I see a lot of posts about "say no to net neutrality" but what are we actually going to do about it...

I see a lot of posts about "say no to net neutrality" but what are we actually going to do about it? If this actually goes through, are we going to turn over and take the dick of the ISPs ? Or are we going to do something? What can we do?

Other urls found in this thread:

cnet.com/news/netflix-reaches-streaming-traffic-agreement-with-comcast/)
thenewamerican.com/tech/computers/item/21976-net-neutrality-puts-political-websites-in-the-crosshairs-of-censorship
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

VPNs

>but what are we actually going to do about it?
find a new ISP. If NN is on its way out, we're going to have a shitload of new ISPs pop up and the ones that throttle people are the ones who fall behind the competition whom doesnt.

Youre assuming any ISP will offer that, or that a bigger ISP like Spectrum or AT&T won't buy them out.

>Youre assuming any ISP will offer that
the first ISP to offer non-throttled connections will be the first to capture the market, assuming they remain the only one.

sopa / pipa is used to distract the internet quite regularly. it will blow over.

why does nn right now stop these isp's from coming up? I know comcast is massive and basically has a monopoly but what does NN have anything to do with new buisiness?

Im not criticizing you, I genuinly don't know.

If it passes, get fucked, that's what. You're not gonna be able to switch services. We know how ISPs work, they'll give you roughly the same plan and you'll be thankful you'll saved 20 bucks on netflix.

Obfuscation shills are really getting on my dick. Every net neutrality thread has been the same for a while.
I fear retard newfags who don't understand the issue may fall for the "net neutrality is the gov controlling ur internet" meme.
I hate astroturfing with a passion

im just so confused because there is a lot of theory crafting (kinda like your post) and shilling from every angle, even the jews are fighting eachother over it.

literally nothing, there's no complete thought that can argue against NN.

You're such a fucking retard. No wonder you hide behind a meme flag you nigger.

pretty much

It's astroturf.
You know who's behind it don't you?

there's a major disinfo campaign going on by all the shills so you know there's something there

>iterally nothing, there's no complete thought that can argue against NN.

can you explain this fear then that companies would create "paywalls" or "slow down service" for certain sites if it was gone? especially considering the fact that smartphones are not part of the title 2 bill and dont have these protections yet they dont throttle your connection, and the fact that net nuetrality is actually fairly new and there wasnt any real amount of throttling before?


the more I read about it the more it seems like sites like google and netflix are just using reddit tier retards to ensure they get the same price on bandwidth that some obscure no name website gets.

that much is true, but net nuetrality just looks like a jewish scheme to me, I do not at all see the benefit to keeping it.

Listen, it's fairly simple
Same bandwidth for everything = net neutrality
Selective bandwidth = no net neutrality

Which do you think is better for jewing people over?

It's true that google kikes and netflix heebs benefit from net neutrality, but that's not the point.
If you let them make their bandwidth distribution uneven, they can get money from some corporation to drown the emerging competition. They'll just have a separate bandwidth for 'everything else' including new websites.

Net neutrality is the internet as is.
It's like if your mailing service was allowed to charge you $0.50 to send a letter to your friend dave but $6 to send a letter to your mom, even if the distance is equal.
And you might say, okay, if they get that shitty i'll just change ISPs. So let me per-emptively call you naive, ISPs are known to offer shitty service and collude with each other, aren't they?

I'm trying to reason, not just spout shit, hopefully that'll set my post apart from shills

>Same bandwidth for everything = net neutrality
>Selective bandwidth = no net neutrality

thats retarded, if you put more of a stress on internet providers you should have to pay more, just like if you are a trucker you pay more at tollbooths, because you wear down the road more.

it also does not address the fact that net neutrality is a new thing and this "throttling" has never been a real problem before, so why is it a problem now?

Let them have it. It will only hasten the death of the Internet and force a rise to a new version of sneakernet that will be more independent. ISPs can choke to death on their own greed

No, you piece of shit, that's what you get in shitty countries where ISP offer limited data service. The more you consume, the more you pay.
What we bandwidth per second limit. That means you can transfer X amount of data per a second and that's it. TO WHOEVER YOU FUCKING WANT.
It's not the ISP's damn kike business how you use it and who you send it to. They can go get gassed.

it's a problem for greedy ISP kikes, always been

It's common knowledge that Comcast and Verizon have been throttling netflix since 2014. They literally had to reach an agreement to stop it. (source: cnet.com/news/netflix-reaches-streaming-traffic-agreement-with-comcast/)
Comcast's argument for throttling netflix because they're a large percentage of bandwidth is nonsensical, since consumers are paying for a set amount of data, no matter the source.

Now, comcast has their own streaming system (xfinity), and they're heavily lobbying to make it legal to throttle everything, including netflix, again. It's just plain stupid to give them such power when the absolute best outcome is that NOTHING changes.

>No, you piece of shit, that's what you get in shitty countries where ISP offer limited data service. The more you consume, the more you pay.
What we bandwidth per second limit. That means you can transfer X amount of data per a second and that's it. TO WHOEVER YOU FUCKING WANT.
It's not the ISP's damn kike business how you use it and who you send it to. They can go get gassed.

your overly emotional response to a little criticism seems endemic of the fact you are pulling meaning from nothing.

from what I have read, it seems net neutraility is really a war between competitors, and said competitors (google, kikebooke, ect) and basically using their users as mindless cronies by telling them why NN is super good. It is obvious that the FCC empowers these companies through title 2 to fuck over their competitors, since the FCC has always done this. Again, END USER throttling has never been a issue before or after title 2, so why should I believe it is going to be a problem? can you please answer me that with something besides pure conjecture.


lastly, why is regulating ISP's like a utility acceptable? when all it does is ensure that there will basically be no competition since utilities are basically goverment subsidized monopolies? wouldnt it be better to remove them as utilities and let the free market organically regulate what competitors do?

to me, it seems the reason comcast and AT&T dont have competition is because they are basically protected by the state at this point, like power companies and water companies, they are not allowed to have competitors due to regulations that the big boys like the FCC and comcast get to decide in the first place.


why should I care if comcast throttles netflix if it does not affect the end user? internet companies that put more stress on the internet should have to pay more, that makes sense to me.

this was also meant for you

>why should I care if comcast throttles netflix if it does not affect the end user?
You're thottling the end user's connection to access netflix. I don't know how much more clear I can be...
>internet companies that put more stress on the internet should have to pay more, that makes sense to me.
People are already paying more, that's the problem exactly.

>the more I read about it the more it seems like sites like google and netflix are just using reddit tier retards to ensure they get the same price on bandwidth that some obscure no name website gets.

DING DING DING. This is it and you actually understand the issue.

It's like having a trucking company tear up the roads and then bitching for "traffic neutrality" so they don't have to pay anything extra for road expansion, even though they're the reason for congestion.

ISPs want the ability to charge Google (youtube), Netflix, Facebook and other internet hogs to help build out the infrastructure these companies need to provide their services, instead of forcing the total cost on ISPs via (((regulation))). These companies don't want to pay. They want ISPs to pay, who will then pass on that cost to customers. ISPs ARE NOT going to turn the internet into a paywall. They will throttle content or simply raise the total price of their internet plans. So prices will go up and you'll blame comcast, when the reality is youtube is fucking you by sticking your ISP with the infrastructure bill. It's literally a war between corporations. And the media corporations are using dumb reddit fags to due their bidding against ISP corporations, because no one likes ISPs anyway.

Anyway who supports NN is useful idiot. Or shill, as we call them.

Can't wait for the Time Warner AT&T merger, I'm going to make so much bank.

People already pay proportionately to their usage. If they pay for infinite download/upload, they should get infinite download/upload. No argument against this.

You do realize that it's virtually impossible to start up a new ISP, much in the same way that you can't just open up a car dealership.

You would be fined up the ass and sued for everything your grand-kids would have. All they will leave you with the the lead pill.

Yes, it benefits google kikebook and netflix.
Throttling has always been and will be an issue, just because it's not addressed doesn't mean it's a non issue.

It's acceptable because you can't fucking make your own internet and compete against that kikery.
The internet is fine, leave it as it is, if you have precedent to tamper with it, they'll come up with kikey bullshit to fuck you over.
To assume they're just gonna put a bar on google kikebook and netflix is naive and retarded.

>power companies
Should power charge you more for using your power on certain devices?
No, the they give you energy to use as you damn please, if you consume a lot you get charged more, sure, but that has nothing to do with NN.
let ISPS offer you a different bandwidth plan, but keep their fat grubby kike fingers off how you use that bandwidth YOU BOUGHT.

The problem is that this "net neutrality" issue was something that was shilled on Sup Forums years ago as well.

Some retards think it's the same issue as then about enacting a bill.

Other older retards think it's about a longer standing regulation regarding cable companies.

But the ACTUAL issue RIGHT NOW is about REPEALING the Obama-era bill (((cleverly))) called "Net Neutrality", which is about giving the government control over what sites ISPs are allowed (or forced) to throttle.

The only people who are redpilled about this shit are saying to repeal this Net Neutrality bill because the government has no place having more control over the media, and they also remember that before 2015 the internet still existed as we know it and was just fine without the extra government control.

This issue is being shilled so hard in such a clear way on lefty sites like twitter and reddit, and yet on Sup Forums is SO CONFUSED AS FUCK, that I believe it is (((their))) tactic to weaken Sup Forums on this issue by dividing it and not making its redpilled populace fight FOR THE REPEAL of NET NEUTRALITY. This will allow the rest of the shilled masses over at twitter and reddit to complete the internet gestalt and not have those meddling kids over at Sup Forums screw things up for (((them))) again.

>People are already paying more, that's the problem exactly.
people or companies? please be exact in your terminology so I dont misquote you.


>You're thottling the end user's connection to access netflix. I don't know how much more clear I can be...
throttling a provider =/= throttling a user. It is possible to throttle the provider without affecting the user, I hope you realize this. unless comcast was specifically targeting speeds of the end user, which feel free to correct me if they were, this is still not a problem for anyone but the netflix jew.

>People already pay proportionately to their usage. If they pay for infinite download/upload, they should get infinite download/upload. No argument against this.

this is also not true. AT&T is famous for putting data caps on their "unlimited" plans. They were once my isp and they put a cap on how much I could download with my lan line.

gotta be honest mapplenigger, you are not doing much to speak for NN

im leaning more and more towards this, people keep saying "paywall" but NN is new and there were never paywalls before so what the fuck?


>Throttling has always been and will be an issue, just because it's not addressed doesn't mean it's a non issue.
it really isnt for the end user, unless you are torrenting movies or some shit like that. if you can prove to me otherwise (Again for the end user, not company) then please stop with this tired argument, because it has no body.


1/2

Data can be unlimited, but bandwidth capacity is not. Netflix and youtube combined account for over 50% of downstream bandwidth use in the US. Why in the fuck should they not pay to expand bandwidth capacity when their service consumes over half of ISPs capacity? ISPs wouldn't need to upgrade if not for these services. Yet they should be treated "neutrally", like a fucking blog or something.

>The internet is fine, leave it as it is, if you have precedent to tamper with it, they'll come up with kikey bullshit to fuck you over.

I think this one line i all I need to know from you, the internet is so fucked right now you have to be low iq nigger not to realize this. the internet is still a first generation technology, and is basically run like a crime syndicate by warring gangs (companies) at this point. The FCC stifles innovation by regulating the shit out of everything, they have to approve any capital investment in the internet by ISPS, because the have the power to do it.
>Should power charge you more for using your power on certain devices?
device that use more power are charged more accordingly in your monthly bill, I kind of get what you are TRYING to say, but it is wrapped up in such a shit tier anology it just falls flat on its face.

>unless you are torrenting movies or some shit like that.
Don't you think that's a goddamn issue? you go to a all you can eat food place, pay your fee and the owner tells you hold on ol' pal you're eating too much shrimp!
Get comped you taco bell cuck, if they can't handle to support they bandwidth they're offering maybe they should offer less bandwidth and not fuck with how the user uses the traffic they paid for.

Yes the internet is so fucked, let us manage your package requests, goy.
Why don't you go choke on a menorah and get gassed while you're at it

Make it easier for Start-Up ISPs to take off. Anyone worried about privacy, data mining, or criminal activity muat realize the "legitimate" ISPs already do that.
With much of the ISM radio band still not used, startups wouldn't nevessarily need to invest in hardwire infastructure. Not to mention they could buy network time from cell providers etc. as well.

We need to dethrone the established ISPs, and they've had years of lobbying to stop us. Now that we have a free-market minded FCC chair and Administration, perhaps simply competition can fix it.

>Don't you think that's a goddamn issue?
yes, i was pointing out however that you make it sound like throttling is this new crazy thing that companies are suddenly going to do rampantly when they already have the authority to pseudo implement it and they barely have.

not an argument
>calls me a shill jew
>mindlessly defends google, kikebook, and netflix

try again mongrel.

Fuck off with your package requests bullshit.

It didn't exist before Obama's NN. It won't exist after.

And if it does, I'll love it just to spite you. Fuck off.

that is honestly what this all sounds like.


I gotta say, i have noticed that so far it seems that the arguments for NN are erratic and emotion/fear driven and the arguments against NN seem a lot more level headed.

these fuckistain reddit bluepilled brainwash libtards are being tricked Net Neutrality is government censorship of the internet

thenewamerican.com/tech/computers/item/21976-net-neutrality-puts-political-websites-in-the-crosshairs-of-censorship

fucking assholes read it

I suppose nothing is an argument to a kabbalah worshipping turd.
Your power analogy is retarded. You still have a bandwidth cap, you can't use more than that per second. Problem is ISPs offer you that but they can't really back it up when the user consumes close to the limit they offer.
Whose fault is that? not the user's. Get the rope

>Jewtube and Netshoas have a meeting
>Our businesses are consuming half the internet capacity! oy vey! We need ISPs to upgrade infrastructure or our services might suffer. But we don't want to pay the bill. What do?
>Let's convince those stupid redditgoys to blame ISPs and get them to pay our bill. ISPs need to treat us neutrally, like websites who consume 0.0001% of our bandwidth.
>We'll convince those gullible goys that ISPs will put up paywalls to block us! We're the victims! When in reality, they'd throttle our services so we don't crowd out other web traffic, or force us to help pay to keep their content running smoothly.

If you support NN, you need to go back.

If ISPs actually start fucking with us, I can see all of 4ch and 8ch doing a huge, never-ending raid on the entire internet. If major websites are made unusable for a while the ISPs will be forced to comply with the demand for a free internet.

>ISPs will be forced to comply with the demand for a free internet.
How?
Are you gonna boycott them by not using the internet?
You're gonna find yourself in a situation where no good plan is offered. And then what? Are you gonna kickstart your own ISP by transfering data through the ionosphere? good luck

There isn't much you can do except cancel your internet service if this goes through. Sup Forums/8ch will be some of the first websites to go though. 8ch more specifically.

>ad hominem ad hominem ad hominem ad hominem HA JEWS ad hominem ad hominem ad hominem rhetoric rhetoric rhetoric rhetoric rhetoric

you literally have no arguments, you are just filled with rhetoric, if you actually care about NN, then please stop talking about it because you just make all PRO NN advocates look like reddit tier mongrels


would be bretty cool


exactly, this is what it seems to me

>Fuck free speech
>The kikes won't shut off Sup Forums instantly
Moshie please

Let's just keep it simple fellas

>NN in a nutshell: (((They))) are trying to regain control of man's awareness of the 4th wall again.

Either address the point or shut your kosher pie hole

based argie

netflix IS paying for bandwidth. All NN does is prevent ISPs from triple-dipping by charging customers and websites who have already paid for their data.

>What can we do?
cancel you internet sub instantly.

Also, the ADL could then lobby ISPs to block access to "Anti-Semitic Websites" and don't think for a single moment they aren't going to do this.

Look around you. Most retards on here support this bullshit.
We wouldn't be running at full autism.

No you won't see this, because if NN is removed, your access to 4ch/8ch will be shut off. They will prevent you from accessing it because "Illegal Content".

This campaign is fueled on shekels and not representative of Sup Forumss leaning on the matter.
Regardless, "we'll fix it later, its okay" is no argument.

This man is correct

literally what point? you are just theory crafting a whole bunch of shit and not really making any sense. ill give you one more shot to properly convery your "point".

Power. I ain't doing the reading for you. You're paid by the hour and I do it for free. We can do this all night, schlomo

If you really think NN means that ISPs can't prevent any access to anything you're extremely deluded. There will be all sorts of exceptions, as already exists.

all you need to do is type this shit into a search engine and you will see that companies are paying for their bandwidth consumption

Yes but you have ethical grounds to bitch/boycott them as they are breaking their agreement and raping your NAP in the process.

Here’s a good Pol-centric argument for net neutrality. Say you’re browsing Breitbart or Fox News and your isp is Comcast. Comcast owns NBC so they could throttle your access to and post ads on other news sites (i.e. Brietbart, Fox News, etc.) encouraging you to browse MSNBC instead. So without net neutrality ISPs wouldn’t only be able to control what streaming site you use but literally the news sites and political opinions you see.

>This man is correct

no he is not, power companies dont get pressured by the ADL to stop providing power for rallies and business's that are "racist", and they are utilities like the internet is now.


fucking thank you

1.) shills where paid by post not by the hour during the election
2.) most people are paid by the hour, its a standard metric for pay
3.) most people browse pol while either taking a shit or at work

all you have shown everyone here is that you have very little to no understanding of the actual topic at hand. you are probably underage and jobless since you are so daft you tried to use "paid by the hour" as a insult.

either you are a really good troll or a really dumb nigger, i honestly can not tell which one. im not wasting any more (you) on you.

>gizmodo
>extremetech
>help.netflix

you might as well of just searched "what do cucks think about net neutrality"

Sup Forums is fucking stupid on this one. Corporations are not your friend. People hate Comcast and Time Warner Cable, why are we going to give them the power to fuck us more? Portugal ISPs are making you pay for separate content and you know that shit is going to get price hiked over the years. Unbridled capitalism is a mistake. Corporations are the ones who own the lobbyists that control the politicians, part of the reason why our country is so fucked right now. Corporations are NOT your friend. They are the ones helping to sell us out with mass immigration (cheap labor) and sending jobs overseas (free trade). Of course the government isn't your friend either, but at least they were trying to prevent this shit that you're so ready to fuck with.

But if you give that power over to the government, they totally won't do that!

>blah blah you dont know what you're talking about goy, ur underage, blah blah
Shilling is not a real job
Stop kvetching and get in

stop paying. Go outside and live your life. Media exists to sculpt your minds and propagate certain responses from the masses.

While I agree with you that pic is highly misleading,
You can still access those sites without paying for the extra packages.
It's still bullshit but people ya know-

lol like i am responsible for what duckduckgo displays. okay nigger

>HA here is my evidence
>DONT CRITICIZE MY EVIDENCE

the absolute state of pol

shut it Canadafag

Dismissal isn't criticism, fuckhead, make your shekels worth something to your employer

do you want a screen cap of all of the websites that have any related words nigger? just fucking look it up yourself you fucking inbred piece of shit.

You are advocating for a goddamn monopoly to take place and literally the only thing stopping it is laws. Do you want packed internet? because it seems like you sure are pushing hard for it Goldberg

The point of net neutrality isn’t to give the governments the ability to control the internet and what people see. The point is to stop ISPs from doing this very thing. You don’t see the government cutting power or upcharging people for USPS deliveries (also a title II utility) to those who don’t agree with them.

If a retard is handling a bomb that will blow both of you up, someone should be pretty mad at that retard. Even if it's just a third person from Argentina.

Power companies don't have the ability to see what you're doing with your power, and cut it off for certain services. People spend too much power running their AC. The power company can't cut off power for just people's air conditioning.
The argument behind getting rid of NN is that your ISP thinks people are using too much of their bandwidth on certain services. They want to watch what people are doing on the internet, and throttle accordingly. They can see whether a streaming video packet is going to Hulu vs Netflix, and if they have a deal with Hulu the Hulu packets will go through, and the Netflix packets will be throttled. ISP's already can throttle the traffic of their customers that use too much bandwidth. That's not the argument. What they want to do is throttle the traffic based on where it is going.

ToR my boy. ToR.

Implying ISPs can’t detect tor traffic and stop it all together.

>do you want a screen cap of all of the websites that have any related words nigger? just fucking look it up yourself you fucking inbred piece of shit.

no, but you are posing your screenshot as evidence as i am very easily telling you why its bullshit, and now you are upset so you revert to name calling.

>You are advocating for a goddamn monopoly to take place and literally the only thing stopping it is laws.

i would advocate that its actually the opposite, and that these "laws" (they are not laws but regulations, big difference) are actually doing more to install a monopoly. not that you have to agree with that, but if you cannot even understand why someone would think that you are just being disingenuous just like our black friend here is being >The point of net neutrality isn’t to give the governments the ability to control the internet and what people see. The point is to stop ISPs from doing this very thing.

and this is somehow accomplished by basically giving the FCC dominion over isp's through tittle 2, that does make any sens...............
>You don’t see the government cutting power or upcharging people for USPS deliveries
>USPS

holy fuck you cannot be serious, USPS was absolute shit before competitors came on the scene. ordering a package was like "well it could be here in 5 days or 3 weeks, who fucking knows". the USPS is a perfect example of the gov letting go of a service and giving it up to the private sector.

1/2

You won't get a few blacklisted companies, dude, you'll get whitelisted sites and crums tier bandwidth for everything else.
Depending on your plan, of course, but what do you reckon will include TOR?

2/2


>Power companies don't have the ability to see what you're doing with your power
wrong
>and cut it off for certain services
also wrong

>They want to watch what people are doing on the internet, and throttle accordingly.
they already do this all the time

>They can see whether a streaming video packet is going to Hulu vs Netflix, and if they have a deal with Hulu the Hulu packets will go through, and the Netflix packets will be throttled.

they also already do this

>SP's already can throttle the traffic of their customers that use too much bandwidth. That's not the argument. What they want to do is throttle the traffic based on where it is going.

also wrong, isp's just want to be able to charge companies like google more because they use more bandwidth and put more stress on their network, which makes sense and is a totally reasonable thing to want. jewgoogle is just using its mindless drones to cloud up the issue it seems.

>Power companies don't have the ability to see what you're doing with your power
wrong
Lol what do they have, CCTV cameras on your power outlets? dumbfuck

no but they can threaten to upcharge you are cut service all together if you are a business and are using more power than the area can provide


you "dumbfuck"

Stop strawmanning. They can't tell whether your using a fan or charging your laptop. They can only see the amount of power you're using.

yes, you are a dumbfuck to suggest otherwise, eat it up

>Stop strawmanning. They can't tell whether your using a fan or charging your laptop.

holy fuck dude you are so fucking wrong. power companies can absolutely tell what kind of devices you are using if they were to analyze it. power transmission is a complicated process, they are not just sending anonymous "power" like you seem to think.

if you are going to be so confident in all your post atleast take two seconds to fucking educate yourself so you are not just pulling shit out of your ass

>eat it up

pic related

Either way they can't discriminate based upon that, stop being an obtuse fuckwit.

Beyond the point. It's handled in a neutral fashion

wow more uneducated guessing

yes you can and it happens all the time. cost for power is not only in production but also transmission. power companies frequently will give you rates based on the average amount of power you use (never really seen on a consumer end, only business)


Power companies can upcharge you for location, time of year, type of buisness, time of peak usage, ect. they absolutely can adjust their pricing based on how you use their service.

>It's handled in a neutral fashion
what is handled in a neutral fashion

shouldnt they worry about the end user using a ton of data instead of what kind of site theyre using it on?

the trucker pays the toll not the truck or tire manufacturer

>HE CALLED ME NAMES MAMA
>HE'S A BAD MAN SO HE IS WRONG
You are absolutely beyond reproach and you can't handle bantz
Youre an idiot who knows nothing about electricity, stop trying to DERAIL the thread topic you blueshilling fuck.

Power usage you dimwitted cockmuncher

A charging phone
An electric stove
A Lightbulb
Air Conditioning

They all consume power. This consumption bottlenecks, leaves your house and the difference from energy coming in vs coming out is what you're charged.
Devices are not measured individually. You are so lost and have no idea what you're talking about. But in this analogy devices are like websites you use. You are not charged more for using Air conditioning, You are charged more if you consume a lot of power.
Just like in some plans you'd be charged more if you're streaming a lot of data.
The reason you're not charged more is because it's a static fee for what you agree to: be limited if you exceed a certain amount of bandwidth per second.

Doesn't matter what packages you request, doesn't matter what electric devices you power. You buy bandwidth same as you buy energy. What devices you hook up to it, or what websites you check out doesn't matter, it's therefore handled in a neutral way.

That's what net neutrality is about.
Thanks for exposing yourself as a retard.

>shouldnt they worry about the end user using a ton of data instead of what kind of site theyre using it on?
in short no, im not going to spell it out here because this is a very easy to search thing, but the stress is caused by companies like netflix and google, not by the user


>You are absolutely beyond reproach and you can't handle bantz

seeing as how I have posted 22 time (including this post) just in this thread i think you are factually wrong that I cannot handle bantz. I pointed out the name calling to highlight you have no substance to your arguments

>Youre an idiot who knows nothing about electricity,
you got proof to back that up buddy? if you really want to talk about why power companies can tell what devices you are powering (hint, this is part of how they adjust your fucking power bill) would require a lecture, and you probably still wouldnt absorb it.


>They all consume power. This consumption bottlenecks, leaves your house and the difference from energy coming in vs coming out is what you're charged.

I literally do not know what to tell you besides the fact you are factually wrong. this statement is just flat out wrong in almost every respect.

if you want, I can give you a lecture on the why, but you would have to pay me, and I charge by the hour.

this is also for you can not even describe it as a bottleneck, that just doesnt make any sense.

Beyond the point, stupid, we're talking net neutrality, don't derail
Address how bandwidth should be managed any differently from power. You're not buying netflix, facebook, or reddit. Bandwidth is the resource analogous to power.
Come on, nigger, make a case for it, i'll wait

i like how you convieniently left out the portion where i say that you're derailing the thread, and then you continue to derail the thread.

im sure soros is very pleased with your work

>Beyond the point, stupid, we're talking net neutrality, don't derail
you were the one who called me a retard for sugesting otherwise, and i simply defended my position. its not my fault you dont understand how power works, and are obviously embarrassed that I justly pointed that out.


how can you honestly say im derailing when i started this thread by asking people opinions on the matter, than made over 20 posts, 5 of which hit their character limit, about this topic? are you fucking daft?
>im sure soros is very pleased with your work
i see, you just dont like when people dont agree with you.
getting back to the point
>Address how bandwidth should be managed any differently from power.
>Bandwidth is the resource analogous to power.
how are they at all similar? they have completely different operating costs, clients, business models, goals, and products, they are not close to being the same.

>You're not buying netflix
ok i can't do this anymore, you are now saying i dont pay for netflix?

if there is one thing you can take from all this mess, its that you have single handidly convinced me that NN is a bad thing with you retarded posts.

Still not addressing the point, you weasely merchant.
Why should bandwidth be treated any differently from power usage?
Come on, answer it.

Law A already covered NN vaguely because of it being part of communications previously.

Law B gets created in 2015 to formalize NN, meaning law A no longer covers it. It now is a part of law B.

Law B is now being repealed, law A no longer applies because law B took it's place.

Now ISP can do whatever they want and what they had been trying to do before 2015*, but was blocked by Law A, but now we will end up with neither A nor B.

*
2005 - Madison River Communications was blocking VOIP services. The FCC put a stop to it.

2005 - Comcast was denying access to p2p services without notifying customers.

2007-2009 - AT&T was having Skype and other VOIPs blocked because they didn't like there was competition for their cellphones. 2011 - MetroPCS tried to block all streaming except youtube. (edit: they actually sued the FCC over this)

2011-2013, AT&T, Sprint, and Verizon were blocking access to Google Wallet because it competed with their bullshit. edit: this one happened literally months after the trio were busted collaborating with Google to block apps from the android marketplace

2012, Verizon was demanding google block tethering apps on android because it let owners avoid their $20 tethering fee. This was despite guaranteeing they wouldn't do that as part of a winning bid on an airwaves auction. (edit: they were fined $1.25million over this)

2012, AT&T - tried to block access to FaceTime unless customers paid more money.

2013, Verizon literally stated that the only thing stopping them from favoring some content providers over other providers were the net neutrality rules in place.

this is the kind of post i was waiting for, im sorry dude but the retards i have been fighting with just drained it out of me.

I am not against any regulations, but I still think letting the FCC basically control ISP's is a mistake.