Alright, so over at leddit and basically every other shithole I turn to they're losing their shit over net neutrality. Me being the good citizen I am read the main parts of the proposed legislation (apps.fcc.gov
I need a basic gestalt, I really don't get wtf all this shit is about.
As I understand it, the main complaint is that internet providers want to be able to charge other companies more to be able to push their content faster or at a higher priority. Those that can't afford these new fees would get less priority or load slower.
Take stock of those people that are losing their shit.
Are those the people you want to help, or not?
That's what I've been reading, but I don't see that reflected in the text or anywhere except:
People I think are exclusively full of shit.
>maximum kikery
Holy shit there are no limits to how (((they))) can turn a profit.
Telecoms already operate as defacto monolopies in their service areas thanks to non-compete agreements. Allowing them to throttle traffic at their whim and expecting market forces to protect the consumer is stupid. The game is already rigged.
Now, i'm against regulations. This anti-neutrality stuff is ok with me, but the telecoms need to get beat nearly to death with some anti-trust actions first.
Under net neutrality, a small number of users could suck up 90% of the bandwidth (example p2p) and the ISP can do nothing about it.
I've heard that it could open the door to government regulating Internet content instead. at least ISPs can be punished by the free market.
>the telecoms need to get beat nearly to death with some anti-trust actions
No shit. This is a point I often hit libertarians over the head with and I've yet to receive a satisfactory response.
So why are liberals fuming about it then?
Under net neutrality, Comcast will throttle you if you go over a certain amount of data per month.
No more piracy and porn on the net because all these sites can and will be taxed to death. Also Wikileaks gets a huge federal cock rammed up its ass and probably has to start charging users to browse it.
>Wikileaks
Meant Wikipedia my bad.
>So why are liberals fuming about it then?
Because they're communists and think everyone should be allotted the exact same amount of bandwidth, regardless of their needs or uses.
They buy all of their music from iTunes and watch all of their shows/movies on Kikeflix, both of which would be given priority download speeds, so it's a non-issue for them.
I trust the Trump admin to do the right thing for the american people and economy , point blank. Just 1 year ago everything that i thought I knew was right was actually wrong, so I refuse to give a stupid opinion on this, because that is what my opinion is. I don't know shit, and I don't know where to get the answer either. Just going to let things play out and see what happens.
Trump knows his internet boys helped him out. And I think that net neutrality is just another falsely titled power grab just like 'climate change'. It's what the left does best. They dress something up with a fancy name but use it to grab power and rape citizens wallets and privacy and agency.
patriot act - patriotism? - no actually less privacy
climate change - save climate? - no actually steal money
obamacare - better healthcare? - no actually steal money and worse care
i could go on. fuck the left.
At least don't be so ignorant on this one issue. The basic thing is, they want to be able to throttle your websites unless you pay them extra money per month. So if you want netflix, Sup Forums, reddit, or any other major site or service, you will have to pay extra money, or you will lose access.
>I trust the Trump admin to do the right thing for the american people and economy
>I don't know shit
Internet is already expensive as hell, i would never pay more for websites. back up this claim.
Why do shills always pick the absolute worst anime images. You guys are straight trash.
You don't know anything and have no opinion so how could you know which anime grills are top tier and which are not? Pretty dishonest of you, user.
(((Bureaucrats))) are good at convincing people like you to give them more power to solve problems that don't exist. In many cases (such as this one), all they have to do is give it a pretty name and you geniuses will beg them to implement it. That's why you see nothing wrong with the legislation.
So how is killing it going to be better?
What problem are you currently suffering from that this legislation will fix?
>tfw the goy ends up being charged either way
Sup Forums needs to be a paid thing. do you really want children browsing this site? do you really think its a good think when half of the users are 15 year old summer fags who just want to fap and most le epic memes? fuck off, I don't want that.
I'm with a good ISP, if everything stayed as is that would be fine for me.
But the other side keeps spreading FUD that killing it would mean internet would basically become a service where you would pay extra for website packages.
Mind you I don't even use the big offenders like netflix and such.
I live in NYC with dozens of telecom companies competing for shekels I'll be perfectly fine, meanwhile rural and suburban retards who voted for drumpf who only have comcast will be fucked and Sup Forums will turn into a progressive educated utopia over night because only city people who voted Hillary will have access to it. Feels good man.
Again another shill showing off his brain damage by posting an completely garbage picture with their post
Essentially facebook and reddit and other goodgoy websites are going to load fast while anything they dont want you to see is going to load so slow its pointless, effectively blocking the flow of free information
So you have no problem with the way things are currently, yet you're begging bureaucrats to take more control over the internet because hypothetically things can get worse, despite the fact that since the creation of the internet, things have only gotten better... Are you even capable of fathoming how dangerous your dangerous your retarded mindset is?
You'll be Philippine-level of internet.
>Unlimited internet for $1 /50p a day
>"Unlimited"
>The kind of "unlimited" that when you consume past 800mb, you'll be throttled to 2G speeds
How am I shill? I'm happy the trailers of America will only have access to foxnews and Facebook after this legislation is passed. The internet needs to return to its progressive leftist roots and all of you rural and suburban retards need to be corralled into cyber ghettos where you need to pay extra to venture out of.
Net neutrality narrative is stinking, with this they think they can turn the internet against trump.
Of course this also means right now they can't charge bandwidth hogs more for the same speeds, or charge you more for using bandwidth hogging websites.
>So why are liberals fuming about it then?
Their propaganda machines will have to pay even more to spread their shit
Porn makes so much money they will have more than enough to pay for speeds.
What the fuck are you talking about, read my first post. You legit just made me upset.
Good thinking user, lets give more shekels to mr silverstein. We don't anything in exchange but it does make mr shekelstein happy so why not make a new law that says the goyim owe him more.
Botan is way better than both of those shit pics and she's okay tier
it should be regulted under title 3
as a common carrior.
think like a
telephone service, a basic backbone service.
would you want wallmart to get cheaper rates to coldcall you because they negogited a bulk rate?
would you want them to be able to charge ngos they don't like higher rates?
would you want telophone service to be run like some high pressure sells market?
of course not. and the internet is the same style service. also internet lines need to be regulated to have relaiabltiy for war times, for example they used to build the major phone lines in cinter-f-circles in coties so they would be harder to cut and easier to repair if sabotaged
Go somewhere else then you massive fucking retard
sorry, but my fear of the jew doesn't border on the delusional side. I actually respect the jew. you need to figure out some other way to scare me into believing your ridicules ideas
>Want to push certain content faster
Wtf , I don't think that's how the internet works lol
There would be plenty of bandwidth to go around but the ISPs don't want actual competition so none of them are upgrading to fiber. They do everything they can to avoid stepping on each other's toes in America. There's the few big boys that don't get on each other's turfs, and even the smaller ISPS are just buying their pipes through them. They're all just happy with what's going on. If one of them really wanted the whole market they'd install fiber in a competitor's area and take the whole fucking market.
It's just easier for them to throttle users and charge more than it is to upgrade and bring us into Korea type speeds.
So how do we make this happen
>The internet needs to return to its progressive leftist roots
You know nothing of it's roots, september faggot
Op is a fag and your country belongs to Belgium
>Bandwidth hogs
Is this an exclusive burger problem or are you kids retarded ? This is not how the internet works
Ok, no hyperbole. you really want to get charged more for internet while getting less content and the potential for more censorship? I think those are all bad thing, can you articulate what you think you are getting back in exchange?
push your congressperson to have it regulated as a common carrior
...
>Bandwidth hogs
Jesus Christ. Maybe if Telecommunications companies stopped trying to pull 50 and 60% profit margins and actually invested in their infrastructure, bandwidth wouldn't be an issue. This is ONLY AN ISSUE IN THE US. Look at European countries. They actually upgrade their shitty hardware.
FUD
protip: people who use more data pay more. netflix pays millions in internet fees, for example.
it's a common FUD to pretend net nudity allows high data comapnies/users to freeride or something, which is simplely not true.
regulated content. money is useless if you have enough of it. as long as the internet is being controlled, I don't really give a shit how much it costs. this place nor any website deserves to be free. free things only lead to bad things. free things only attract the most impressionable, free things are not good things
Shit, better start charging people for the air they breathe.
>net nudity
the internet is a human construct, air is not.
The net neutrality they want isn't status quo, they want heaps of government regulation on "hate" speech and content added.
I'm an urban retard like you tho.
All they have to do is tweak the law to only include only the top 2% of bandwidth hogs. It is currently a lose/lose.
There's weak anti trust legislation that requires Telcos to resell their services to wholesalers, but the CLECs (wholesalers) are ultimately at the mercy of ILECs (Telcos) for maintenance, installation, and to a significant degree rates. Remember EarthLink? That's one. If you are involved in the IT/voice operations of your business you've also probably dealt with Level 3, another CLEC as well.
>t. CLEC employee
Progressive leftists just ten years ago were calling me a nerd and telling me to get a life because I used the Internet. If the Internet were to return to its roots, you'd need to fuck off.
this website isn't free, it costs $100,000s a month in server costs.
It's supported by ads, which means the ad buyers can have infulence on the site.
Well its not free since providers are msking money then sone one must be paying. Clickbait pays them in shekels you pay them in closing popups.
Also, as far as free things being bad i agree only in that email should cost 1/2 penny each. Other than that, please shove your opinion about charging the masses for something they already pay gor ba knip your kike ass then kys.
>bandwidth hogs
FUD. no such thing. sites that use more internet pay more. stop acting like net neutrality = unlimited data plans. because it doesn't.
But the money made isn't spread evenly. You're going to see top grossing companies consolidate this market just like they have with everything else.
Take a look around at all of the businesses... News, agriculture, media in general, pharmaceuticals... Most major industries and even the little ones have been consolidated and are owned by a handful of umbrella companies. For example, there used to be thousands of slaughterhouses in the US, now there are only 13.
You are going to see a major consolidation of this market under those that can afford the costs... This is the same argument that can be made for a $15 minimum wage.
Big businesses can swallow the costs and force small businesses out of the market. When they do that, they'll consolidate their grip.
JFC, you've got the right idea but you guys are really, really buying the koolaid here. The government isn't doing shit here. The government is literally keeping power out of the hands of corporations. This power does not exist. Getting rid of the deregulated internet gives these major corporations the power to completely shape the information you receive on a daily basis. It WILL completely kill the way we can communicate with like minded individuals. There really isn't any competition because these major ISPs never actually 'compete' with each other. If they were you'd see them moving into each other's major territories and installing fiber to completely BTFO the competition. They don't. They're all colluding together right now because they've got a good thing going on. Go look at 'Informant', not the movie, the book. It's a real thing.
The deregulated internet is the single biggest threat to the globalist plan to wipe out Europe, North America and the white race. As soon as this happens, there will never be a major competitor to YouTube and YouTube will censor the fuck out of right wing opinions. Right now the only thing keeping them from doing that is that someone could theoretically start up a competitor.
It has little to do with individual payers and more to do with large businesses that use enormous bandwitch compared to what they are paying
theres a lot of hidden costs and variability among clients, this makes it simpler
But libertarians oppose government sponsored monopolies
Your lack of sources makes me want to favor this new law. How much does youtube pay you to post in this political chat?
>ISPs
>free market.
The issue is that by removing net neutrality they're doing two things
>> 1) further regulating data transmissions/speeds.
If I pay for my internet bandwidth (pipe) and the other end pays for their bandwidth, why should an ISP get to decide at which rate and ratio they should allocate my bandwidth? Why should I have to pay extra for 'extra' bandwidth to access certain types or volumes of data at certain times?
>> 2) opening up to restrictions and censorship
If the government allows ISP to throttle things at will it gives them ability to discriminate against things at will. The very concept of net neutrality is anti-discrimination. They could start throttling service to news or social websites, game servers of companies they aren't invested in, against products or services (netflix, hulu, amazon, spotify, etc) that they don't have ownership in and then prioritize their own services in this field.
Essentially, removing net neutrality is a stop gap for a dying/failing infrastructure that is going to allow cable giants to remain competitive and stifle the growth of new ISP and product services that are taking away major business from companies like time warner, comcast, etc.
tl;dr
jews being super jewy at eachother and the only losers are the end users who will end up paying spectacularly for the same services.
It's all just disingenuous bullshit.
>MUH NETFLIX IS HOGGING ALL OF OUR BANDWIDTH!
Bandwidth is not electricity. It's there always, whether or not people are using it. Data caps, throttling, all of it is a power grab. Right now they are essentially selling you a lane on a highway. This would allow them to control what exits you use, how many times you use that line, all kinds of shit. This is one of those few issues where I think you should have to work in the industry to have a say in it. I have worked for 10 years in networking and not a single fucking network engineer I have ever met is in favor of what they're trying to do. It's all a bunch of horseshit trying to pull the wool over people's eyes who don't understand the technology in play so they can get more shekels and not spend the money to bring American internet speed up to the modern day.
What is your obsession with little animated girls? Kinda creepy that you have all of those saved
>or charge you more for using bandwidth hogging websites.
Customers already are subject to paying for their own bandwidth. Most commonly they buy packages with monthly data caps.
The issue isn't that no one is paying for it. It's that ISP make their profit by selling packages no one uses. As people started using more of the service they bought ISP saw their profits start to shrink.
ISPs pay for the local network which they own, but buy capacity on the global backbone. When more ISP users use more data the ISP have to pay backbone providers more money for that data.