure if there are many US examples. The only one that comes to mind is the slowing of bittorrent traffic, and honestly, that's not really what I'm worried about too much, discriminating by types of data is less controversial than discriminating by specific websites. There is also some allowance for things like extremely expensive guaranteed bandwidth for business critical applications.

Being this ignorant and still posting.

>The government and big business is shilling against it. It's going to benefit you.
FTFY

>Pay better premium
>Get higher speeds, higher/no limit

Is this not the case elsewhere?

I have 50 meg Internet. I'm not going to 256k which is the highest DSL in my neighborhood. F that noise.

>ISPs will never block content!
You say this even as Faceberg and Jewgle are about to turn on the great firewall of China in the US. Remember "Fake News!"?

That's not net neutrality.

Why is Sup Forums scared shitless of government but are huge cucks to monopolies?

Literally retarded.
Who are they going to switch to?
Most places in the US don't even have access to fast internet, and the rest has mostly a single provider in the area.

Are you joking goy! It hasn't happened, we telecoms would never dream it!

It's very important that you do not pass any laws that would prevent us from doing this thing that we would never ever do. Our feelings would be so hurt.

>browsing Sup Forums
>ever

>they just want their TV shows and gaming streams.
What do you need fast internet other than those two anyway?

Torrents? Didn't they capped it and removed later because people whined a lot about it?

In the context of the US, it's the democrats, website providers, and honestly the overwhelming amount of IT people I see that are for it.

It's the republicans, and ISPs against it.

>Hating Sup Forums
>Using meme arrows

Even using a VPN is reason enough now for the FBI to investigate you/shut you down.

fightforthefuture.org/news/2016-11-29-urgent-the-fbi-cia-and-other-law-enforcement/

Where were you when they extorted Netflix for more money? Under a rock? google.com/amp/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/netflix-agrees-to-pay-comcast-to-improve-its-streaming-1393175346?client=ms-android-verizon

Normies are ignorant about this, but they will notice it if it ever comes into effect and swap to any ISP that promises to not slow down websites. All an ISP needs to do is buy an ad that says "unlike competitors X, Y and Z we will never slow down your Internet sites". The competitors can't fight against that, because they are doing just that. They can say "we offer faster jewtube" or whatever, but they will always lose out on that fight in the advertising domain and the fact that speeds that they can increase sites by are marginal at best. So as long as one of the ISPs, even the smaller ones, stay neutral, they all will.

So what you have to look out for are the big ones swallowing up the smaller ones.

WEWLAD. google.com/amp/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/netflix-agrees-to-pay-comcast-to-improve-its-streaming-1393175346?client=ms-android-verizon

Not the last mile.

>Sup Forums not for net neutrality


What Sup Forums are you going to holy shit ?

Then what does "paid special access" imply other than paying more for better service?

Oh you're right, the free market completely solves the network neutrality problem! Why didn't people think of that? You can just pick another cable company!

Oh wait darn there isn't another cable company is there? Oh maybe there is but by pure (((coincidence))) they offer the exact same things we do. Darn guess you're just stuck with us.

It's fucking terrible. Don't pretend it isn't.

I am waiting for the day we can buy satellite internet from L Ron Musk himself, then we will truly enter the promised land

Let's they slowed down Sup Forums, how slow do you imagine it would be? Like 56k modem slow?

If Netflix gets charged, they will pass on the costs to customers. Already happened. google.com/amp/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/netflix-agrees-to-pay-comcast-to-improve-its-streaming-1393175346?client=ms-android-verizon

qz.com/333313/milliions-of-facebook-users-have-no-idea-theyre-using-the-internet/

That's certainly an alarmist reading of the amended rules. The new rule is not good, for sure, but it certainly doesn't criminalize anonymity, it merely lets the judge weigh use of anonymity software in granting a search warrant.

I was stupid and said opposite thing I meant to. I am shitposting on Sup Forums now because I am literally too sick to sleep. I delet post to avoid confusion.

Entirety of Sup Forums is for network neutrality.

This captcha is too much work

Hello, I work for a Tier 1 operator.

I will try and clear some confusion, since Sup Forums as always is lost in conspiracy theories and lost track of reality.


1. Nobody is going to make youtube or netflix or spotify faster "because they pay", their goal is the opposite.
Internet providers are not earning enough from giving just access to customers, so they want to start selling SERVICES such as videos and music.
What would happen is that you get your 20$ adsl plan with included operator music/video service, and some extra to pay for netlflix/spotify etc.

This is already somewhat reality in some places in EU, where provider music service DOES NOT count towards datacap.

---cont

A simple example would be different charges for different Web sites.

This will only profit the companies that own the Internet infrastructure. It won't help the websites or you because it would be the companies that own the Internet infrastructure that would control the fees.

Facebook is free.
Sup Forums is an extra €50 a month.

Mobile companies are already doing this by making it so websites and services on their list don't count towards your data limit. There is no reason they wouldn't try the same while imposing data caps on hardline networks like Comcast already does.

You clearly don't understand how ISPs work. They are regional and local monopolies. You can't simply create a ISP and get into the local infrastructure.

>Better service


It only faster service. Imagine I am Amazon prime. I offer two day shipping free since ur a prime member.

Sweet right?

Well France payed me an they receive the package in two days, but since you didn't I take 2 days pro easing your order and ship it on two days.
It still shipped in two days ,just that it took longer to process cause you aren't paying.

Not all of us live in the wilderness of Canada m8. Seriously where the fuck do you like that there is one service provider? I have dozens to choose from. Here's a list:

idd.com.au/internet-service-providers.php

If you can only choose one, that's probably government medling, isn't it? I'm not a libertarian or any shit like that, but yeah, this a point where an actual free market will fix it. A free market is not one corporation able to provide a service because the government made it that way.

Excellent analogy

>I am waiting for the day we can buy satellite internet from L Ron Musk himself
Trust me, you aren't. I had satellite internet, 3gb cap (2gb off-peak 1gb peak), 250kb/s down uncapped, 30kb/s down capped if I was lucky, upload was completely unusable.
All for the low low price of >$70 a month.