Why do Conservashits want to make the internet more expensive for consumers?

By abolishing Net Neturality?

Other urls found in this thread:

google.com/#safe=off&q=google fiber legal issues
theverge.com/2014/8/29/6084171/cable-companies-file-to-stop-municipal-broadband-expansion
archive.is/aSFpK
arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/02/isp-lobby-has-already-won-limits-on-public-broadband-in-20-states/
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Because what we were told was net neutrality wasn't.

Because it won't, stupid nigger. The internet has been around for decades and this has never been a problem. 1 ISP out of 2500+ doing something you don't like 3 years ago doesn't warrant giving bureaucrats who know nothing about the internet more control over it.

Instead of lobbying the government to regulate the internet, why don't you lobby them to allow more competition? Companies like Google and Amazon are begging to get into the industry, but they have a million legal hurdles to jump through, created because ISP lobbyists paid the right price.

Net Neutrality isn't what you think it means which is what the Government wants you to think.

They're the ones trying to get rid of it, so you're saying Trump's government are misleading assholes ?

It's for the best, one less cracker burning hours on the internet, is one more cracker that can save their race.

so what is net neutrality and why does (((Sup Forums))) want me to oppose it?

It sets the precedent that bureaucrats who don't know anything about the internet can make rules governing the operations of the internet to solve a non-existing hypothetical future problem that people got worked up into a frenzy over.

right then what's the reason they want to get rid of net neutrality?
what problem do you solve with that?

Imagine a toll road. All cars pay 1$ to use the road to go to wherever they want. On this road is business A, and business B.

Now the road owner says, hey if you use our road to go drive to business A, you don't have to pay the toll fee.

Now business A gets more business then business B, although they do not have a better product. The market no longer works via competition, but by who controls access.

NN is needed so that the free market can work.

Fear mongering retards
>Never mentions it was made by Obama in 2015
>People think the Internet will forever be ruined for removing a policy that did almost nothing two years later

so why does Sup Forums want this gone?

Equal internet speed preference to sites by federal law and certain privacy protection.

Huge problem in Canada. Govt grants three major companies monopoly and internet here is dogshit.

Except nobody is going to pay Comcast or TWC extra for what they were already getting. Businesses won't use infrastructure that plays favorites.

Well Sup Forums thinks that the free market will extend to ISPs. So if ISP A breaks NN, and the markets cares, then people will change their business to an ISP that does follow NN. No government needed.

The reality is that ISPs often have a monopoly over certain areas, and hence the free market will not solve this problem.


However Sup Forums usually follows ideologies and doesn't care about real world nuances. That is why for NN I do want government intervention. The free market for ISPs has already failed.

Can confirm. Been to Canada a few times and internet is atrocious when compared to internet in America.

>but they have a million legal hurdles to jump through, created because ISP lobbyists paid the right price.
Name two.

>Govt grants three major companies monopoly
How? What laws give them a monopoly?

>Internet in 2014 fine
>Removing Net Neutrality will just be the same
WTF IT'S THE END OF THE INTERNET!!!¡¡¡

google.com/#safe=off&q=google fiber legal issues

theverge.com/2014/8/29/6084171/cable-companies-file-to-stop-municipal-broadband-expansion

Archive the shills
archive.is/aSFpK

It's not about making more expensive, it's about controlling what information people have access to. The wealthy are becoming masters at brainwashing and they need the ability to throttle those who oppose their propaganda.

Facebook and Google are for it so we're against it

This

arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/02/isp-lobby-has-already-won-limits-on-public-broadband-in-20-states/

b/c govt intervention makes things cheaper and better?

why are liberals so stupid?

So you have named none.

I haven't read the legislation. Excuse me for being coarse. Don't big companies already pay for higher bandwidth from the isp ? Isn't their already a tiered pay / bandwidth system. Who exactly isn't paying more for better service and vice versa?

That's not in Canada moron.

Seeing how the likes of Netflix takes up like 60% internet already, the doom and gloom of OPs pic wouldnt change shit

>Why do Conservashits want to abolishing Net Neturality?

because they are doing the bidding of the big ISP companies that pay politicians massive bribes. Also republican voters are to stupid to realize they are voting for people who constantly fuck them over.

FCC bureaucrats don't know anything about how to design and run networks... when the issue of fair carriership came up years ago, the government decided to intervene and put in regulations. Because the government is filled lawyers, businessmen and political science people, they didn't know the first thing about regulating the network infrastructure.....so they asked the experts...

....who were working at AT&T, Worldcom, and regional carriers... who said "hey, please use these people to recommend the proper regulations... they are experts!"

Hence lobbiests for these companies became the policy advisors for regulation.

TLDR; the monopolies themselves wrote the law on network regulation to make themselves legal monopolies.

i meant to link to the guy above you my bad

would never reply to a leaf on purpose

What does the FCC have to do with Canada?

best post in the thread and it's just a this of Anonymous quoting Anonymous

that image tho

another shill post
make a legit point using some facts? - no way
name calling - you got it!

It's a general issue with ISP monopolies... the US is an example

Removing net neutrality might make Netflix more expensive, but it almost certainly won't make your internet more expensive. In fact, ISP infrastructure has grinded to a halt because of this bullshit.

Regulations are needed so we can have a free market? Are you fucking stupid

>It's a general issue with ISP monopolies... the US is an example
The claim was Canadian government.

But lets see a law that gives US ISPs a monopoly from new start up ISPs?
The stuff about banning local city owned ISP is shit but that's not a monopoly stopping private rather than public businesses.

I think that it's not government laws making monopolies, but business cartels and government refusing to enforce antitrust laws. We need more laws and enforcement not less.

Yea we should remove anti monopoly laws while we are at it. Stupid pro-market laws that are good for the consumer.

That's factually incorrect in almost every facet. (Except the question of why are liberals stupid).

because pol is filled with contrarian faggots

If they wanted to charge customers more, they can do that right now. "Sorry, your internet bill just went up." They don't have to justify it.
However, what they CAN'T do is go to netflix and say "hey, your service takes up a disproportionate amount of our pipeline and users are experiencing latency when using their internet as a result. Help us fund a better pipe to hold your traffic or we will throttle you."
Yes, consumers will still end up paying for it, but through rate increases by netflix, not the ISPs.

The reason America has a near monopoly ISP is because of things like "net neutrality." Since they can't charge companies like Netflix extra money for the shit tonne of bandwidth they use, they would have to pay it out of their pockets, and that's unaffordable for smaller ISP's.

Regulations help big corporations by killing smaller competitors. Always have, and always will. Isn't it funny how just when a plethora of smaller isp's were starting to become popular and things like mobile Internet are becoming forces to be reckoned with, suddenly major corporations start shilling for so called net neutrality legislstion?

>paying for internet access
That's an outrage!

Why do libtards want to turn control of the internet over to the government when the government has proven it could fuck up a handjob?

The ISP are overselling their product with the expectation of never having to deliver on what they have actually sold.

If they can't deliver speedy service to all users they should expect their customers to leave them for better alternatives.

exactly

>Regulations help big corporations by killing smaller competitors.
Name a regulation that kills smaller ISPs.
Name a regulation that kills smaller ISPs and is part of NN.

>better alternatives.
no better alternatives can arise because of the huge amount of pipe needed to get the netflix shit through.

No its because ISPs are so focused on marketing high numbers instead of actually improving infrastructure.
How it should work:

ISP A has x capacity. It wants to deliver y speeds. It can support x/y users. If the network is currently under utilised, they can give the extra capacity to the currently online users. This will lead to a situation that at 100% load, all users get there advertised speed, and during off-peaks users get even higher speeds.

How it actually works:

ISP A has x capacity. It lets unlimited users subscribe because $$$ and then can't deliver the speeds.

Data caps are the most retarded this ever, because its not about total usage. Its just about current usage at a point in time.

Yes, anti monopoly laws do such a great job of preventing one corporation from taking over a business. Now, we have three! So much better. Maybe instead of killing small competitors with expensive regulations and bullshit laws (which large corporations easily subvert or just pay a fine for), we could actually allow small businesses to compete. Smaller isp's and mobile Internet products were starting to cut into big isp corporation's profits. Suddenly, corporations like Amazon, Google, Pornhub, and various other big names come out and start pushing for "Net Neutrality".

>he doesn't remember the 90's early 00's
>he doesn't remember that there used to be countless internet providers in the US
>he doesn't remember that now there's 1, MAYBE two per state, not including satellite worthless shit

huh, I wonder where all those smaller ISPs went. It's almost like something changed a while ago, but nobody noticed it, and it killed all the smaller internet companies.

while true, this does not mean that ISPs intend to charge end users more for certain packages or lanes, as suggested.

>no better alternatives can arise because of the huge amount of pipe needed to get the netflix shit through.
So why do ISP oversell/overstate their capacity to deliver bandwidth in their service agreements?

Also some ISP manage to provide gigabit service without issue. Although most of those are government operated ISPs run by small cities that got screwed by the larger ISP refusing to provide quality service.

None is almost 2

yeah I always thought the biggest (((jew))) of all was data caps.

They have literally infinite of that resource. It doesn't matter how long you use it. It doesn't put any extra 'wear' on any hardware or anything. You're literally paying for access to a node.

so you're not paying for more data. you're literally paying for more time.

I asked for a regulation that killed small ISPs. You haven't given me any. I don't think it is regulations killing small ISP. I think it's cartel practices of large ISP and the lack of will to enforce antitrust laws.

>So why do ISP oversell/overstate their capacity to deliver bandwidth in their service agreements?
perhaps because there are no alternatives for people to switch to when they don't get the advertised speed?

I think ending net neutrality is good because it makes lefties so angry.

And the solution to that problem is what?
I see people saying less regulations on business but no one can name even a single a regulation stopping new private ISPs.

What is netflix pushing? What are the ISP's (Comcast, TimeWarner) pushing? The lobbies have an agenda?

This guy gets it!

That image doesn't make sense. The cars at the "everyone else" lane should get stuck in a traffic jam that grows backwards from the point at which there is a bottleneck in capacity, not piling up at a random point in front of it.

And the "big companies" would be unable to effectively use the capacity increase in the wide lane as they can't get any extra vehicles through to the wide lane.

This pretty much sums up the current right completely.

The solution is turn off net neutrality. Make it affordable for small ISP's to compete.

why cant all of these tech illiterate shits get this

>The solution is turn off net neutrality. Make it affordable for small ISP's to compete.
How does NN make it expensive for small ISPs?

Net nuetrality is GOOD for big corps. Why tf do you think Netflix and Amazon like it?

Isn't that image the opposite of what ISP's want? Aren't they trying to charge Netflix and Youtube more on the backend for using all their bandwidth?

>Too stupid

Why don't you faggots stay on reddit? The world may never know.

If you think Comcast is the worst company to have existed in the history of mankind YET you love net neutrality you are an idiot.

Yes, if we get rid of net neutrality, you'll probably have to pay more for full Internet access BUT the Internet will be safe from possible government censorship and telecom monopolies ruling entire regions of the USA. Not to mention there'll probably be new telecom companies that offer better customer service and more discounted Internet prices (think Southwest, but for ISPs).

The situation is a lot grayer than anyone on the pro-neutrality side would have you believe as both have very legitimate pros and cons.

Well, actually I think it's an example of big government versus big business with we the people not having a horse in the race.

On the one hand, you have ISPs and huge websites that want the additional fees to squeeze out competition and capture the market.

On the other hand, you have the libtards that want crushing overregulation because they're power mad. They want to control everything you do online and they want to stifle innovation and force price rises by price fixing.

Either way, you and I get really screwed over.

But in the meantime the lefties are really, really whiny about not getting their crushing overregulation, so since it's a loser for the rest of us either way, we may as well pick the one that pisses off the right people.

>The reality is that ISPs often have a monopoly over certain areas,

Post some examples. Im extremely interested in which areas are like this.

But now business B has an incentive to build a highspeed rail service to circumvent evil Jewey Comcast Tollbooth and plant Google Fiber in your area

fpbp

Giving the FCC power over it doesnt make the internet free and open any more than letting ISPs do whatever they want would.

At the very least we have the opportunity to vote with our dollars.

Explain how NN stops new ISPs from entering the market.

Explain how NN has anything to do with government censorship.

Explain how NN enables monopolies.

Cause they can't afford to pay for all the bandwith netflix and youtube takes up. And they can't throttle it either.

They can block everything they don't agree with making everyone way more hive minded than they should be. It's a huge mute button.

>already failed
Only because the government subsidized the costs to ISP's of installing the necessary infrastructure which allowed them access at a rate competitors without the same massive subsidies can't afford.

And don't forget faggot, necessity is the mother of invention. All this means is that you lose the incentive for niche competitors to enter the market or for further innovation in broadband technologies.

You'll get a nice, well regulated market, of expensive crappy ISP's that will be giving you the same service in 10 years that they do now for twice the price.

That comic is retarded. And so are you. Do corporations just send terrabytes of blank data through the internet just for shits and giggles? No. All of that data is downloads and streaming service going to their customers. And frankly some data should be treated with higher priority than others. For example people who post more than 1 thing on Facebook a week should be in the lane that ends in a giant pit of lava.

Net Neutrality is literally a mega conglomerate psy-op, look at most net neutrality "info" sites, its all shitty memes pandering to low common denominators where the biggest supporters of net neutrality are the technocratic shadow government like google and amazon.

Support net neutrality and you are supporting government intervention and control over your internet that is actually controlled by google, amazon, yahoo etc because obama sold the internet internationally and is why the british government are trying to make the internet now resemble something like they have in china.

>Cause they can't afford to pay for all the bandwith netflix and youtube takes up. And they can't throttle it either.
So they sell smaller bandwidth packages or charge more for their current bandwidth included.

Throttling doesn't reduce bandwidth consumed. It just makes it take longer. The price the ISP must pay to the interconnect is the same.

How would not having NN make the ISP more profitable while delivering the service the customers want to consume and have paid for?

its k i don't live in america, my country has NN and cheap ass high speed internet. When Sup Forums gets blocked it won't be my loss, I will still be here posting for free.

If big corporations wanted to do the scary things that net neutrality is purported to prevent, I have no doubt they'd find a way, and it wouldn't be a huge issue like this net neutrality craze has become.
It just reeks of manufactured conflict as a distraction or some other kind of psyop. The current government is in the pocket of corporations anyway, all this would do is change the perception of who holds the power, not the reality.

you need city council approval in every city you want to run cables in and in my local area (silicone valley) Comcast owns the city councils.

The problem of getting people to believe government should have any say over how companies operate.

What is the difference between this net neutrality law and price controls in Venezuela?

Both can be sold like government trying to stop greedy capitalists for the good of the people, in the end it ends up with less investment and eventually shortages. Literal communism.

I'm sure from their perspective the right winged folk sucking corporate dick are the whiny ones.

You aren't as objective as you think you are. If you were born ten years earlier or later you would be on the other side of the fence.

>you need city council approval in every city you want to run cables in and in my local area (silicone valley) Comcast owns the city councils.
So you have a conspiracy theory.

Fuck niggers, sjw and numales on the internet. If they want to internet social justice, they will pay up their share.

worse of all is just the big risk. giving the FCC this much power is just asking for some future administration to abuse it. And that's assuming everyone currently pushing it is pure of heart.

HRC pushing for telecom access as a constitutional right is just an excuse to put the government in charge of the physical internet. Practicality is the only thing stopping the state from pulling shit along the lines of tracking people down for social media posts and turning off opposition websites. Hillary's plan, this FCC nonsense, and all that SOPA business are all part of a plan for the fed to get a finger on the actual internet tubes.

It's as big of a deal as taking away our guns.

>What is the difference between this net neutrality law and price controls in Venezuela?
NN regulates access as a utility.
Stating that ISP can charge for access at whatever rate they want, and in any package they want, but how the end users use their access can't be regulated.

Price controls set the price for a service or good which can't be changed.

NN doesn't even prevent any of the things in those shit for brains comic to begin with. Like that retarded website package one. NN doesn't prevent that. The postal service is a common carrier but postage rates vary based on the destination and size of the package .

...

That's a dumb and unsupportable argument. And frankly I don't care what their perspective is. Their side is the one that caused a hundred million deaths, destroyed Europe forever, and is actively working to exterminate my entire race. To say nothing of the personal hardships they have caused me. If you want to be objective there's a right side and a wrong side here.

And if you bothered to read my position you would know that I don't much care for corporations either. I'm just more willing to put up with them than I am tyrants in government and their toadies.