Net Neutrality

So John Oliver made a "statement" regarding net neutrality on his show and mentioned Sup Forums to be his personal army along with ((Reddit))

tldr for Net Neutrality is an ISP's ability to use their technology to give preference in data transfer speed to particular web services.
For example, if 15,000 people at once want to visit a site, the ISP would throttle the capacity for that site, giving it preference over a site like gawker that gets no visitors at all.

John Oliver's position on this is that:
>BIG CORPORATIONS WANT TO BUY OUT ISPS TO ONLY CATER TO THEIR SERVICES AND PRIVATE TEH INTERWEB AND THE WORLD WILL END
John Oliver Video: youtu.be/92vuuZt7wak

So the fear is that these companies will favor the highest bidder over others, making the internet extremely slow for everyone else.

The reality is that if ISP's did this, they would cripple themselves and have everybody switch to another ISP. (Comcast)


However if we approved these regulations on the ISP's, we'd essentially make it illegal for ISP's to have some websites that people want to visit more rapidly accessible than websites nobody gives a shit about, rendering a standard for Internet speed, where we all have a mediocre base internet speed for any website.


What do you think Sup Forums?

Also /NNG/? Net Neutrality General?

Other urls found in this thread:

broadbandmap.gov/
ag.ny.gov/press-release/ag-schneiderman-announces-lawsuit-against-spectrum-time-warner-cable-and-charter
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

I used to think he was funny, until he started fizzing out leftist propaganda through his crooked teeth.

I want to punch this ugly cunt right in his bastard face

jew faggot needs to get a good smackin

I'm sorry hold on. You are trying to pitch a narrative where Comcast and Verizon are the fucking GOOD GUYS?

No, on the contrary. I probably misworded it. I'm saying these companies shoot themselves in the leg whenever they favor one service over the other, making customers switch to other ISP's.

I'm basically rating the ISP's competence in the market. Idgaf about good vs. bad when it comes to companies, you're either a smart or a dumb company.

I really can't figure out what the fuck you're saying. I don't know where you got the idea that's what repealing net neutrality would do and you seem to think "throttling" connections makes them better. You seem to think people are afraid of "corporations buying the ISPs" as though the ISPs are not already giant corporations. You truly have zero understanding of this issue even after just having it explained to you with a youtube video.

Your idea that most people are capable of switching ISPs just proves you live in or near a major city and aren't aware that most of America has access to only one internet provider. That is why this shit needs to be regulated like a public utility like water. Because most people don't have the option to just go get "the other internet" any more than they could get "the other water." So someone just needs to make sure there's some kind of basic minimum standard. That's all net neutrality is intended to be.

>Minimum standard for internet access
>Net neutrality
Pick an issue.

These two have nothing to do with eachother but okay. ISP's and corporations like Google or Amazon are two different things, and just because ISP's are corporations doesn't mean anything.

What's your argument? You seem to believe people don't have a choice for internet in the US.
broadbandmap.gov/
^ Look for yourself.

Read the regulations they are proposing for Net Neutrality, ISP's need to be able to make their own decisions on Traffic Shaping.

Do you know what Net Neutrality is?

Monopolizing the ISP market with a single government funded ISP is your proposal, and it's absolutely retarded.

You sound completely out of your mind. Nobody is talking about nationalizing the internet. What thread are you in?

>Your idea that most people are capable of switching ISPs just proves you live in or near a major city and aren't aware that most of America has access to only one internet provider. That is why this shit needs to be regulated like a public utility like water. Because most people don't have the option to just go get "the other internet" any more than they could get "the other water." So someone just needs to make sure there's some kind of basic minimum standard. That's all net neutrality is intended to be.
You don't know what Net Neutrality is. Obviously

99.9% of this show and the other related shows (daily show, samantha bee, colbert, seth meyers) are meant to push the establishment, globalist agenda. I'm starting to believe whatever stance John Oliver and company take on an issue, the opposite position is most likely the correct position to back in terms of true freedom.

The Swiss guy wants a public ISP. Not only would this be an extremely slow service, having added retarded FCC regulations on private ISP's would limit the ability for these companies to traffic shape their performance and latency would just set a slow as fuck standard of speed across the board.

I'm pretty sure the swiss cuck learned what Net Neutrality was from the 20 minute John Oliver Clip.

I don't know why I'm talking to someone that sounds so off his meds but I looked at your map. Here in green is the percent of the country that has access to more than one ISP.

>having added retarded FCC regulations on private ISP's
You are fucking irredeemably stupid. Literally nobody has suggested adding a single new regulation on ISPs. That is not and has never been part of this issue. The choice is between continuing to uphold existing regulations that are on the books right now and getting rid of them. That's it. That's all. Those are the choices being discussed. Whatever image you have of this situation where anyone wants to add regulations, or change regulations, or take control of anything at all is completely a product of your addled mind.

Don't all these countries with public ISP'S have flaming hot super fast internet speeds though?

>Hur dur Muh no ISP availability
Recognize any patterns?

You're still ignoring the fact that these regulations would strip away the ISP's ability to Traffic Shape their service, in an attempt to stop "muh evil corporations".

Net neutrality is literally a retarded move toward the route of establishing a base, publicly funded ISP, do your fuckin' reading cuck

yea and they are the size of texas or smaller WHOAA have taxes out the ass and no social mobility

How the fuck is the FCC or any government agency neutral? Especially the FCC that grants practically every merger and monopoly and subsidy and change the telecoms want?
Net Neutrality doesn't really matter, keep it, get rid of it, don't matta. If the ISPs want some change, they and their lobbyists and their political connections will get their FCC chairman buddy to give it to them. Why is this so hard for people to understand.
Pic related is net neutrality

List a country with a population as large as the US with faster internet speed on a public ISP.

You want the Government to pay for a nationwide public ISP? Do you realize how stupid that is lol

First, yes on average. Second, the opposite is also true. Countries like Canada with deregulated ISPs have slow and expensive internet.
And here's a map of the entire internet connected united states. Compare to previous image and get fucked you syphilitic moron.

>try to talk about it with friends
>2 super alt right shitposters on pol misdirect the conversation by bringing up selling of personal information instead and claim thats what net neutrality is about
>tries to undermine net neutrality by saying "you only want to talk about this because of jon oliver"
>none of them are even americans
I'm now convinced that these 2 are only supporting trump because they want to see america burn.

>BIG CORPORATIONS WANT TO BUY OUT ISPS
Uhhh, but ISPs are big corporations. And people who are high level executives at the big corporations which are ISPs often times end up working within the FCC and serving appointments to high levels of the agency.

You're trying to pitch a narrative where the FCC are the good guys and are enemies of Comcast and Verizon, that's far more ridiculous.

>If the ISPs want some change, they and their lobbyists and their political connections will get their FCC chairman buddy to give it to them.
That is exactly what you are witnessing. Ajit Pai, the architect of the plan to gut Net Neutrality and current head of the FCC is literally a former Verizon Lobbyist.

RIP americunts

What point does that even prove? And how the fuck does Net Neutrality have anything to do with it???

You're saying that these very low pop. regions with only one option for an ISP are going to be affected so much, that regulations need to be in place that would affect millions of people.

You're still avoiding the question regarding the actual regulations' proposals on what ISP's can and can't do with their service

The current Trump appointed FCC headed by a Verizon lobbyist is the one trying to kill Net Neutrality. That is the only reason we are having this discussion again.

Yep. The whole issue is a moot distraction from the real issue of our government being a proxy for megaconglomerates, banking cartels and internationalist social engineers.

It's internet control, why are you convoluting it?

>regurgitating John Oliver's word salad practically verbatim
Jfc

He was first appointed to the FCC by Obama in 2012, kiddo, back when le Drumpf was still a TV show host.

Those are called facts. What part of it do you disagree with? That Ajit Pai isn't the head of the FCC? That he isn't a former verizon lobbyist? That he isn't the one suggesting we dismantle existing net neutrality regulations? What?

you realize there is a difference between the concept of NN and the actual laws they implente right?

Actually switzerland guy is right, I live in southern oregon and we literally can either go comcast or go fuck ourselves, your claims are based on lies.

>if ISP's did this, they would cripple themselves and have everybody switch to another ISP.
How many choices do you get with a monopoly?

Does Oliver mention Ajit was first appointed to the FCC by Obama, to have progressive "FIRST STREET SHITTER FCC COMMISSIONER" feather in his cap? Diversity is our strength!

Yeah he was there but he wasn't the head. The public protections of Net Neutrality were put in place under Obama but nice try deflecting this onto an old favorite boogieman.

Monopolies granted by the FCC, so why do you think they're gonna be your buddies and help you out? FCC is Comcast's bitch, you'll eat what your given, whether net neutrality stays or if it goes.

I'm basing my stance on the fact that the majority of the population has access to more than one ISP. If Comcast were to fuck up so badly by concentrating their performance to Google or Netflix in the way that the John Oliver narrative suggests, it would go bankrupt, and that void in east bumblefuck would be filled by a competent ISP. Implementing these regulations would just fuck it up for the rest of the country

He was a lobbyist made a high ranking commissioner by Obama, I'm sure Obama was just tricked.

>The reality is that if ISP's did this, they would cripple themselves and have everybody switch to another ISP
that is not always an option

>the fact that the majority of the population has access to more than one ISP
This is absolutely not the case and I implore you to spend a single minute just googling any part of that sentence.

The more power you give to the FCC on what ISP's can't or can't do, and the more you normalize this kind of shit, the shittier your internet is gonna be.

>the fact that the majority of the population has access to more than one ISP
>fact
prove it

does anyone else LE FUCK COMCAST

Compare your own map with the percentage of locations with more than one option against the population density map I showed you. We already went over this

You're the only one talking about Obama. The same way you guys are always the only ones talking about Hillary whenever someone questions Dear Leader.

We're talking about Net Neutrality.

...

>You're the only one talking about Obama. The same way you guys are always the only ones talking about Hillary whenever someone questions Dear Leader.
Your entire narrative is based on John Oliver pointing out that the FCC head was part of Verizon. He's playing at your game, and you immediately try to change the rules of it when you lose.

OSHIT poor brit. Get a VPN and watch the video, 'mate'

Not as chairman, that was Trump.

Cuckcast is okay. At least they HAVE an unlimited data option unlike Centurychink who will straight up tell you to get fucked if you go over 250 GB monthly.

Literally nobody is talking about giving them more power. How do you even manage to avoid understanding that?

Fair enough, but that's what they already did with the two titles. That's why I advocate removing these regulations.

holy shit you are stupid and don't understand the topic

>not enjoying 1000 mb/s download speed

>the liberals did a shitty thing so it's okay when the republicans keep doing that shitty thing

Fuck Obama and fuck Trump, they both suck corporate dick. You're just deflecting the issue because you've got no solid arguments against that guy or against net neutrality regulations.

A broken clock can be right once and a while. And they're right.

Net Neutrality will actually be a destruction for everything we hold dear on the internet.

Going along with Oliver on this one actually does stop the globalists plans.

>The reality is that if ISP's did this, they would cripple themselves and have everybody switch to another ISP.

Not an option, for vast majority of Americans, and even then what if the 2-3 options they do have ALL do it.

Starting up an ISP is financially prohibitive.

This is why Free Market memers need to fuck off, not everything benefits from a free market, vast majority of shit might, but not everything, blind adherence to MUH FREE MARKET! is retarded.

I'm sorry to break it to you but you're the stupid goy puppet here. Current year man is right for once.

...

> tfw 7mb/s

>Shilling for ISP tiered web browsing
>Using hate for liberals to convince Sup Forums to be against net neutrality

Sorry, no one is this fucking stupid here. You must be working for Comcast.

I can be against the liberal agenda and pro net neutrality. There's no way I'm paying for internet like television packages. Next thing you know I'll have to be paying out of the investment funds for simple streaming services.

Go to hell, faggot. I'm onto (you)

Well it's not blind adherence to it imo. I'm just replying to the argument that John Oliver is essentially making, where he's saying that companies will go full jew and make all web services except the highest bidder be accessible. I'm refuting this by saying that if a company realistically did this, it would go bankrupt because people will literally stop paying for a shitty service, or someone else will fill the void. And there's absolutely no evidence to support that a company would commit suicide like this.

There's only one ISP tho

So fucking obvious. You guys suck at this

>being a shill for comcast

kys

Jesus Christ. I just watched the episode. I fucking saw MY POST on his show. WHAT THE FUCK. Feels incredible. Praise.

>just switch to another isp
>what is a monopoly?
>what is collusion?

>'m refuting this by saying that if a company realistically did this, it would go bankrupt because people will literally stop paying for a shitty service

Comcast and Verizon have had notoriously shitty service for fucking decades. They're still, relatively speaking, top dogs. You know why?

Because starting up an ISP is financially prohibitive.

You are proposing that if they implement negative business practices, the free market will fix it, a competitior will arise and consumers will flock to them.

I am saying, in the face of the last 2-3 decades of shitty service, no such competitor has risen (aside from google in a handful of cities), and thus your proposition is wrong.

There are no arguments for or against net neutrality, it's a fucking distracting meme issue. That's what I'm saying. If you really expect the FCC to make consumer-friendly regulations instead of industry-friendly ones, you're a tard.

Fuck off.

Being against net neutrality is literally shooting yourself in the foot just because an enemy asked you not to.

You comcast and verizon shills are fucked in the head.

And those of us that didn't flush our meds this morning are telling you we can already see that hasn't happened.

I think it's more complex than that. The problem is that they're blowing up the proportions of what ISP's actually do with throttling. It literally just redirects the performance to favor the most popular sites. If they weren't allowed to do this at all, they would have to make all websites have an equal latency which would stretch it out too thin, like the communist version of internet connectivity

Yeah, he promoted an Obama-appointed commissioner to Chairman. Omitting that he was an Obama appointment who was promoted within the agency by Trump gives the impression that he's some lobbyist that Trump himself brought into the FCC. He was already there at Obama's pleasure, trying to dump all the blame for him on Trump is intellectually dishonest.

The cable providers are already hurting because people don't want cable TV anymore. They own the wire and they used to be able to sell us TV packages on it. Now we just want the Internet and Netflix gets their $8/month. The cable company wants to go back to its old profits.

Not so fast, shill

ag.ny.gov/press-release/ag-schneiderman-announces-lawsuit-against-spectrum-time-warner-cable-and-charter

And to add to you shill nature, I've seen you posting multiple threads all day from mexico about this topic. This morning you tried to get people by saying "Let's do the opposite of what Oliver wants"

Go fuck off.

why are amerifats this dumb?

>There's no way I'm paying for internet like television packages.
If ISPs wanted to do that, the FCC would let them. They let cable providers do it, why wouldn't they let internet providers?

I see your point, fair enough. The thing is, from the broadbandmap.gov/ it seems that there's quite a good amount of options in relation to population density. But hell, you may be right.

>The reality is that if ISP's did this, they would cripple themselves and have everybody switch to another ISP. (Comcast)
Isn't American ISP market a huge cartel?

Remember the training material and don't stray from the templates

> what? DYETCP-IP?

No. This isn't some quality of service thing. This is a way to charge more for using the Internet to watch media. Their cable TV business model died, and now they want to get in on Netflix's action.

Is there a point to arguing the minutia?

What bearing does him being an Obama apointee have on the fact Trump promoted him and that he is infact a former lobbyist with vested interests that run counter to his current position?

>Have NHS

>Have John Olivers teeth.

I myself have only posted about net neutrality once. I've actually only made like 3 threads on Sup Forums before lol. I still think John's wrong on this though. Not everyone that disagrees with you is a shill O.o

Do what you want but don't use his link.

The point is to show the FCC is a joke organization that serves the interest of the outlets it's supposed to regulate and both Democrats and Republicans are fine with this, thereby rendering your precious net neutrality a total meme.

>Oh you're having problems streaming New Girl? I'll see what I can do for you
>It says here you don't have the Netflix direct + package so your speed is lowered to 24kb/s, for network optimization reasons of course
>We can of course increase that speed for you for a monthly fee of $3,49 ma'am
I can't believe people would even consider backing this shit

"net neutrality smells as fishy as an email saying grandma is going to die alone and give you 10 million, you only ned to send all your information(especially bank account info) for grandma send you the money.
why nee internet speed ? to download child homo porn movies in 4K ULTRA HD?
i can play metal gear solid online with 24mb, i dont need more speed and i can download some gibs of payed movies (of course) in half an hour.
This hole "net neutrality" thing seems more like a scam to be more easier to see people's tendencies and spy on "unusual net trafic"

I don't have any screen caps from earlier, but the mexican flag is a literal shill who has been at it all day. The ISPs are now hiring people to get in on the personal army action because they assume that we've had some hand in recent Trump and Le Pen popularity and the Colbert FCC complaints. They are trying to manipulate the board into collective action.

Watch over the next few days and screen cap these net neutrality threads from time to time for the truth.
They are literally trying to twist us against net neutrality by saying "the liberals want it, you shouldn't"

So rather than try and fix a broken system, Trump keeps the status quo of shit and you bitch about people complaining about his actions because 'b-but OBAMA!'

Great work, handsome.

KEK

>The reality is that if ISP's did this, they would cripple themselves and have everybody switch to another ISP. (Comcast)

You are stupid.

Jesus man. I'm just voicing my stance on it. I haven't posted about this at all before

Bump

>they're blowing up the proportions of what ISP's actually do with throttling
Because they don't do it. It's still illegal for now. Look, you want a concrete specific example of what would happen if Net Neutrality were repealed?

Comcast has already talked about a plan to bundle video streaming sites like netflix and even youtube in with their cable packages. Oh you can have internet but you gotta get the bundled package if you want that internet to have videos on it. Your image if this as just a matter of speeding up popular sites is asinine and based solely on PR from the corporations themselves.

You have to remember that you are talking about Comcast, Verizon, and AT&T. They're a bunch of cyberpunk nightmare mega-corporations. Allowing them absolute control over the internet is basically the worst case scenario.

>having just 1 (one) ISP available where you live counts as competition

>2017
>US-Senator went on record saying "You don't need access to the Internet.", thus no reason to rule it under title-2

American doublethink is Best doublethink.

DON'T USE THE URL (((THEY))) GAVE YOU ON THE SHOW!