>>150386274

This. Look at how it's already happening. They censored everything conservative.

Other urls found in this thread:

newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/obamas-bad-pick-a-former-lobbyist-at-the-f-c-c
unvis.it/newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/obamas-bad-pick-a-former-lobbyist-at-the-f-c-c
cnet.com/news/facebook-to-beam-free-internet-to-africa/
netequalizernews.com/2011/02/08/what-is-deep-packet-inspection-and-why-the-controversy/
youtube.com/watch?v=le2R2Ps58pQ&t=
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Stop being a retarded nigger.

Obama's FCC was allowing throttling. Netflix and other violations were allowed.

OBAMA'S FCC APPOINTEE WAS A CAREER TELECOMMUNICATIONS LOBBYIST - FUCKING LOOK IT UP.

Why do people here buy the fucking media and reddit narratives on "muh fair internet".

It's a leftist lie.

Fuck off shill.

>NN does it better by allowing you to go to any site and post your views on subjects without intervention from your ISP. I would like to hear your thoughts on this

Uhhhh....we already have that

Writes like a shill, probably a shill. Go shill elsewhere

Sup Forums is still here buddy

No you are the shill

newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/obamas-bad-pick-a-former-lobbyist-at-the-f-c-c

>literally believing reddit and the mainstream media

Please archive it
unvis.it/newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/obamas-bad-pick-a-former-lobbyist-at-the-f-c-c

Dont conflate the two issues:
1. censorship by private entity
2. selective throttling

Both are bad. I have not read up on the specifics of NN, but if it explicitly allows #2 then its bad. The internet is controlled by large corps, all of which are (((liberal))) and (((politically correct))), they'd be happy to slow or block any site which does not conform to their jew standards.

A fellow gentleman. Let us down vote his comment so others will know what to think.

You know what, I could not care less about internet in the US.
You are already 10 years behind in terms of speed.
Every single service that matters has servers all over the world.
The worst that will happen is US ISPs will charge US companies extra for serving shit to people, causing everyone to move hosting out of the USA.
Just like when all research into crypto left the US when they tried to classify it as munitions.

Without NN user #1 #2 would be in effect if your ISP would want it to be.

Honestly, I don't know how these faggots on Sup Forums did it but, today, they made me anti-net neutrality. I'm impressed really. It's true, Sup Forums is always right. I don't know how they did it, but they did it. The argument just makes too much God damn sense.

...

>posting democrat basic bitch memes from reddit/facebook

>Doesn't have to
How many tools that the government has does it avoid using maliciously against it's citizens? The Patriot act doesn't have to be used against citizens but it absolutely is.

So right now we don't have NN regulations. So what is stopping the ISP from doing what people think they would do?

But what if I don't use social media and I don't play video games?

I would only have to pay like $25/month for video and email.

WTF? I'm ANT-NET NEUTRALITY NOW?! Thanks Obamaleaf!

The "Dad is a loser but told me I look dapper and classy for this wedding, and I'm going to have all the girls after me! Even Grandma said so!" look.

Wow, I only use Sup Forums and Youtube. My bill would be slashed. Why is everyone against this?

No net neutrality is better in your image, retard.

In your image, I'm paying $55 for everything with NN. Without NN, since I don't game, I will only be paying $40 for the same services I use right now.

How much do you get paid to be here?

Dont worry Canada, faceberg will pay for your internet too.
cnet.com/news/facebook-to-beam-free-internet-to-africa/

Sup Forums was never conservative.

With net neutrality:
Your 80 year old grandma is paying $70/month when she only uses email.

Without net neutrality:
Your 80 year old grandma is paying $15/month for just email internet. She doesn't subsidize the Blacked.com habits of reddit users.

Your analysis is correct. Fairness Doctrine as you present it is a forward action, while viewing a site is purely voluntary.

>How many tools that the government has does it avoid using maliciously against it's citizens? The Patriot act doesn't have to be used against citizens but it absolutely is.

And your ISP cannot stop you from going to other sites but with NN gone then they absolutely can. This law just prevents them from censoring sites. It would be absurd if the government let ISP's throttling you.

> I think he is wrong because net neutrality doesn't have to enforce anything expect make it so ISP's cannot throttle your connection to any website.
That's because you don't understand US law. US law is all about legal precedent. You may like THIS FCC rule, but you won't like the next one. Setting precedent by inventing a future hypothetical problem and giving bureaucrats the power to fix it is the oldest trick in the book. There is now a legal precedent that the FCC "fixes" "problems" with the internet. What will the next generation of bureaucrats consider "problems"? Anything that triggers them, pretty much. It's a slippery slope.

>NN does it better by allowing you to go to any site and post your views on subjects without intervention from your ISP.

But it doesn't? Why do people argue this?

Do you not remember how after C'ville, the AR etc. got massively deplatformed by their ISPs? Well guess what, right wingers losing their right to free speech re: ISPs already happened, and NN didn't do shit.

So yeah, fuck NN.

What is that? internet port blocking by the ISP as a business model?
'tarded.

Why is that PokeBall looking bikini so damn popular?

Look at it this way, you shmucks (it's the same way you look at it when a major false flag happens and you finally wake up for one day before you go back to being retarded sheep):

There was no problem with the internet before.

SUDDENLY the media rushes to tell everyone that ISPs WANT TO KILL YOUR BABIES and YOU MUST FIGHT FOR YOUR FREEDUMS

And then they tell you to support a bill that takes away more of your rights in the name of "protecting" you.

Now replace "internet" with Afghanistan and "ISPs" with Taliban and you get the basic pattern of how they fool you into buying their bullshit.

Net neutrality is about protection against invasion of privacy among other points
netequalizernews.com/2011/02/08/what-is-deep-packet-inspection-and-why-the-controversy/

NN as it existed twenty years ago is different than what we are talking about now. when they say NN now they just mean "let's add more government to the mix"

Net neutrality didn't exist 20 years ago. This is an Obama internet regulation that was implemented a couple years ago.

Again. Why haven't they don't it yet? In all the years of the internet being a thing they never did. why??

NN is fair and it doesn't discriminate, everyone pays. Though they do not have to pay the same price as ISP's do have tiered internet, they just do not have a say in what site you visit.

net neutrality as a concept has been around for a long time, kid

>Again. Why haven't they don't it yet? In all the years of the internet being a thing they never did. why??
It is widely known how gov is lacking behind the speed of development of the net.

I fucking love Don. Goddammit, of all the things I'm jealous of Americans right now, that man is it. We've got Trudeau and silent dignity. A house of cowards teaching their faggotry. God bless Trump and bless free speech.

People seem to think net neutrality has been a thing for decades.. We're literally talking about an FCC rule implemented a couple years ago. All of these hypothetical dooms day scenarios didn't happen for decades, now suddenly it will happen? The internet got better and cheaper over time, not worse. This combined with the fact that corporations are spending millions to shill for "Net Neutrality" reeks of Jew tricks

It's just a measure to stop it from happening. If you want to see what the internet looks like without NN all you have to do is use china's internet.

Yeah....since 2015

Interesting reply, paradigm shift inducing

We're talking about regulations, stupid nigger. ISPS were declared "common carriers" in 2015 and "net neutrality" rules were implemented the same year. That is what we're talking about. The more clueless people are, the more they support it.

Or go back literally 3 years when none of these hypothetical problems were a thing.

What they don't understand about net neutrality is that it allows for a monopoly, just like obamacare. The start up fees for an ISP under nn are retardedly high and the process moves at government pace. I say good riddence, sure, comcast will blacklist sites, but what happens in a free market when there is a demand for something?

Yup. Anyone who isn't retarded knows the solution to this hypothetical non-problem is more competition, not more bureaucracy. Google has been trying, local governments have fought them at every turn.

>since 2015

This is wrong. "Net Neutrality" has been the standard in the US for electronic communications since literally 1860. It's illegal for one telegraph company to prioritize certain traffic over others, and the same was true for telephones, and until very recently, the same was de facto true for internet communications. But the internet is NOT considered a utility in the US and so the rules for it don't hold ISP's as accountable.

In 2014, Verizon Communications Inc. v. FCC was decided, which opened the door for ISP's to start doing shady shit. For one obvious example of this, see this graph (pic related) from Netflix. Netflix speeds went back up after they started making direct payments to Comcast and other ISP's.

This decision in part led to the the FCC considering allowing ISP's to have a 'fast lane' on their networks for certain traffic. There was a massive public outcry, because that's fucking bullshit, and so this was abandoned. They're trying (yet again) to pull the same kind of bullshit, they're just gotten better at pretending it's something else.

This is simply a cartel of greedy corporations who are bribing policymakers in an attempt to make more money for providing worse service. Most are among the worst rated companies in the country, and internet in the US is among the worst in the developed world. Removing net neutrality rules would be a massive step backwards and will have huge ramifications.

You're an idiot. You don't deserve internet.

>Or go back literally 3 years when none of these hypothetical problems were a thing.
China has always censored the internet.

>net neutrality is that it allows for a monopoly
Can you explain that? Also how is allowing ISP's from blacklisting sites a good thing?

dumb frog poster

>I don't know anything about networking or peering agreements
If tier 1 peering was a commodity then they'd all be charging the same price, fucking moron. Each provider has differing levels of quality service. Not all tier 1 peering providers are the same speed or latency.

>muh corporations! trying to censor my cuck porn!

>c-c-c-c-cuck

What the fuck does that have to do with the fact that Net Neutrality is 2 years old and none of these problems existed before it? How old are you? Those of us who are actually allowed to use this board can tell you that the internet has gotten cheaper, faster, and overall better over time, not worse. And that has nothing to do with a bureaucratic rule implemented 2 years ago.

So you want shit like North Korea where only the super rich get to enjoy uncensored internet?

>Internet censorship is bad
>So lets give more power to a tiny group of (((bureaucrats))) to censor the entire internet

>Net neutrality is a principle that says Internet service providers should treat all traffic on their networks equally. That means companies like Airtel should not block or slow down access to any website or content on the Web - for instance, to benefit their own services over those of competitors.

I rest my point.

>I know who will never betray me, corporations!
>[loud slurping of corporate dick intensifies]

That may give you tingles to say, but that's not what Net Neutrality is. Net Neutrality is the FCC classifying ISPs as "Common Carriers" and implementing the first (((regulation))) to govern how content is provided, setting the legal precedent that a tiny group of (((beurocrats))) at the FCC sets the rules. Like I said before, you may love this rule, but you won't love the next ones. This is how (((they))) always take advantage of naive fucks like you - the unthinking majority. They convince you to be scared of a hypothetical future problem, and then you beg them to solve it.

>We need Draconian regulation to stop this hypothetical thing that's never happened in the decades these companies have offered this service free of such regulation.
Fuck out of here.

Net neutrality is the way in which government regulation of the internet seeps in so that organizations like the ADL can censor free speech it deems offensive or immoral.

>Corporation betrays me
>Take my business elsewhere or stop using their service

>Government betrays me
>Stop paying taxes
>Get put in a box
I love that the Irish are trying to get me to trust an over reaching government policy. The UK says hello.

This whole net neutrality debate has finally convinced me that ALL conservatives & libertarians are fucking retarded.

REMINDER - within 10 years both Florida and Texas will go blue permanently and you'll never be elected into office ever again.

>Support NN
>"You're just giving the government Jews more control."

>Don't support NN
>"You're just letting the corporate Jew extort you."

Whoever wins, we lose.

Corporation does something you don't like, you can switch providers if possible or move to an area covered by the 2500+ other ISPs. The (((FCC))) sets a rule you don't like....???? The FCC censors content....? Now what? That's the problem with setting precedent. You need to look ahead instead of focusing on the juicy burger they're holding in front of your face.

Tell me a website that was taken down by US law because of NN.

In the bad future, Sup Forums would become part of the ultra dark web, accessible solely through an old laptop with a solar battery pack and via mesh peer-to-peer connections. It would be free.

At least with corporations there's more than a handful of people involved here, some competition, and actual profits at stake.. I don't understand how people can be more scared of competing corporations than a tiny group of (((bureaucrats))) who can literally create laws with the stroke of a pen and sell that power to the highest bidder.

Its really simple, redditors think Netflix/Amazon/Google are the "good guys" while ISPs are the "bad guys". They both are shit.

Nobody said there was, stupid nigger. Show me the actual, demonstrable problems Net Neutrality solved? In other words, look at the internet 2+ years ago. Was the world coming to an end? No. The internet was getting better and cheaper, as it always had for decades.

>B-But you IRISH heh heh gottem.
Stellar argument. Have fun looking for an ISP that won't fuck you.

>Show me the actual, demonstrable problems Net Neutrality solved?

Show me problems that it created, NN has been around for more then two years.

Better not be any shitposting faggots here then. Going through all that trouble only to be called "fake and gay".

There's no real competition for ISPs, and despite claims that the FCC would censor or shut down sites they're all still there. Meanwhile providers proved to not be trustworthy in the first place by throttling certain services. One hasn't wronged me, the other has.

Any legislation on the internet is bad. Leave it the way it is.

>I still don't know how peering agreements work
>herp derp I pretend I know networking and get my news from reddit.com/r/technology

>Show me the actual, demonstrable problems Net Neutrality solved?
It prevents the restricted and tiered "access plans" that they would implement, you incredibly retarded cocksucker.
You really want to let them destroy the internet just to prove a point?
Fuck you KYS

Not it hasn't, liar. It was implemented in 2015 after the FCC classified ISPs as "common carriers". You don't even know what Net Neutrality is, do you? Just admit it, brainlet.

>businesses will make unprofitable and retarded decisions just because big daddy gov doesn't make laws :(
Can't be this moronic.

It "prevented" a hypothetical problem that never happened for decades while giving FCC an insane amount of power, you fucking brainlet.

If I remember correctly verizon/at&t/sprint/and tmobile were throttling the fuck out of internet data including the added data caps.They only recently touted that they would offer unlimited internet but with a catch, if you hit a certain amount of data they would STILL throttle you even though you payed full price for unlimited data.Tmobile however, is the only one who offers true unlimited internet and is for NN.Not to mention comcast also has data caps and throttling for certain services, which is also what ISP’s were doing under NN.Now tell me this, why were they allowed to do this under current NN laws?And yes, feel free to correct me on anything as I have not really talked about this subject for a while.I am for NN but wondering why people wanted a fucking former cable lobbyists running the FCC of all things?

Why didn't they do that in the years and years and years before NN existed? The dems used scare tactics to make it seem like corporations are trying to constantly rape you in order to get their centralized planning passed. You fall for it so easily.

>Stop being a retarded nigger.
>Obama's FCC was allowing throttling. Netflix and other violations were allowed.
>OBAMA'S FCC APPOINTEE WAS A CAREER TELECOMMUNICATIONS LOBBYIST - FUCKING LOOK IT UP.
>Why do people here buy the fucking media and reddit narratives on "muh fair internet".
>It's a leftist lie.

Once you setup your network, the amount of data that flows into it doesn't change the running costs.

And since the internet doesn't seem to be congested as it is, the whole "throttling" story goes to shit.

I will. I'd rather the trouble of shopping around a company over the trouble of living in a country that decides to hijack the internet to stifle whatever isn't politically expedient at the time.

Turns out finding a new country is much harder.

>No net neutrality
>Your bill will be $0.03 cheaper
Well that's me convinced

youtube.com/watch?v=le2R2Ps58pQ&t=

If net neutrality goes away, I swear to god I'm going to go full darkweb mode and only browse on the tor nodes.

Net Neutrality has been around for alot longer then you've been born.You're just a sad little shitposter, you post just like manly tears.

NN going away would be the internet the way it was 3 years ago. AKA not shit changed but the government grabbing power where you let them.

The whole reason this started is because Netflix was saturating a pipe between their tier 1 provider and Verizon. The rule is whoever sends more traffic pays for upgrades. Verizon was like "wtf Netflix, pay or we're throttling you". The netflix chimps out in the media "we don't wanna pay!", and everyone believes their jewish lies.

>NN
>not reddit

I hope you are trolling because if no you should check yourself in for clinical retardation, you could get NEET bux for it.

>government grabbing power where you let them.

What does this even mean? Can you explain it? How can ISP's stopping you from visiting Sup Forums worse then the government grabbing so called "power"?

>Decides to hijack the internet to stifle whatever isn't politically expedient at the time.

When has that ever happened you big wuss.

By naming their bill "Net Neutrality" and confounding it with the pre-existing basic principles of cable organizations, and combining it with shills peppered here and there, Democrats and Obama Admin have completely managed to divide and confuse the living shit out of people on this topic and have allowed them to do whatever the fuck they want without the attention of the public on them.

How people do not see the same patterns with this NN bullshit, I have no idea.

The basic principle is that this thing needs to be repealed because the government does not need to control the internet any further. Don't believe the lies and the false flags! Small government is not a hard concept!

enjoy your 15 an hour you fucking corporate troll. Monopolies need to be regulated because they are not free market. Theyre just like a super dictator

I know net neutrality is bad because the commies were the ones pushing it here

>$54.99 vs $54.96
Nice

Bullshit , small government is good where there is free market. If theres monopoly, youll just get a rogue Agent Smith abusing people if you dont regulate it.