Dont fall for Net Neutrality scam

NET NEUTRALITY IS A SCAM

These posts are by an organized paid group (shareblue). "Net neutrality" sounds good but is just more laws to regulate and censor the internet via the FCC.

Do not fall for this shit user...

Other urls found in this thread:

archive.is/oAy5n
archive.fo/oAy5n
npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/02/26/389259382/net-neutrality-up-for-vote-today-by-fcc-board
archive.is/OkBPg
nypost.com/2017/06/28/cnn-boss-in-crosshairs-if-att-time-warner-merger-approved/
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

BIGGEST LEAK IN 4CHIN HISTORY
archive.is/oAy5n
archive.fo/oAy5n
→

plebbit isn't that good at making a psyop campaign look organic.

Network Neutrality IS a good thing. Otherwise, the Internet will turn into a (((controlled))) environment

> Net neutrality is the principle that Internet service providers and governments regulating the Internet should treat all data on the Internet the same, not discriminating or charging differentially by user, content, website, platform, application, type of attached equipment, or mode of communication.

So if there is no net neutrality, nothing prevents American internet service providers or search engines from blocking access to "hateful" websites.

In principle I agree that they should be able to do whatever they want but in the real world corporations are globalists and supporting those who give them more power to push their agenda is retarded

Explain, in detail, how the wording of the Net Neutrality legislation accomplishes this.
Because as I see it, it only gives the government the power to levy fines against any internet entity they want, as well as forgive fines owned.

This is how you get (((government))) controlled internet.

Nice meme you fucking idiot.

Why would corporations be shilling for other people to have more control over them.

>These posts are by an organized paid group (shareblue). "Net neutrality" sounds good but is just more laws to regulate and censor the internet via the FCC.
>Do not fall for this shit user...
THATS THE FACT JACK.

I dont remember anything wrong with the internet back in 2015

yea this isnt the first time they campaigned for regulating the internet to "save" the internet.

yet the government already has a power to stop tiered internet access: anti-trust laws.

end the cable monopolies. stop them dominating internet access, and there will be companies willing to offer non-tiered internet access, without any new laws or agencies.

You know what happened last time they tried this? They said they had to pass the law before it could be released to the public.

Nope. Nothing sketchy at all there.

>Thursday's vote comes after Commissioners Michael O'Rielly and Ajut Pai asked that the FCC "immediately release the 332-page Internet regulation plan publicly and allow the American people a reasonable period of not less than 30 days to carefully study it."

That request was denied; we'll post the document here when it's available.

tldr: it was never made available.

the internet was under the FTC, Obama tried to move it to the FCC which has more authority and control, Trump is just moving it back to the FTC where it is already sufficiently regulated.

>Rural retard wants me to vote against my best interests in favor of mega-corporations
Hmm, where have I seen this before...

Here's the source article. I'm too lazy to archive and I don't care anymore.

>npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/02/26/389259382/net-neutrality-up-for-vote-today-by-fcc-board

Please archive it archive.is/OkBPg

>vote in the interest of one mega-corporation over another
show flag, leaf.

Giving FCC power over the internet is like letting a pedo guard the daycare. Anons are fucking listening to google sucking the cock of 'net neutrality' takeover.

>These posts are by an organized paid group (shareblue). "Net neutrality" sounds good but is just more laws to regulate and censor the internet via the FCC.
This
The entire thing is a false dilemma meant to give the FCC control of internet content so it can stifle political speech.

The solution is simply to break up internet ISP monopolies. This triggers the net neutrality shill.

AT&T are /ourguys/

>CNN boss in crosshairs if AT&T-Time Warner merger approved

nypost.com/2017/06/28/cnn-boss-in-crosshairs-if-att-time-warner-merger-approved/

Who did this?

yeah, no

NN is an absolute essential
the net dies without it

please rub 2 brain cells together

>reddit spacing
>insults intelligence instead of constructing an argument
checks out

Go fuck yourself.

>NN is an absolute essential
>the net dies without it
What was wrong with the net back in 2015?
NN is a solution in search of a problem
typical marxist tactic

how can better than 9/10 of this thread not even know what it means?

oh right, because they dont care what it means

>please rub 2 brain cells together
not an argument

>1499146643522-pol.png
>-pol.png
Hi, shareblue.
>more lefty insults
You are not good at psyops. Stop.

A couple years ago, I actually listened to Reddit and sent e-mails to my politicians about NN. But now that the election has outed Reddit as a literal Jewish propaganda arm, I'm not so sure about NN anymore. There has to be some catch that the Jews are hiding from us.

>These posts are by an organized paid group (shareblue)
Sure, you paid corporatist shill. Sure.

Sage!

Fuck you buddy! Google, Amazon and Facebook are spending hundreds of millions of dollars lobbying and advertising for net neutrality because they have my interests at heart.

How can you talk negatively about such generous and altruistic companies?

OP is correct

Well obviously I am up for the great American shoa

pussy on a pedestal never do dis

The Jews are on both sides, dumb goyim lose either way.

The solution to the problem is breaking up ISP monopolies. Why do you think the only solution is handing more power to the government?

>break up the ISP monopolies
>paid corporatist opinion
wat

>There has to be some catch that the Jews are hiding from us.
Go read the legislation in question. It effectively allows the FCC to pick and choose who to levy fines against. They also retain the ability to forgive those same fines.

So it is essentially an attempt to gain control of the internet by way of targeted fines.
>What? You aren't supporting the correct candidate?
>Well, you see you are actually in violation of [vague statute #12553], and thus owe us $10M. If you support candidate X however...

They don't actually understand Sup Forums memes and trends, they just repeat them to try and blend in.

Please give me the link for the legislation.

>You are not good at psyops. Stop.

various fallacies, false assumptions
try to stick to the matter at hand and not red herrings/etc

>not an argument

"but its ok when i dont offer any, thats different"

>What was wrong with the net back in 2015?

there were NN rules in place then
im no marxist thank you
but what you want to argue is "what was wrong with it before there was ANY talk of NN??"
answer is: none of the ISPs/Telcos were big enough to clever enough, nor where any of the big corporations opposite them(who support NN) for such protection rackets to exist, for which they entirely have their motivation in ending NN

Litterally putting pussy on a pedastle

>pussy on a pedestal never do dis
LOL.
I agree. Her head is degenerate.

You LITERALLY want jews to tell you which sites you can and can't go to.

Daily reminder that increased government regulation is the reason ISP monopolies exist.

Not likely.

i fucking hope nn dies simply to trigger all the fucking faggots in pol

the two sides are:
*big ISPs/telco coporations
*the data-CONSUMER (non-provider "corporations who use them
the former HATE NN
the later NEED it

good picture and good post. have a bump

How dare you imply our benevolent corporations would ever undermine their customers, like selling their browsing history to anyone with enough money.

>Rus who doesn't realize his media is already comprised
nice meme

i'm still pretty confused by the whole issue. what's Trump's position on all this? i'll support that! PRAISE KEK

>reddit spacing
I need to search for it. The wording is seedy and laced in statements that are essentially fluff, in a 500+ page report.
It might be easier if you just check out what powers the FCC holds over what is their jurisdiction. They can do quite a lot.

>like selling their browsing history to anyone with enough money
they already do that. You're retarded if you think otherwise

Its sarcasm Sasha, chill.

That's because there was another order from the FCC in 2010 and yet another from 2005

If Trump thinks we need to get rid of Net Neutrality then I agree. If he thinks we need to keep Net Neutrality then I also agree.

>NET NEUTRALITY IS A SCAM
Kys shill

sage

You edgy faggots are so contrarian on every issue that you LARP as net neutrality haters.

Kill yourselves.

OH BOY I CAN'T WAIT TO SPEND MORE MONEY FOR THE SAME SHIT I ALREADY HAVE

GEE
I WOULD LOVE IT IF I WAS UNABLE TO RUN A WEBSITE BECAUSE I'M NOT ON AN ISP'S PREFERRED LIST

You fucking moron, OP. Repealing Net Neutrality is basically turning the internet into Obamacare.

Internet is and always has been fine as is. Don't muck it up with needless government regulation

#freemarketwillfixit

Net neutrality: Your ISP gives you the same speed to access facebook and Sup Forums

No net neutrality: Your ISP can give you full speed to access facebook, 0,001% of the speed to access Sup Forums and then you can never browse this site and other non ((they)) approved sites as well. If it is not neutral, they can pick favorites or dislike some content

Thanks norway

>flood of 1 post by this ID
hmm, you guys have convinced me. Maybe giving the government control over the internet is a good idea after all. They need to regulate hate speech, afterall!

>If Trump thinks we need to get rid of Net Neutrality then I agree. If he thinks we need to keep Net Neutrality then I also agree.
Fair point, but you should also consider that Obama thinks we should keep Net Neutrality, so that's a pretty convincing argument to get rid of it.

reminder that the Internet we know developed under the principle of Net Neutrality, and the Gov set the rules when the ISPs said they were not going to follow that anymore.

butters

>Repealing Net Neutrality is basically turning the internet into Obamacare.
Odd you should say that since Net Neutrality was another Obama agenda item.

Guess we know what side you're on.

>pepe-angry.jpg

You dipshit, the current internet HAS net neutrality.
Because I just woke up you raging nigger autist. Net neutrality is what we already have. We're not giving them control of shit, we're removing that control from ISPs. They're the ones who want to regulate and control the flow of bandwidth, not the fucking government. For once in your life stop looking for boogeymen.

You're a retard (though the girl's cute). Explanation follows.
One of the biggest effects of net neutrality was making internet service "utility" - it means that your provider cannot differentiate how much you pay depending on how you use his service, the same as if you'd use other utilities - water or electricity, for example. You pay merely for access and general quality of access.

The current bill attempts to do away with that designation, meaning that now ISPs will be able to check which services you access and levy additional fees.
>But it'll be free market, user, they won't do that because competition will then get clients!
Not exactly. Most of ISPs go through infrastructure of a few giants, like Comcast. Giants which are vulnerable to political and corporate pressures. If those giants will adjust their infrastructure to preferentialism toward some services and content, smaller ISPs will have to adjust or pay extra in place of their clients - and you can bet your ass most won't.

There are places that are thorn in the site of quite rich and powerful. France already blocked Sup Forums for a short bit around elections. Now, consider that to be a norm in US should some multimilionaire, like, for example, Clinton or Soros decide that there should be limitations put on places such as Sup Forums, as they're hate speech centrals.

I am willing ot bet that some ISPs will buckle easily, it's hard to explain special treatment of places like this one, what's with reputation current libtard society is ascribing to us (sometimes correctly, given how many shitlords we have). P2P, proxies etc won't help long term.

Government currently controls internet, correct, but because of that it also forces it to follow certain rules it drops on everyone. Yes, it limits free market and that's normally a bad thing but in this case free market also takes away limitations set by government and leaves them free for grabs for whoever wants to buy an ISP out.

>Net neutrality is what we already have.
No, it is some fluffed up term used as a virtue whistle, imprinted onto people by GOOGLE, MICROSOFT, FACEBOOK, REDDIT, AND THE REST OF THE SILICON VALLEY COMPANIES.

Learn who your corporate masters are, shill. You sure as hell don't fool us.

Is that some pussy on a pedestal?

>post is defending net neutrality
>decrying obamacare

??????

Net neutrality has been the standard practice, unlegislated, for decades. It was only legislated during the Obama years because it was a popular issue and shit like SOPA and PIPA kept popping up, things he also pushed.

If you think for one second your ISP has your best interests in mind you're a moron.

>One of the biggest effects of net neutrality was making internet service "utility"
This was never implemented, because it thus makes the ISPs legally responsible for what is transferred over their networks.

If this reclassification were to take effect, ISPs would be REQUIRED to check your data for illegal content, because they could otherwise be sued by the government, or any other private organization. Do you really expect them to risk such legal trouble for your "privacy"?
This is fucking censorship, and you fucks have taken the bait just as intended. Almost identical to what happened with the Patriot Act, and you dumbasses are eating it up just like people did back then.
>WE NEED SAFETY! FREEDOM ISN'T FREE, YAKNO. LET THE STRANGE MAN GROPE YOU AND HARRASS YOU.
sheep

this.

>mfw a good portion of Sup Forums users are now completely tech-illiterate
HTTP was a mistake

In this case, with net neutrality gone, ISP can be easily affected by social and political agenda. Rather than being, well, neutral anymore, as all businesses they will have to conform. And since none offers limitless bandwidth, you'll quickly get a hierarchy and priority services established - not on the basis of constitution or any rights but on the basis of profit, a side of free market normally merely demonized by clueless libtards but in this rare case - an actual threat.

There will be no avoidance of having some big businesses buying bandwidth priority. So sure, you may get a really good access to facebook or twitter, but companies not politically aligned with financial powers, like Sup Forums, will get screwed over naturally, even assuming no one will feel any malice toward the board or want to shut us down because we're the "alt-right nazi misogynists".

So, sure, on the new bill ISPs stand to gain quite some cash, I agree. But it also unshackles them to sell out their consumers access rights and for the mighty dollar - screw us over for anyone willing to throw cash at putting their websites and content over what their opponents would like. Welcome to North Korean intranet brainwashing at worst, "pay additional $10 a month to access risque sites like infamous Sup Forums!" very likely, even if worded subtly.

Won't it just be great when Sup Forums gets throttled or blocked by your isps? Have you guys forgotten that all companies are ran by lgbtqrmxyv Jews who thrive by appeasing the left? And you, a board full of larping nazis, want to give them power over what you say? That's fucking rich.

>giving authoritative control to the FCC will prevent the ISPs from being affected by political agendas
Holy shit, do you even read the shit copypasta?
>giving authoritative control to the NSA will prevent computer companies from spying on their customers
This is you.

>shill
There's your virtue signal. Tell us why you think companies (((they))) control have your best interests in mind, tell us what you think is going to happen with net neutrality.

Enforcing net neutrality was the only good thing Obama did.

>i know you are but what am i
they should teach you guys better deflection strategies.

>This was never implemented, because it thus makes the ISPs legally responsible for what is transferred over their networks.
Are you certain? Again, utility merely forces ISP to allow access without limitations so it pretty much absolves them from managing traffic to different websites on part of their clients. The same way as other utility services work and, say, electricity provider is not guilty no matter if you use your power to keep the fridge going or charging little electric chair made for the neighbour's kid - consequences of the use of that power are only on your head.

>net neutrality is a scam
Come on now OP, Sup Forums can only get so retarded

>France already blocked Sup Forums for a short bit around elections.
Yes, because the government had jurisdiction over the internet there, labeled Sup Forums as a campaign website, and issued a media blackout during a leak, not because a corporation was paid to shut it down. This is literally an argument AGAINST net neutrality. What the hell is wrong with you people? The cognitive dissonance is unreal.

FCC will have to uphold 1A. Private corporations don't.

Electricity is not a carrier for data and products. If the ISPs are providing a connection for mexican cartels to conduct business in the United States, they are liable for it. This is how our laws work.

And make no mistake, this is the ultimate goal of (((Net Neutrality))). With it in place, the ISPs have very little choice in what they do, and this includes yielding a lot of control over to the government, and thus the laws.

So with such control in the hands of the government, what is to stop them from doing more NSA-style tactics?

...

>Are you certain?
Yes.

All I need to know is that Apple Jewgle and Faceberg are shilling hard in favour of ths inet neutrality kikery along with all the usual faggots of humaniy like liberals progressives and lolberts.

These companies will lose a fuckton of revenue and hopefully collapse. Faggots who can't pay will get the slow speed demo version of the internet with limited access 90% of the Sup Forums userbase are poor shitheads who won't get access and this shithole will collpase finally and faggots will have to leave the absement for the first time in their lives, all the cancerous e-celebs e-subcultures will collapse and the internet will be limited only to the patrician class

The FCC will also have to enact other controls that the government is mandated to do, which the ISPs don't. This includes (((Public Safety))), such as things like the Patriot Act.

...

>FCC will have to uphold 1A
HAHAHAHAHA

and then the public can actually go through a lawful process to oversee it was enacted properly. Because public piece is tied to Constitution in a away private entity is not.

No, graphical user interfaces were a mistake

You look like a scam. Censuring exists, but has nothing to do with net neutrality. The only censuring that could fall under net neutrality is bandwidth. Every law that spies on you isn't related to net neutrality. If they throttle your internet and close down torrent sites, spy on YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, isn't that censuring? They arrest people for comments these days, you really are free.

Just like the public can go through a lawful process to get their data expunged from the NSA database?
Oh, wait.

OP is a JIDF shill who needs more shekels from his media company shares. Net Neutrality is best for all and creates a level playing field for all authors and publishers.

>what is to stop them from doing more NSA-style tactics
The fact that legally, at least NSA still is bound by certain rights in regards to treatment of private data. Sure, they have bad track with that, but NSA spying on citizens making the news and being a huge scandal is such a scandal for a reason. The problem is that new bill doesn't introduce any substitute for even token legal protection net neutrality offered and with that gone, NSA still will have access to data on the basis of national security in the country the service is offered and by whose laws ISPs are already bound, except now ISPs will seem to have a right to buckle under pressures to limit access for those citizens however not only government but "private" powers want.

I'd really like the new bill to work so that obvious flaws of net neutrality anons mentioned would be covered. But they don't seem to be. More shit is just being heaped on top of it.

>The only censuring that could fall under net neutrality is bandwidth
So literally all of the data involved in the internet?