*shits in your internet*
*shits in your internet*
Other urls found in this thread:
ei.com
irregulators.org
en.wikipedia.org
opensecrets.org
huffpost.com
en.wikipedia.org
youtube.com
cmcsa.com
twitter.com
>cuckservatives will defend this street shitter and the self-admitted zionists running Comcast
Aw man I was browsing that!
looks like king paki from fukken ireland
Someone fucking end this worthless cunt.
How does it feel thinking of yourself as ''red pilled'' while being completely blue pilled on net neutrality and ignoring all the facts and arguments against net neutrality?
...
>poos in tubes
all the US tele co's are complete shit though
with the exception of google fiber
this is literally the only internet that is not complete shit.
my ISP along with the NSA has nuked two of my SSD's and a modem because they can
why is Tay so cute? shes like a kitty
the meme explains why they're so shit though. it needs revision since i made it at 3 am, but still.
the general idea is that ISP costs have rose astronomically since the rise of streaming and conglomerate websites. ISPs cannot target the culprits like netflix because of net neutrality, so they're forced to target their customers. what are the customers doing? canceling cable because their bills are going up while it's the internets fault. what do they do instead? sub to netflix and youtube which are causing the rising costs anyway.
seriously, third world countries have better internet than we do. if ISPs start going after streaming services instead, they can't raise the costs of their streaming platforms because there are so many alternatives and people are already fed up with paying $50/month for 5 different services. they'll price themselves out of the market
this entire thing is fucking astroturfed to hell by the valley. same thing with reddit. why do you think small forums that we had in the 00's are gone now? they can just make a subreddit
Based poo?
>they're forced to target their customers
This is where you fucked up. ISPs are more than happy to fuck their customers in the ass. Unless you can show me that streaming services are directly responsible, I'm going to have to call bullshit.
ISPs have never had the interest of the customer at heart. 50 million households in this country have access to one service provider or less that provides wired broadband service (25 Mbps up, 3 down), and that's a conservative estimate.
>ei.com
On top of that, telecoms have charged at least 9 times for fiber optic/broadband services since the mid-late 90s, for about $4000-$7000 per household (about ~$400 billion USD by 2016), and yet we haven't seen shit in the way of actual effort taken to establish residential fiber optic/broadband services.
>irregulators.org
The ISPs are not on the people's side, and while some of you will say that's fine, when we're paying out of our pockets for services that they are actively withholding, that's a problem. When ISPs are providing campaign funds to politicians who will make municipal fiber illegal, and are ensuring that they maintain an ironclad grip over a city's network, that's a fucking problem. Third world countries have better internet than us, not because of government protection of streaming services, but because there is no competition among the big ISPs and somehow that's okay with the American people.
Actually he is /ourguy/
Don't believe the Google/Facebook/Reddit astroturf hate against him.
Regulating the Internet as a utility was a HUGE power grab under Obama.
...
I'd rather have slightly shittier internet than out of control migration. Despite the memes we throw around to trigger you fags none of us actually thinks that Trump is a perfect god emperor, he's just an above average politician.
So it feels better than average I guess is the answer to your question.
>/ourguy/
>astroturf
>HUGE
how much is comcast paying you, shill
>tfw you have to call the plumber to remove indian fecal matter from your series of tubes
classic example of a shill is someone trying too hard to fit into the culture
American ISP are shit and expensive because they're colluding.
can't wait for faggots like you to cry when stormfront and pol are being throttled to high hell to incentivize you to buy the PREMIUM PACKAGE.
He is everything I hate.
Why are we letting the poo in the loo cuck us?
You mean save us
I mean't what I said mogli.
God I hate cucks
Fuck this shitskin desu
i'm not trying to shill for ISPs or anything, so i appreciate the response. i grew up in an area strangled by roadrunner/TWC, so i know how it feels
as far as i'm aware, ISPs lobby to state governments to build these monopolies. my question is, if the government is looking out for "internet freedom", then why doesn't net neutrality target that as well since federal law trumps state
ISPs are undoubtedly losing profit to streaming services and streaming services are the ones shilling against net neutrality. they are happy to take more money from their customers, but they've already lost the phone and TV wars. internet is all they have left. it just makes me question, ESPECIALLY with the level of astroturfing in favor of NN, who is the legitimate side.
at the end of the day, losing NN is the definition of capitalism. until there's more regulation to break up cable monopolies AND avoid creating streaming monopolies, current NN is just crony-capitalism
>i'm not trying to shill for ISPs or anything,
>Literally shilled for ISP's 3 posts in a row.
>Literally shilled for ISP's 3 posts in a row.
>having a position that disagrees with mine is shilling
there's a website that exists where you can down vote dissenting opinions
Not for you Apu
...
my sides
> against net neutrality == Comcast, Time Warner and Verizon make more money
> for net neutrality == Google, Netflix and Amazon, make more money
You do realize either way us plebs don't benefit?
we don't have net neutrality
>current NN is just crony-capitalism
Feels like everything internet related (that the government is involved in) at this point is just crony-capitalism. Politicians are being bought out by ISPs, so if you ask them to enact more legislation, more often than not, there's some loophole that, coincidentally, benefits the ISPs. If you ask them not to enact strict regulatory legislation, then the ISPs are free to fuck the consumer over and divvy up cities and states to prevent any type of competition amongst themselves.
Frankly speaking, going the route of little to no regulation is not going to force competition at this stage in the game, but it seems as though more regulation is going to be a short-term gain (maybe) and a long-term loss, because people are hyper-vigilant about the cronyism now, but once interest wanes you can bet your bottom dollar big business is going to come out on top until the cycle repeats. Unless there is a way to ensure that more legislation will encourage competition, i.e. in the form of municipal ISPs, or ensuring that smaller ISPs have a chance, it feels like a lose/lose scenario. I don't have the answers, obviously, but it fucking sucks when everywhere you look is just a giant middle finger to the consumer. I live in a semi-rural area where I get 1 Mbps for $40 a month, and I have no alternative besides satellite. Just up the road from my house, less than a quarter mile away, another, better ISP is available, but coincidentally, they don't provide service to my area.
>Politicians are being bought out by ISPs,
Google is the most powerful lobby in washington, dumbass
oh boo fucking hoo my 95% profit margin, built off of a subsidized contract from the federal fucking government to provide telecommunications infrastructure and services to the citizens of the united states, is getting smaller
>muh free market
>consumers should foot the bill for jewgle and netflix because they're too rich to pay
>t. not a netflix goy
omg the last guy in office made this thing and I think it's bad no you can't see it just trust me this has never been taken advantage of ever in the history of anything
It's time Sup Forums welcomes their new Indian overlords.
The difference is we save money by being against net neutrality because the big internet companies aren't able to charge us more for certain "plans" like being able to game, stream etc that we currently already pay for. They want to ramp up prices so you can game/stream like normal basically
>companies that primarily use telephones to conduct business should have to pay special premiums for the privilege to operate (lets be greedy and say this applies to the entire 20th century)
>mofuckin data transmissions (voice or internet) are expensive and it's a finite resource how dare the users of the telecommunications system do business without us getting a cut
>because the big internet companies aren't able to charge us more for certain "plans" like being able to game, stream etc that we currently already pay for.
you realize there's no laws or regulations preventing this right now, right?
for net neutarlity not against*
if it's so profitable at the moment, i wonder why google put their ISP project on standby and started shilling so hard against existing ones
i'm from maine and our fiber foundation is ridiculously good. especially for how impoverished our state is. i personally just want this regulation gone, but something to help local municipal ISPs too. we have municipal ISPs that do survive against time warner, but they're so tech illiterate (boomers) that they don't know what people actually want. i remember wanting more than 1 upload speed when i was a teenager and my dad was heartbroken because it would've been over $80/month, making our cable bill nearly $300 a month, to go from 1 to 5 and he couldn't afford it.
google, netflix, and reddit (owned by a gigantic conglomerate) just do not deserve to win this battle in my eyes. the ones who refuse to listen to the other side won't regret supporting the regulation once it does backfire, they'll just want more.
POO IN THE LOO PAJEET
Erm net neutrality has regulations so they can't block content or degrade performance, without it they CAN meaning they'll do exactly that
Cite it.
>DESIGNATED SHITTING NETWORK
because google isn't getting subsidized to put fiber optic networks across the fucking country, they're doing it out of pocket (for the most part). To be fair, no ISP is getting subsidized for installing fiber optics anywhere. Google just up'd the ante and the rest are following suit.
>Shilling this hard
Go fuck yourself jew
Literally just google it it's the first result
bad words add to the discussion look at me I'm fucking hilarious
>OY VEY HOW DARE YOU NOT PAY FOR JEWGLE AND NETFLIX
So you can't?
Wait, did this happen before Net Neutrality was in place?
.....
No? It didn't? Hmm, weird...
en.wikipedia.org
How do you not already know this my man
I'm sure someone can make a statement that he groped them. Can't be that hard.
>wikipedia is now official US regulation
CITE
IT
It kinda did, the difference is internet wasn't as fast as it is now, and things like Netflix and online gaming weren't as huge so they jews weren't taking maximum advantage of it yet
Friendly reminder, if you support Ajit Pai you're literally supporting a real life shitskin cuck-o-maniac and you should kill yourself right now or move to Germany.
This is the only citation you need to realize you're getting cucked
How coincidental. This year they are, last year they were 2nd, behind Comcast. Google is another matter in its own right, and if you'll read my post beyond the second sentence, you'll realize I have never once mentioned Google, and that it's irrelevant to the discussion of Internet regulation. Google's foothold in Washington is primarily to ensure that their current interests and business involvements are not put under the "monopoly microscope." They're doing what any other big business is doing, and while it's an issue that needs to be addressed, it's not relevant to this discussion. I have little doubt that if Google managed to become a big ISP, they would be doing the exact same thing Comcast/other big ISPs are doing, on top of their current lobbying practices. This is not necessarily about one big company is better than another, but rather that the companies that are in power now, are fucking their consumer over for a sub-sub-standard product, and that that's being okay'd and allowed because of crony capitalism.
>i wonder why google put their ISP project on standby and started shilling so hard against existing ones
Because Google is having to fight tooth and nail to get their ISP project off the ground, due to, what a shocking coincidence, the fact that ISPs that are older and more well-established have enabled politicians to establish legislation that benefits them. Google's attempt at an ISP was basically lighting millions of dollars on fire, because they were fighting against the home team. They spent more on lawyers than on the infrastructure itself because of how deeply entrenched current ISPs are in the government, at every level. Note, however, that I'm not trying to portray Google as some a hero of the common person, because I'm fairly certain Google would do the exact same as these other ISPs, if they were given the opportunity.
also as a followup, 12 cities have google fiber, that's 12 entire municipal networks having to be re-done because google can't use (by nature of the speed and service they're offering) the default copper or whatever bullshits in the ground right now like any other ISP can. Imagine the difference in starting points
see
>>Because Google is having to fight tooth and nail to get their ISP project off the ground, due to, what a shocking coincidence, the fact that ISPs that are older and more well-established have enabled politicians to establish legislation that benefits them.
so we should fix this with more legislation
What could go wrong!
...
Honestly I believe Google put its ISP project on hold for a combination of this and the fact that 5G will deliver faster speeds at a lower cost than fiberoptics, and it allows them not have to worry about lawyer and costly infrastrucutre.
Cellphone companies are actually positioned to be the new ISPs.
but still fuck Ajit, he's a mothercucker
I think the fcc has shills here because they known what Sup Forums can do if you piss enough of them off.
Doubtful Sup Forums would do anything though anymore.
topkek
You're not completely wrong about the lobbying thing by the way.
>spoiler: 8/20 of the top spenders in the entire lobbying industry have a stake in this
then the telco should up their prices and not try and segment the internet
they're trying to make it illegal for ISPs to charge companies like netflix more for using ridiculous amounts of bandwidth
which means I have to pay for them to watch their stupid netflix shows
Why the fuck would you shill for comcast, verizon, time warner, literally the shittiest internet companies that will fuck their customers already without a second glance.
Fucking shill.
If they up their prices, that leaves the opportunity for competitiors to come in and offer a similar service at a better price (a la Google). If they segment the internet they don't have to change their prices they can just rape the companies (like Netflix and Amazon) that use absurd amounts of bandwith. They retain customers and get de-facto power over all business conducted on the internet.
5G antennas exist right now. As we can all plainly see with people taking out more loans that ever before on tuition, auto and having high credit card debt. Not to mention the people who have paid over a $1000 on a new meme iPhone. There exists plenty incentive for OEMs to begin putting those radios in devices as of this year.
However we won't see early mainstream 5G usage until late 2019 in most hopeful situations. I believe that ISPs are actively lobbying right now to regulate the shit out of these devices and not to mention load them up with shit tons of bloatware and NSA malware so as again shit on consumers who want to really free themselves from a landline.
However the truest enemy to devices with those radios will be battery consumption. Devices these days burn so much power illuminating bezel-less slates of breakable OLEDs that get hot and explode, before they run out of power in 5 hours. Which doesn't help that most batteries are glued in now for flagship phones. Which are quite frankly the only real devices that people are willing to drop mad dosh on. Case in point again the iPhone 8 (small) has suffered sales because people would rather buy the "real" iPhone X.
I cannot speak for certain about androids beyond Samsung.
>republican
BASED POO
>the companies (like Netflix and Amazon) that use absurd amounts of bandwith.
It's the fucking customers that use up so much bandwidth using those services. Bandwidth that they paid their ISP to provide them. If the ISP's aren't spending enough on infrastructure to provide the bandwidth they promise, that's a problem with the ISP.
>Bandwidth that they paid their ISP to provide them.
>try to cap bandwidth
>customers complain
>try to charge netflix for bandwidth
>customers complain
gee and I wonder why USA has some of the most expensive internet in the world
Actually that 95% profit margin claim is pretty misleading. It's more like 21% profit margin after ALL expenses are subtracted. Here's a leddit comment response to the huffingtonpost article that makes that claim.
>The profit margin they are referring to is what's commonly called gross profit, meaning: The revenue from my service minus the variable costs to provide that service.
>Think of it this way: I have a factory to produce widgets. It costs me a dollar in materials, and a dollar of labor to make a widget (the variable cost). I then sell my widget for $10, leaving me $8 in gross profit. OMG! An 80% profit margin! I'm ripping off the consumer!!!
>But then, what about all the employees I have to pay, regardless of whether I sell 10 widgets or 10,000? What about the factory that I built for $100 million? In standard accounting (also called GAAP), I amortize the cost of my factory - meaning that even though I spent the money in year 1, in my accounting I show 1/5 of that cost for five years (it's a weird accounting thing). As for all those employees, the usually go on a line called "Selling/General/Admin. Expenses".
>So, if you look at Time Warner's financials Q4 2014, you'll see revenue of $5.7Bn, a cost of revenue of $1.7Bn, leaving a gross profit of $4bn, or 70%. That's essentially the number that the article is talking about (albeit, I'm looking at the total company figures, not the specific broadband unit). But look below that line - you'll see another $2.86Bn of expenses - after all that they had an operating income of 1.2Bn - for a 21% net profit. It's a healthy business, but not an obscene one.
>At the end of the day, does this really surprise anyone? Yes, it costs next to nothing to add each new subscriber to their service - but they had to make enormous investments to be able to produce that service in the first place.
>Trusting someone with skin that brown
You don't actually do this, do you?
Welcome to the conversation Britbong, glad to have ya.
The real genuine honest to god issue is that current ISPs got a fucking gimme with the setup the first and second time around the block building infrastructure for a large network and are now pissed that they're having to do it themselves this time and are looking for anyway to ease the burden. If that means regulating the data transfer from webservices to consumers and making back the money they are "losing" from upgrading the data networks by charging people for that privilege they'll do it.
Americans don't want that, for the most part. However this isn't really an issue that we have a say in, we're just pissed about it.
Even when NN gets repealed and you do not at all change your data usage (if you don't visit the sites that were the reason for price increases under NN: amazon, Netflix, google) your monthly bill still increase because ISPs have absolutely no competition.
You'll continue to take the AT&T dick and like or you can suffer and not have any internet at all (meaning no updates for your laptop so that you can remain safe if travel, no possibility to get work email, no communicating with family and friends, no games, no youtube).
However as interesting as that sounds to me. And as much as I would like the above situation to happen for America (people just ultimately stop using the internet altogether), which I believe would end up doing a lot of good to help people reconnect and focus on the important things in life.
It just can't happen though because the female part of America and the media consuming lower classes (bread and circus) will absolutely flip their shit and make life even more a hell for the rest of us who are more grounded with what's important. Not to mention those people will find some way (government or steal from people they know) just so they can stay connected like the drug addicts they are.
>>Even when NN gets repealed
Still waiting for someone to cite the specific regulation that prevents ISPs from bundling your internet.
advocating for more government control of the internet. wtf happened to pol?
en.wikipedia.org
How much is comcast paying you btw?
They think the leftists will be kind to Sup Forums if they ever get an iron grip of the government again.
>HERE'S A WIKIPEDIA LINK! DO THE RESEARCH YOURSELF!
haha oh wow
>with the exception of google fiber
HAHAHAHA
Sup Forums was pro net neutrality until the election and r/The_Donald nigger migrants arrived.
google is god
bless google, they are the best company ever
yes you can have all my information google I love you
pol is a leftist board you retard
>ron paul supporters
>pro-net neutrality
Russian cuck
>advocating for corporate thought police to come into existence in addition to the government that will still be there
shiggy diggy
no they weren't, because those are meaningless buzzwords
you realize its the corporate Jews that write the laws that the government passes.
any new laws will weaken competition(bad) and solidify control over the internet.
Well I'm not gonna pretend like I understand all of this but you made me curious about operating expenses.
Here's comcast's 2016 report: cmcsa.com
Tell me, do financial investments and deferred taxes count as a boon or a determent to net income? Anyone can fuck around and make money disappear in the net section so I can't really take it at face value.
lol i found the shills
How new are you dude Sup Forums was always for net neutrality. Without net neutality (((they))) could block Sup Forums or add it to some premium plan. Net neutrality literally stops internet companies from blocking or throttling sites like bittorrent which they did before NN was a thing
There is no regulation against it. You just lose everything that is valuable when you don't go all into their service (unlimited internet).
So you either pay above the reasonable median price for an internet that is metered and throttled.
Or you pay the exorbitantly overpriced amount for the premium package including several items that you don't want, just so you can have the one thing that should have already existed in the the lower plan.
ISPs should only offer three main packages for landlines
1. Slow plan that is unlimited. (Lifeline plan for lack of better word).
2. Fast plan that is limited.
3. Fast plan that is unlimited.
No other amenities should have to be bought so that you can get access to the 3rd option. However that does not say that it has to be cheap either.