Can someone on here tell me what the fuck net neutrality is and what your opinion on it is?

Can someone on here tell me what the fuck net neutrality is and what your opinion on it is?

Is the internet a utility? I feel like it should be.

it's just a meme, the government can spy on you whenever it wants. Also all your computer parts and electronics are made in china, so there is probably tons of backdoors into them that the chinese spies utilize.

That being said, in my country you can't actually prove who is using the internet by law. You could easily say that somebody else was using your computer while you were sleeping and it would be a perfectly legitimate defense.

>the government can spy on you whenever it wants.
this is true. and providers can sell my info now

I'll agree with saying it was someone else on my computer

Net neutrality is about preventing ISPs from giving network access priority to paying companies.

For example, without net neutrality, Google or Yahoo could pay your ISP in exchange for being able to have bandwidth priority. Other services that don't pay would then be throttled or have their packets delayed.

Removing it would be terrible for services that can't afford to pay the fee. For example, if somebody made a game with multiplayer, your ping times and dropped packets would increase.

>the government can spy on you whenever it wants
>there is probably tons of backdoors into your computer parts and electronics

Neither of these have anything to do with what net neutrality is you ignoramus.

It was another phase of US government control over the internet, and faggots were bagging for it like the retards that they are without even reading the bill.

see this is a reasonable argument to me I can't disagree with you even though I'm normally on the far right of every position

don't worry about such trivial things goy, errr I mean guy! Anonimity and freedom of speech are archaically old mentalities that need to be thrown away. We need to be able to sell it, errs I mean sanitize the internet to make it more welcoming! You arent a racist right goy? errr I mean guy!

Yet it never happened for the entire life of the internet. Literally no ISP has done it and suddenly it's a big concern that warrants more government control over the internet? Bullshit. Congrats on being another bluepilled useful idiot who doesn't understand what's going on.

>Yet it never happened for the entire life of the internet. Literally no ISP has done it and suddenly it's a big concern that warrants more government control over the internet?
damn see now I'm conflicted with my last post

>Google or Yahoo could pay your ISP in exchange for being able to have bandwidth priority

they kinda do this already in a way. most larger ISPs have direct peering links to companies like Netflix, Google, Amazon, Facebook, etc. this is mostly because of the sheer amount of data that is always being used to/from these companies. for instance, Google (youtube) might, at peak times, be going at a rate near 100Gbps - or more - on just one peering link. depending on how many egress points the ISP has this could be a huge amount of data. so, all of that data being dumped onto the main lines (the core ring) of their HSD infrastructure would be disastrous. these types of connections are paid for and agree upon by bother parties.

it's not necessarily "bandwidth prioritization" but it does give them an edge. ISPs also house cache servers that store commonly downloaded content so that it won't be repeatedly downloaded.

these companies already have a bandwidth priority just by the sheer amount of data used daily.

desu if net neutrality is such a problem for these companies why aren't they starting parallel companies which only sell their service to the big companies? cus then they can give big companies a network infrastructure but not the little guys and consumers.
Why not?

Just because you support Trump / Right-wing perspectives doesn't mean you have to support ideas that are foolish and would be bad for our society.

So Sup Forums, how much do you pay for your internet and what are your speeds?

>these companies already have a bandwidth priority
Not in the same way that removing net neutrality could give them.
If they want to build extra infrastructure to support their services that is fine, but preventing other users from having equal network priority would be very bad IMO.

It's the law to keep the internet free because you need a new law crafted by Goldberg McShekel to ensure the internet stays the way it is

It's a shady bill trying to allow globalist control

fugg you australia

stop changing my mind on things

Not an argument, faggot.

ISP's were giving many millions of tax payers money in the 90's to improve their shit but they took the money and gave us the finger.

How do you build infrastructure online like you guys are saying what does that mean

If they ever start lobbying hard for the abolishment of net neutrality I'm torching the nearest comcast office
Fuck those kikes

what company hasn't done that?

and no, ISPs haven't given you the finger at all. you don't understand how expensive it is to lay and maintain a fiber-optic network. the residential business at most ISPs is their bread and butter, but they do not make most of their profits from it. there are always maintenances going on and billions of dollars being spent every year to maintain and upgrade the network. you'll sit here and blame your internet being down on the ISP - and they'll take it - when it could be a third-party fiber carrier that is mere transport to your local headend that happens to get their fiber cut. or a squirrel chewing through your aerial lines. some random fucker with a shotgun deciding to shoot some lines. there are countless ways the money is spent.

i'm not defending shady business practices, but honestly, most of you have no fuckin' idea what you are talking about.

You build a data center nearby and have some fiber connecting to the core ring.

Why do you like net neutrality? looking for opinions here

>what the fuck net neutrality is
Which one? The proposed law or Tim Wu's definition? The law was about government control of the internet. Sup Forums fought against it and it never passed. Tim Wu's idea is a philosophy of a free internet. The government tried to pass it again...well..to talk about passing it. Retards confuse these two, which the left wing media intended. Way to go retards!

>put down fiber
>dont need to lay down better cable every 5-10 years, you just upgrade the modems

It's what happens when you let the (((free market))) do its thing.

ISPs are common couriers, and Net Neutrality is nothing more than reinforcing of contract law.

Which when you get down to it is pretty sad that you have to say a signed contract is a valid contract.

Prioritizing one kind of traffic over another can lead to cencorship
What if the (((mpaa))) lobbied hard enough to outlaw bittorrent?

I see. I'll have to look it up later as well

What are you talking about? That has literally nothing to do with net neutrality.

They don't have to abolish it, it never passed. Dummy. Be happy. Look what FCC control did to TV.

the law

Fags posting on an anonymous image board argue that laws taking away anonymity online is bad

The law was super stinky. It would have given the FCC control of the internet.

What I thought.

So is the internet really a luxury?

The interent is a series of tubes invented by Al Gore back in the 90s in an effort to prevent global warming and to save polar bears. It's sole purpose was to save the world but millennials now use it to pump tumblr, cartoon pornography, memes and social networks into their home.

How does it feel knowing you are wasting a tool that was supposed to be used for the betterment of mankind as a fapping peripheral?

negative. upgrading the modems isn't good enough.

to do gigabit speeds, you need to upgrade the CMTS itself, as well as the optical transport gear inbetween headends. docsis 3.0 is the standard now but 3.1 offers much higher rates of transfer, and most of the infrastructure simply isn't setup to handle it. fiber is only as good as the equipment that is transporting the data.

that said, fiber is still laid, say for example during a fiber cut or storm damage. cellular carriers pay to have fiber laid to their towers, which is monitored and maintained by the same ISP you get service from.

enterprise customers pay to have direct connections to the core network, rather than through the same residential pipes, and this costs money to do. the ISP runs fiber directly to their business.

there are also still many areas of the US that don't have fiber laid and ISPs continue to expand.

> feel
Don't. Can you logically prove it?
Also, the concept of neutrality is flawed the way it's defined now. What people mean is that they opposed throttling bandwidth by ISPs and such.
In essence, there's different priority to different packets. Streaming video usually gets promoted over email, and there goes neutrality out the window (as it is defined today)

On a kike note, why shouldn't i be able to pay to get priority routing?

>What people mean is that they opposed throttling bandwidth by ISPs and such.
yeah
>In essence, there's different priority to different packets
making me think

>On a kike note, why shouldn't i be able to pay to get priority routing?
I can't think of a reason not to

It doesn't have to do with spying
They've been selling your information