NN Summarized

>last 20 years
>internet has grown exponentially and gotten much better
>last 2 years
>internet has been labeled as Title II utility
>all ISPs, large and small, now have regulations originally meant for the Ma Bell monopoly during the great depression
>last 0 years
>Title II removed
>internet as we know it is destroyed
>costs $5 a month to access a website
>cable companies merge into a singular, unregulated monopoly

wew

>inb4 "BUT IT IS A MONOPOLY!"

we need more competition, a free market will naturally solve all of the problems without the government's monopoly regulations. It's literally gov regulations that make it so hard to start a new ISP, and Pai is working to get rid of all of them

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/B03eByZia5I?t=5m28s
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Thanks, saving this

Lol fuck off drumpftard

Is there one single case of an ISP being unable to participate in the market because of NN laws?

The only sites you need are Sup Forums and StackOverflow anyway

The ridiculous amount of money shill sites are allowed to waste/get subsidized while they maintain their hold on the king of the shill hill

Is there a single case of ISPs needing Ma Bell regulations?

ok

Don't forget 9gag

Bump

The absolute state of rabbit

By free market solving it you mean discounts for Sup Forums premium internet access?

Kek

Yes, i can remember ATT blocking Sup Forums

>Company X competing with companies A B and C
>Suddenly X decides to start charging for access to websites
>Customers are angered and cancel there subscription for Y
>X either changes it's strategy or goes out of business

Beginning Friday, an AT&T customer was impacted by a denial-of-service attack stemming from IP addresses connected to img.Sup Forums.org. To prevent this attack from disrupting service for the impacted AT&T customer, and to prevent the attack from spreading to impact to our other customers, AT&T temporarily blocked access to the IP addresses in question for our customers. This action was in no way related to the content at img.Sup Forums.org; our focus was on protecting our customers from malicious traffic.

Overnight Sunday, after we determined the denial-of-service threat no longer existed, AT&T removed the block on the IP addresses in question. We will continue to monitor for denial-of-service activity and any malicious traffic to protect our customers.

Best post

>believing some (((PR))) release after they received severe backlash
Wew.

Anyway, that's not their call. They can send out a warning, but don't block anything. I'll make my own decision.

Bruh, DoS is literally illegal. They can block it if they want, it's not free speech

Sure, legally they CAN block it. I'm saying, as a customer, they can get fucked for doing it tho.

>gotten much better

Nah. Internet was better pre smart phones. Mostly affluent white tech people.

The problem is the oligopoly resulting from the loss of net neutrality.

you think there will be competition when in reality there won‘t be; the services available from different ISP will largely be the same (like now).

Maybe some will have cheaper social media and others will have cheaper streaming, but overall there will only be an illusion of choice and less money in our pockets and more money in theirs.

don‘t be an idiot, we need net neutrality.

that doesn't work in situations that require massive and prohibitively expensive infrastructure. These situations create monopolies always.

There are two paths to net neutrality.

1. A monopoly ISP that is forced into it by the government

Or

2. A free, competitive market where high costs or slow speeds will drive you out of the market

Which do you prefer?

Literally one of the things Pai is working on getting rid of.

Seriously, when you impose no regulations you're essentially giving up on a free market solution, and you're steering the industry towards a monopoly.

Focus on the important issues, Title II is a meme that hurts little ISPs that don't need the extra regulations

>when you impose no regulations

*When you impose monopoly regulations

Lol wtf. So when Sup Forums blocks a DoS attack, you somehow don't want to be a user of Sup Forums anymore? Because this definitely happens all the time, that's why Sup Forums paid for cloud flare

Bump

Maybe I'm just too pleb to understand. I don't understand why they had to block Sup Forums for all of their users.

>he thinks all of the major, top end American companies ruthlessly compete with each other and never consult one another or price fix

Top fucking kek. So what happens when companies A B C X and Y all decide to starting charging for access to specific websites? Or mix and match where they offer some premium rates for specific websites, but not for others? What happens when your area only has companies A and B and both of them charge out the ass for premium access to the website in question?

You are a naive fucking retard. Don't you understand that by now, these businessmen have conquered and mastered capitalism to such an extent that they can circumvent competition destroying the top dogs? Why do you think almost every major American commodity has been consolidated to a handful of companies that offer similar rates? Why do you think businesses frequently knock off their own products, sell them under a different brand, and compete against THEMSELVES to capture more of a market share?

You are such an ignorant baby.

FTCs job is to prevent a cartel, not FCC. Also, if somehow ISPs decided to start being shit then new ISPs could steal away angry customers and become super rich

Not how it happens you fucking dipshit. You're utterly ignorant of the state of American business, so you're not worth talking to. If you looked at the state of any major business sector in the US, you will find the same trend. The top companies work in tandem. They compete, but they compete in a relatively safe way in regards to each other. It's fucking senseless for them to aggressively fight each other as top dogs and try to outdo each other for the benefit of the customer when they can both exploit the customer for mutual gain. Which is exactly what they do.

These guys have conquered the business world. They understand exactly what they're doing and exactly how to circumvent "competition" within a free market to keep themselves at the top of the game. They know how to beat the little guy, the start up, the lower price guy.

Your infantile suggestions mean nothing and would do nothing to prevent these companies from engaging in these practices, because they already do so.

Net neutrality, as it currently stands in law, requires ISP's like Comcast and AT&T to treat all internet traffic equally regardless of content. That means ISP's cannot restrict access to Sup Forums. Or slow down Netflix in favor of their own movie streaming service

You are correct, sir

Easy. Someone starts an isp that doesn't do that

Uh, no, sweetie.
Before the NN law the internet was chaos and anarchy. There was no real development nor use for it.

This is retarded John" the current year"Oliver talking points. Read the damn legislation you fucking manlet. Freemarket conquers all

Net neutrality has never been enforced in this country and was luckily killed before put into effect.

Sup Forums
get educated
NN is about one thing
BGP and peering
Le Google and pals wants to force ISPs to eat the cost of their video streaming bandwidth
Here's an explainer
Skip to 5:28 if you want to get right to the point

youtu.be/B03eByZia5I?t=5m28s

Questions?

This is correct as well

So some no name company with no money is going to build infrastructure across the united states and "outcompete" all of these top companies that already have established countrywide service and will not get bought out or muscled out because they're just so pure and want to save the consumer a dollar, right?

Do you not think these small companies try this all the time? And yet why are the same giants still at the top after a decade? All consolidated into fewer and fewer companies? All with their fixed rates that never go down but stay relatively consistent with the competition?

Open your fucking eyes you blind, childish moron. Your infantile suggestions are worthless.

Grow up. If govt didn't write legislation to prevent small ISPs from forming we wouldn't have an issue. There were many more isps in the dial up days than now bc small ISPs weren't legislated out of existence

>Le Google and pals wants to force ISPs to eat the cost of their video streaming bandwidth

You fucking idiot that's their GODDAMN BUSINESS. THEY SELL BANDWIDTH WHAT THE FUCK IS YOUR GODDAMN STUPID FUCKING FACE DOING ON THE INTERNET IF YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT AN ISP IS SUPPOSED TO SELL BANDWIDTH.

My question is why the fuck did you respond to me without addressing my arguments and just link a shitty video? Don't quote my post unless you have something specific to address in it.

I'm not going to watch it because you did the equivalent of send me spam mail in a response.

You're posting this on Sup Forums. Literally the first website that will be blocked.

>shareblue!
>JIDF!

There are shills on Sup Forums. There have been for about 4 years. Every last one is working out of Russia. You can:
A) Be one of them
B) Be one of their dupes
C) Notice

If the government didn't regulate the piss out of who gets to lay cable I'd agree.

Internet freedom has been increasingly limited and monitored in last 15 years. Internet didn't get better at all in last 15 years, only technology got better. Not even technology for file transfer and download got better in 15 years, only disks got better and cables faster. There's nothing in last 10 years that can be compared to download freedom invented 10 years ago, i could find any music album from any country from any decade 10 years ago. Torrents and similar solutions are complete mainstream crap compare to that.

Grow up yoruself. You're utterly naive and ignorant of how things work and think business works the same as it did in fucking 1990. People have gotten smarter, dumbass. They know how to game the system, and your redneck, simplistic suggestions aren't a valid answer to complex modern economic matters. You're a worthless peabrained lightweight.

You're an idiot. The reason there's low competition in this market is because of high entry costs and regulations big ISPs have lobbied for that make entry more difficult. Ending net neutrality will only allow these companies to fuck uy's in the ass even harder

Wrong! There were more ISPs during start-up because they subcontracted the telephone lines from your local provider. They were not ISPs in the modern sense. They were subcontractors of your local phone company.

The ISP paid for the network. They can do what they want with it. They can sell bandwidth to consumers. They can also sell bandwidth to Google. If Google refuses to pay, Google can get fukt. Don't like it? Build your own damn network.

But will someone? And will it be of reasonable price

Before YouTube and Google got monopoly you had many sites where you could upload videos and music. All internet of ISPs is doing is promoting big corporate film and music and eventually they will serve you all through corporate means and that's your choice. You'll get a nice chip at back of your head.

You're the retard. Even if those barriers made it harder, companies can still compete, and feasibly try to. And yet they fail every time. You can't blame that on the cost of entry. They're failing because the big dogs have won the game and they know how to remain at the top, and making the market entirely free will not solve that because the free market doesn't mean companies are forced to compete against each other. That's a big part where the free market fails, because it assumes all companies will see each other as competition when they have the capacity to work to each others' mutual benefit.

Your idiotic, simplistic mantra that if we just eliminate all regulations then somehow, the market will all work out is just you being a faith driven moron. People have wrestled with regulations precisely because people "figured out" the free market in such a way where they could game and ruin the economy. That struggle continues to this day to try and allow the market to be as free as possible while preventing companies from gaming the system in a self serving but economically damaging way.

Free market has really failed in USA. Google is the only search engine, every other search engine isn't trying or is based on Google. All same search results more or less. Same with ISPs. All connected to each other anus.

Prove it. Any statement made about the ending of net neutrality in the US is complete conjecture. You have no idea what will happen. Never post again.

>Simple simple logic
>P-prove it
It's obvious.

Stop posting.

It's not really logic as much as it is an unfounded opinion. It's similar to me speculating that the reason you're such a fucking retard is that you spend too much time on Sup Forums. It might be true and obvious, but that may not be the actual reason why you're a giant fucking retard.

Didn’t Kim Komando just come out and say that repealing net neutrality won’t affect anything but allow ISPs to start building again because the past two years they’ve basically been forced into no compete claus, disabling them from expanding services?
Anyone have a link to that audio?

did anyone ask what the death-deserving faggots at reddit think? no. were concerned with the law and it's language.
>we need to regulate internet like the phone and cable or we will get tiered rates
>even though phone and cable have tiered rates and are under title ii, title ii will surely prevent what it specifically allows because I'm stupid

The amount of actual retardation itt is spilling over into every unborn child. If this bill passes it will be the worst thing to ever happen in the last century. It will cause so much strife that it will make both WW1 and WW2 seem like pussy play.

Fuck all of you faggots.

telecoms have already been caught fiddlefucking with peoples internet which is why the rule was put in place to begin with.