Net Neutrality

Why aren't you memeing against Net Neutrality, /pol? It's going to affect the shit out of you.

youtube.com/watch?v=6txA3pI0xJI

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/alm2TC8ZagM
streamable.com/4j78e
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Because im a lazy fat american that sucks down a liquid ton of jew cum everyday.

Photoshopped picture faggot. In reality these girls probably have all been BLACKED. Such is the lot of the modern white woman these days.

What's wrong with net neutrality? Comcast shouldn't be blocking my servers.

...

I just jizzed myself

Because there is no need for it. If we allowed the internet to be federally controlled then if we retaliated against it we would have the military to deal with instead of the PR department at Comcast.

Because Net Neutrality is most definitely NOT a Trojan horse to faggoty federal government regulations over all internet activities.

Plus I totally trust the government anyways!

Read some current events, faggot

Redpill me on being against net neutrality? I want as free a web as possible, I want the Internet to be seen as a utility and not just a service, so someone redpill me on this shit.

It's photoshopped retard. You jizzed yourself to girls that have already been stretched out by Tyrone's BBC.

Red pill is in the vid in the OP

Internet was unregulated until Feb. 2015 when Obama's white house (ahem) gave FCC regulatory authority over the internet.

Only governments can enforce "speech" laws. If private ISPs tried, there would be a revolution by next morning. For examples, see Germany (locked up 30 people for thought crimes recently), Canada (using unapproved pronouns can land you in jail), Britain (speech laws).

>Internet was unregulated
Okay, but in my opinion, it's a good idea to keep companies in line on some level. The Internet is more or less required for our daily lives nowadays, so I would argue that it being entirely in the hands of private corporations is a bad idea.

I understand the concern with speech laws and whatnot, especially with extreme cases such as Germany, however, the United States' law is based almost entirely around the constitution, which has free speech included, whereas Germany and Canada don't really give a fuck about free speech.

What the fuck are you talking about? You should stop watching the Talmudvision, your brain is saturated with paranoia.

KEK

> be me
> love internet
> read 1984 by George Orwell
> read Brave New World by Aldous Huxley
> Net Neutrality

>be you
>love internet
>watch tv
>think you understand what net neutrality is because john "current year" Oliver told what it is
>get on 4chinz to talk from anus about what the talking picture box said
>get pissed when someone calls you out for being a good goy

How can any sane person argue against net neutrality, wtf is wrong with you americans.
I can't believe i'm saying this but I'm agreeing with Oliver here, OP video was the most openly shill i've ever seen

>think you understand what net neutrality is because john "current year" Oliver told what it is
Video: Why John Oliver is Wrong

Reading comprehension

Apparently you and I have had a miscommunication. You told me to read some current events as if my assertion that net neutrality was bullshit was wrong. I responded under the assumption you were for net neutrality.

Yeah, this is exactly why we need to meme against it.

Current events comment was because they are PUSHING FOR net neutrality all over the place lately. Your comment seemed to imply that Net Neutrality wasn't an issue. Now we've got a chance to get rid of it (was passed under Obamgroid's white house in 2015), but the propaganda is HARD CORE all over the place.

>since no internet provider has attempted to perform extortion before it should be legal for internet providers to perform extortion
........what?

What is net neutrality policy, exactly? I'm a network engineer who is about ready to blow your shilling white ass right out of the water if you're wrong, so answer wisely.

>Your comment seemed to imply that Net Neutrality wasn't an issue.
I'm not sure how. But I agree that the current trend of pushing for this shit is getting out of control. Most of these dipshits have no idea what the fuck they are arguing for, just what the same corporations they are always railing against are telling them to argue for.

My position: I distrust government inherently. Distrust everything about it. See recent happenings in Germany (locked up 30 people for "unapproved speech"). Canada has "pronoun laws" which can lead to police intervention. etc.

Net Neutrality represents the U.S. Federal Government granting regulatory control (to the FCC) over the intertubes.

As for the current implementation of Net Neutrality via the FCC, I can explain what it does, but it will change over time. It's a Trojan Horse the government will exploit at some time in the future. My biggest conern is, of course, freedom of speech online.

I'm also a network engineer.

> Most of these dipshits have no idea what the fuck they are arguing for

And this is exactly why I'm here.

>See recent happenings in Germany (locked up 30 people for "unapproved speech").
>Canada has "pronoun laws" which can lead to police intervention. etc.
There's some fucked up shit going on in Europe, but consider that it is largely driven by corporate greed, who wants their cheaper, less solidaritous workers to feel welcome.
>but it will change over time
As it should.
>It's a Trojan Horse the government will exploit at some time in the future
Are you pretending that the legislature won't just jump in and do the same when, not if, it profits them, or that allowing private entities to discriminate is somehow inherently holy and righteous?
I wasn't at all interested in your feels btw. I was interested in the answer that net neutrality is the principle of non-discrimination among lawful traffic.

"Opposes Internet Censorship" "Supports Net Neutrality"

"Wants Faster Internet" "Supports Net Neutrality"

Don't even know what a Net Neutrality meme ball would look like

> largely driven by corporate greed
Corporations don't control the guns; the military, the police. Government enforces.

> Are you pretending that the legislature won't just jump in and do the same when, not if, it profits them

The legislature can't jump in if the internet remains privatized. The post office charges different prices for delivering mail, why shouldn't ISPs be allowed to do the same?

Your entire post implies that the federal government is completely separate from corporate interests when it comes to revenue. Pro-tip; it isn't.

The difference is the way we can retaliate depending on which entity is in control. With the federal government we have to directly deal with military and police enforcement. With the corporate world we at least have the power of boycott and legal proceedings with a FAR higher chance of success. If the corporate interests then fall back to the federal government for "assistance" we can cross that path when it comes but why the fuck would we go straight to that if we could try and avoid it?

I can't fucking believe Sup Forums is anti NN. Holy fuck you're retards
>b but only government can control speech! Better to be privately controlled
Not if your country has an actual constitution whose first amendment deals with literally this exact issue
>corporations can't do evil because there would be muh riots
Implying that they would be so stupid. Of course they wouldn't overtly do evil. They would placate us with "money saving features" to Jew us into overlooking the fact that we can only access 50 websites if we want to have internet for

You want faster internet speeds from innovations? Why should ISPs spend money on Research & Development if they can't make a profit from faster speeds? Net Neutrality removes the incentive to innovate.

Oh okay, nigger. Let's just hand control of the internet over the federal fucking government because we all know what great things they do for us. Right, goy?

You just committed a thought crime friend.

I'll get my shit together and brainstorm some shit tomorrow. Gonna be an uphill battle to convince the normies.

pic is part of mass propaganda we're up against

>You want faster internet speeds from innovations
Nobody needs muh innovations. All we need is real buildout.
>Why should ISPs spend money on R&D
There is no R&D to be done to get muh faster speeds. ISPs all just buy their shit from vendors who build according to an industry standard, and allocate a certain number of channels to data.
Also, municipal utilities are always cheaper, faster and more reliable than private franchisees. Internet is a commodity and corporations can't have that because of their muh self-esteem.
>Net Neutrality removes the incentive to innovate.
Give me one good reason that you corporate shills shouldn't just neck yourselves on a livestream right now.

> Give me one good reason that you corporate shills shouldn't just neck yourselves on a livestream right now.

Principled free-marketer, distrust of gov't. It's not rocket science.

Agree with you about municipalities being a solution to the ISP monopolies. I truly hate those fuckers.

>Also, municipal utilities are always cheaper, faster and more reliable than private franchisees.
And because they are under municipal control they have the capability of being shut down by those in control of them whenever they feel it is necessary. Do you really think that something like the internet with all of the avenues for dissent it has is going to be treated the same as electricity or water? If those were shut down people would literally die so the prospect of that happening is slim to none. But nobody needs the Daily Stormer to survive. If they deem that to be "unconstitutional" then they can turn it off like flipping a fucking light switch and nobody will do anything about it under the threat of police and military force.

>got
Try to run that frontal lobe in more than one gear, buddy. You realize we've had NN all this time and it has resulted in the death of the pseudo state-owned media? I mean this fucking site got a tv personality in the White House. CNN is irrelevant. Alex Jones is a more trustworthy source for news and half the time he's 100% larping and he doesn't exist as we know him without NN. If you want to see what the world would be without open internet just look briefly at CNN and the kike/oligarch owned newspapers.

NN was (((their))) BIGGEST fuck up without question.

>why shouldn't ISPs be allowed to do the same

Don't they already? I thought the net neutrality shenanigans was over the fear that websites would charge for different speeds on top of ISPs? Am I wrong?

>Am I the only one who has started to feel like a useful idiot defending the big 5's riches? What we have now isn't a neutral net. We're complaining about traffic shaping by ISPs, while big 5 are shaping it already, deciding what we read, what we can download, and who we mingle with.

>I mean this fucking site got a tv personality in the White House.
Go fly a Kekistani flag if you are dumb enough to actually believe that retarded shit.

>If you want to see what the world would be without open internet just look briefly at CNN and the kike/oligarch owned newspapers.
And if you want to see what the world would be without a government that looks out for its people but instead looks out for the entire world just look briefly at the federal government. There is a far greater method of Kikery happening within our legal system than their is in the private world. At least in the private world we have last ditch efforts we can utilize to allow them to decay. We have seen numerous (((corporations))) come and go but have always had the same power structure in our own legal system.

We don't win in either scenario but we cut our losses by not letting the courts and the senate dictate what we can and cannot access for information.

I thought the innovation was stopped because new cable is a pain in the ass to lay down thanks to regulations, that aren't net neutrality related...

Also, wtf? This board was all for NN and freaked the fuck out about it like 1.5, 2 years ago. What happened?

> You realize we've had NN all this time and it has resulted in the death of the pseudo state-owned media?

We've had NN since Feb-2015. The internet was regulation free from it's inception until that time.

The main point being, NN is a trojan horse for further regulations (speech laws, approved thoughts, etc.) down the road.

>Net Neutrality is about putting ISPs under Title II. Dark Fiber is under Title II. I still can't get fiber optic internet. Did you know Mongolia and Romania have faster internet speeds than the USA? Rural Japan has fiber optic internet, but I can't get it in metropolitan areas of the US. Title 2 sounds like a horrible idea to me.

> This board was all for NN and freaked the fuck out about it like 1.5, 2 years ago.

Didn't see that, but if true, this board was normie land and bought the deep state propaganda. Time for /pol to take the red pill on NN.

The American government has a speckless track record for keeping the internet open and unfettered.

Your ISP wants to stop this because it intends to wring you for more money. Anyone who's against it is in favor of taking a sledge hammer to something complex that they barely understand in the name of
>MUH FREE MARKET!

Google fiber literally cannot come soon enough. Our dogshit isp companies are totally unprepared for the storm.

> but I can't get it in metropolitan areas of the US

Same. Wasn't google rolling out fiber in major cities a while back?

>If you buy a Google Home, you're basically fighting an uphill battle to use something other than Google Play music, right? If you have Comcast, then they make using Netflix a battle vs Comcast's own on demand video, how is that different? Why should Netflix get special treatment? It seems like Net Neutrality is less about fairness and competition and more about King making.

> Anyone who's against it is in favor of taking a sledge hammer to something complex that they barely understand in the name of MUH FREE MARKET

You really think unelected bureaucrats at the fucking FCC understand the network better than the fucking engineers at the ISPs? Smoke more pole, faggot

>The American government has a speckless track record for keeping the internet open and unfettered.
That's because they never touched it until niggerboy gave control of it to the FCC in 2015. Then he said "Look, we didn't do anything to the internet. You can trust us with it now, you fucking simpletons."

Are you too much of a consumerist nigger to run your own services?

How do you fix it without the brute force solution of introducing government regulations? My answer would be municipal ISPs at the local level. Someone has to manage the pipes.

>Who doesn't want Net Neutrality? T-Mobile. The EFF said their Binge On service which gives poor people unlimited streaming video was bad for Net Neutrality. Who wants Neutrality? Rich white people who want cheaper cable services. 20% of the US has mobile-only internet access, mostly poor and disadvantaged people. Net Neutrality hurts those poor people. Net Neutrality is literally class warfare in favor of the rich white people who have enough already, and want to exploit the poor even more.

No thanks kike, I rather like the free internet.

He gave "official" control of it to the government after a big kerfuffle over Comcast blocking some cunts.
The FCC is a safe and fair organization to entrust net neutrality to. The internet is a utility, and preventing ISPs from discriminating against particular sites is something that a huge, sprawling industry relies on.

You're not doing what you think you're doing. You're choosing the most corrupt and incompetent corporations in America to take care of this really fucking important thing, even though they have every single reason to abuse that power to turn a quick profit.

Net neutrality is good, you dumbfuck. Corporate monopolies shouldn't be allowed to dick over their customers with the only other option being "lol just move to another city and get a new ISP bruh".

>The FCC is a safe and fair organization to entrust net neutrality to
Oh yeah. Sure thing, goy.
>even though they have every single reason to abuse that power to turn a quick profit.
Are you implying that the federal government won't literally do the exact same fucking thing like they always do? How deluded can you be? This is the same pork barrel slush fund government that is taxing its own citizens to replace them with turd world morons who suckle at the tit of big brother and will do anything (cast votes) to stay on that tit.

>this guy implying poor people can't afford a cheap broadband connection in most developed states.
>implying he's not lobbying against public ISPs, which would provide much better service at a fraction of the cost, because he's shitting his pants at the idea of competition that isn't hellbent on fucking fleecing those poor people with outdated and overpriced infrastructure.
Oh, I'm laffin.

>I want cheap cable service. Make them give me cheap cable internets. Whaaaa whaaaa.

Net Neutrality equals gibsmedats. There are plenty of other ISPs available nationwide. Sprint, T-Mobile, AT&T, Verizon, and Dish just to name a few.

Your argument is sound. You could convince me to change my mind. Aren't the big ISPs supporting NN? I know all the big websites (google, facecrook, et.al.) support it - obviously because they are anti-competetive.

If you can convince me the gov't won't abuse it, the giant (((corps))) won't behave anti-competetively, and my other concerns, you may be able to sway me.

>The FCC is a safe and fair organization to entrust net neutrality to.
They are LITERALLY the commission who gets to decide what is and isn't censored in the US (despite the 1st Amendment) through any method of communication under their oversight. Are you fucking insane?

>Are you implying that the federal government won't literally do the exact same fucking thing like they always do?
No, you retard. I'm implying that they'll do what they've ALWAYS done, which is do what they can, when they can, to develop this network and keep it open.
What issues I have between how our government handles the internet have absolutely nothing to do with this particular issue or the fcc.

>implying he's not lobbying against public ISPs

So let me get this straight. You want an ISP fully controlled, monitored, and censored by the government? No wonder you're in favor of Net Neutrality.

U R a Dumbass

Who said anything about price? I just want the same speed I pay for across all sites, you fucking kike.

>what they've ALWAYS done, which is do what they can, when they can, to develop this network and keep it open.
They haven't done a damn thing. It has literally been the (((ISPs))) who have developed, competed, and kept things open this entire fucking time. The federal government has had no part in the development of commercial internet other than staying out of the way.

I trust the government to oversee my roads, races, healthcare, education and safety. Why not the Internets?

What an argument. Take your acne riddled fat ass back to Plebbit with the other electric Jew watching dipshits content with their college loans and Hebrew Box Office subscriptions.

A Republican Mark

somebody should have told my internet about your nertzi TPP
and so cocks
youtu.be/alm2TC8ZagM

>implying I'm a republican

"You are a John Cena mark."
"So your saying I'm John Cena."

...

I support net neutrality though.

fuck you, i have a 100k+ job and money to waste i don't care poor fag

Google and Facebook support it because they have industries that stand to lose from some cunt like Comcast throttling traffic and then demanding that they pay up to get unthrottled (this happened to Netflix, iirc). If and when Google's isp project takes off, rest assured, there's no competition between Google fiber and any other existing American ISP.

The only thing I can point to saying that the government won't abuse it is that there's no way "for" them to abuse it. It's a flat law, applied throughout the industry, saying "you cannot do this thing to your customers". It actually prevents certain large websites from forming pacts with certain isps to throttle other, competing websites.
Not true. They don't decide that. They simply enforce it. The FCC has no ability to censor a broadcast simply for point of view or politics.
They do have a legal mandate to censor certain "indecent content" on TV broadcasts, such as pornography and slurs. None of these have been enforced on the internet (as far as I am aware).

Net neutrality is a big reddit meme

>there's no competition between Google fiber and any other existing American ISP.
WRONG

You brain well... but your talking to Foxnews Sheep.

>Okay, but in my opinion, it's a good idea to keep companies in line on some level
We already have a regulatory body to deal with companies doing shady shit. It's called the Federal Trade Commission.

We don't need to give a completely unrelated department (the FCC) broad, overreaching regulatory powers over allowed content and service terms and conditions to do what the FTC is already authorized to do.

>I like the way things are at my ISP
>I don't want anything to change
>So let's change the rules for ISPs
>I'm not sure what Title II is
>I'm not sure why we need to change the rules
>I just don't want the way things are to change

Uhhhm..

>The FCC has no ability to censor a broadcast simply for point of view or politics.
No shit, Sherlock. Do you really think they are going to come out and say that they are going to block content due to political reasons? Do you really think the Supreme Court is going to come out and say they are going to allow faggot marriage due to political reasons? Do you really think that Trump is going to come out and say he is attacking Syria due to political reasons?

>None of these have been enforced on the internet
So you really want to bank the future of the internet and its openness one one single entity (versus numerous ISPs) that has a track record of infringing on our rights under the guise of "national safety" and "justice?"

All of America's other ISPs are fucking horrendous.
Google Fiber is a sweet, sweet dream. Look at this shit.
"For $70 a month, Google Fiber provides Internet that's roughly 100 times faster than the national average for broadband. Customers are also given the option of basic Internet on par with other broadband service for free, after paying a one-time fee of $300, or $25 monthly for 12 months."
Everything else is such a fucking JOKE in America, Comcast is coming in and offering for $300 what our current isps charge you upwards of $70 a month for.

I'd rather bank on the government keeping a rule that says "you cannot block web traffic" than bank on corporations to behave themselves after said rule is removed, yes.
Every post you've made just implies that you don't have the slightest clue what we're talking about here.

Note: Slippery Slope is not an argument. Its a fallacy.

But it is good to see that your position is ultimately based in crazy tin foil hat Foxnews sheep paranoia.

The internet was just fine for nearly 30 years before Obama signed the Net Neutrality bill. Network neutrality may not have been the de jure rule, but it was the de facto standard and every ISP knew it.

>after said rule is removed

There's no rule being removed. It's literally

Net Neutrality: change the rules that worked for decades.

No Net Neutrality: continue on with the current system.

Its a balancing act between total government control and total commercial control

streamable.com/4j78e
streamable.com/4j78e
streamable.com/4j78e
streamable.com/4j78e
CNN IS FINISHED!!!
CNN IS FINISHED!!11

>Every post you've made just implies that you don't have the slightest clue what we're talking about here.
And every post you've made just implies that everything you know about net neutrality comes directly from the same faggots on TV that are constantly deriding anything that goes against the status quo as hate speech.

>I'd rather bank on the government
is the dumbest thing you've said in this whole entire thread. Perfect job sounding like a complete boot-licking supplicant.

Go back to Plebbit.

It was just fine after it too.
>Network neutrality may not have been the de jure rule, but it was the de facto standard and every ISP knew it.
And now it's the de jure rule. There isn't a reason to circumvent it or desire to see it circumvented.

>The internet was just fine for nearly 30 years before Obama signed the Net Neutrality bill

...that never went into effect. Net Neutrality was a rule change. Trump stopped the change. The liberals are now screaming to be in charge of the government, even though they lost.

You fucking retard. (((Guess who))) owns these ISPs?

Whose websites won't get included in your new "only the best of the web" internet packages? How much extra is it going to cost you to see them? And even then, they're going to be capped at dialup speeds.

Why would you want to cut the legs out from under our greatest communication medium for cultural change unless you're a shifty jew?

>Slippery Slope
I wasn't making a slippery slope analogy, I was comparing the situations, not as subsequences to each other.

>Fox News
Nigger, I don't watch that dumb shit. Just because I disagree with your retarded opinion doesn't make me a republican nor a Fox News watcher. Go to Yiddit with that shit.

>boot licker
I'm half convinced that you're a comcast shill, to be frank.
Sorry, sugar tits. I'd rather lick the boot I can vote for.

That hat isba shoop

>I'd rather lick the boot I can vote for
>he thinks democracy means he has choices
That's fucking adorable!!!