Genuine question: if net neutrality is supposed to protect the consumer from corporations...

Genuine question: if net neutrality is supposed to protect the consumer from corporations, why do all the major corporations want net neutrality to pass?

Just look who supports it, why would you worship these companies?

I'm not going to blindly hate something because of who supports it, I just want to know why they support it so much.

Those aren't isps you dummy. The Jews at Comcast and Verizon have donated a fuck ton of money to repeal NN

any of those businesses could be fucked over by ISPs if they start packaging the internet the way they package cable tv

so rather than waiting to see who gets dropped off the internet one by one, they are all working together to ensure that doesn't happen

the internet is hardly broken, why would you change something that is working pretty well?

net neutrality was made 2 years ago. we didnt have to pay to use any sites then, why would that happen now?

Because they want what's best for their customers goyim. Their shareholders are completely onboard with it too.

oy vey how do I report this problematic post for antisemitism?

HR brownie points. I'm sure some people in HR actually do care about people but the majority just care about public opinion
They also may not have their hand in the pot

net neutrality wasn't made 2 years ago it was signed into law 2 years ago. it was the defacto way the internet was from the beginning, since your ISP has never controlled what websites you access unless you were an AOL user or some shit.

So you're saying that internet service providers are going to drop Facebook and Google? I find that hard to believe.

so you think the ISPs will just decide to change now? your argument is that you can predict the future?

NN started under Bush

So you're saying given the option, isps won't change? Your argument is that you can predict the future?

No they'll just charge you more to use it, or throttle the speed if you don't pay

Do you like privately owned highways?
Do you like freedom of movement?

Pick only one. Its your future.

not necessarily drop, but charge separately for, yes

also imagine a company like Comcast starting their own Netflix-style service and then slows down Netflix... they'd be allowed to do that if net neutrality is abolished.

Or imagine smaller websites, which would not get the benefit of being packaged at all... your ISP could throttle them to give more bandwidth to the sites people are paying for... either by slowing the connection or preventing you from accessing it entirely.

how do you not understand this?

Very simple.
You're giving your money to shlomo or chain anyway. However does shlomo also pay chaim or does chaim actually pay shlomo? That's the real question behind this

stop thinking, the pro-NN faggots don't like that

Because the corporations love us and want us to be happy

Explain the legal argument for keeping net neutrality. Go ahead, ill wait.


That's why it's being changed.

...

Certain corporations benefits from net neutrality, other corporations benefit from getting rid of it.

that's a good question. Who at the end of the totem pole, chaim or shlomo.

because people at these companies use the internet and dont want it going to shit.

Wrong. It's been law since 1996.

All 2015 did was prevent Comcast from doing anything about Google data harvesting their customers.

THIS IS ABOUT BIG DATA. FOLLOW THE MONEY, GOY.

>being this naive
It's about the lucrative data market.

No it's because ISPs tried to change it in the past. They tried throttling VOIP services when skype was starting to get big. They've been told time and time again not to do this. Internet is a service like water. A farmer pays for more water than an ice sculptor since he needs to water his land. The ice sculptor only needs to freeze a block of ice. The sculptor doesn't have to pay extra for turning the water into a sculpture.

exactly, their only argument is "muh feels"

ISPs didn't do that before NN was made law a few years ago. And the vast majority of people who use the internet rely on Facebook and Google. If an ISP just makes it harder for them to use those sites, wouldn't that just hurt the ISP?

>law a few years ago
NN was signed by Bush in 04

Well I'd consider not wanting to get fucked by jews a big deal but maybe you enjoy it

Nope

>internet is like water
Wrong. One liter of water is always equivalent to another liter of water.

One gig of data IS NOT equal to another gig of data, but the ISPs are legally obliged to treat it as such. This has led internet companies to take advantage of the FCC rules by hogging the lines since the ISPs can't legally charge them more for using most of the bandwidth.

Can you elaborate? I just learned about Cambridge Analytics and Big Data how what they did in elections with it. It never bothered me that ads are targeted but I'm getting intrested now. Comcast wants to remove Net Neutrality because it wants to prevent Big Data from happening? Why do they want that?

Your right, Clinton signed it in 1996.

Go educate yourself goy.

Myb, user has it here

what? nope

The court ruled that the FCC had used the wrong piece of legislation to enforce its net neutrality policy: Sec. 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which gives the FCC the mandate to promote broadband.

The ones who want Net Neutrality are the sites that could be throttled by ISPs. The ISPs are the ones who DON'T want it. Do you understand now?

Because Big Data would mean a company like Comcast has to become subservient to Google or (((face consequences))).
Essentially blackmail, or in corporate terms a "hostile takeover".

"Hogging?" Does Netflix send me data over the Internet I did not request? If I want to receive 1 gig of data from Netflix, but my ISP charges me extra for THAT data vs. 1 gig of data from random websites, why should I have to pay more for that?

No, Comcast wants to enter the Big Data market and mine and sell data like Google, Facebook, and any of the other internet giants.

The issue is that all of the data Comcast and friends could possibly harvest is already earmarked by Google and friends. So the most Comcast can do is charge Google for transporting the data (which is what they are trying to do), but that is technically illegal because Comcast HAS to treat Google like any joe blow consumer.

Thus Google and friends are pretty much taking advantage of nuances of the law to essentially get a free service.

Comcast and friends view Google and friends making mad bank by selling data as taking advantage of their service, since Google and friends make a lot, lot more harvesting data than they have to pay Comcast to use their lines.

So it's 2 things really: Comcast wants into the data market that is completely controlled by Google, or they want compensation. As it is, they get neither.

It's hard to care about these big companies sometimes, but it is kinda messed up that Google can effectively use the law to prevent competition from entering the market.

>All major corporations are the same
Are you fucking retarded? The corporations in pic related aren't ISPs you fucking retard. No one but ISPs benefit from net neutrality getting gutted.

>One gig of data IS NOT equal to another gig of data
How does it's transfer work for 1GB taking up more bandwith than another one?
I don't get that at all. Why would they become subservient? I thought they want to drossle Big Data bandwith?! Why?

That was the 2015 ruling, which is getting reverted.
Your monkey Obama is the one actually responsible for fucking net neutrality up, but Soros would never tell you that.

What right does Comcast have over data that didn't flow through it's own networks? Can't they get analytics of the data from their own customers on their own?

these companies fear a free internet

(((they))) want to censor it AS WE HAVE ALREADY SEEN.

You shouldn't. They should.
Bandwidth is finite and bandwidth used for your shitty cartoons is bandwidth businesses can't use to make money.

Why should your cartoons take priority over a very important international conference call? Because that's how it is right now.

Because it's better to submit and survive than to be strung up on the gallows.

>The issue is that all of the data Comcast and friends could possibly harvest is already earmarked by Google and friends
Why is that? Why cant Comcast just do it too? And thanks for explaining, makes 100% sense.

>Netflix isn't a business using bandwidth to make money
You utter mong

It's more about the information that is contained in that gig. Is it an episode of family guy, or is it some marketing data from facebook for them to sell to advertisers?

Both of these things might take a gig, but their dollar value are vastly different.

Stop lying, the earliest form of NN that was actual law came in 2010 as the OIO of 2010 made by the FCC. Anything before was non-legally binding principals that dictated FCC action.

The 2015 OIO has nothing to do with what you talking about, it was a response to Verizon sueing and killing the FCC's 2010 OIO in 2014. Stop talking about things you don't understand.

Because I PAID the ISP for that bandwidth and I can use it for what I want REGARDLESS of the source.

It's hard when Google has most avenues covered and claimed. The best they can do is metadata analytics, which isn't the best for advertisers to buy.

I cared about net neutrality a few years ago, but by now, it's impossible to care any more. I mean, we're hardly rooting for the underdogs now, are we? The bulk of the web's traffic is corporations with multi-billion dollar valuations (Google, Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, etc), and everything left is all bit players at the margins (like this site). The original dream of the web being this great decentralized democratic platform is dead and gone. Even Time Berners-Lee has said so.

Burn the entire fucking thing down and start over.

We should kill NN because Comcast can't make money on a revenue stream they have no business in profiting from?

Look at all these companies desperate to keep the FCC rules. Makes you wonder why they need to FCC at all seeing as they're all on board.

Because we live in the brave new world 1984

Sounds like a solid plan in 2017 America

Because they don't want ISP to hold them by the balls and make users pay to use their websites.

Because they are legally obliged to treat all customers the same, as well as their service.
So if I have an unlimited plan, and so does Google, Comcast HAS to treat our services the same. Doesn't matter if Google uses the line a thousand times more often than i do, for a thousand times the data. Legally they must be treated the same, as per the 2015 FCC ruling and the 9th circuit court.

So since bandwidth is finite, there is nothing the ISPs can do to stop Google and such from hogging their lines. If they throttle they will get sued in a heartbeat.

Because if net neutrality is repealed, less people will be able to use their services you moron

Notice how the list doesn't include Verizon, AT&T, Spectrum, etc

>It's hard when Google has most avenues covered and claimed
How can Google claim that?

And what I get from all this is that with no NN we let ISP's handle Big Data from now one instead of Google and co., cause once ISP are allowed to drossel everyone else, they will priorizie themselves. So, do we want Google or Comcast to know everything?

Wrong. Do your research.
So the ISPs have no recourse when Netflix is taking up the majority of their bandwidth? Pretty fucked up.

They can't even accept more money from others who want preferential treatment because Netflix will sue.

If the ISP can't provide the bandwith that they promised they could on the contract, then maybe they should upgrade their infrastructure.

NN is not under threat, just the dirty 2015 ruling.

It's 2017. If you aren't doing everything you can to make The Bad People unhappy, then you aren't doing your part.

There's literally nothing I care about more than making The Bad People's lives miserable. If Facebook is pro-NN, I'm anti-NN even if it hurts me in the process, because at this point I'll literally sacrifice my happiness to hurt these people.

...

I agree. The problem is people are using an analogy of physical roads to make sense of digital network usage. Google and Netflix are not like trucking companies. Data is not like trucks on a highway that causes wear and tear that other people have to pay. (E.g., I don't order from Amazon, so why should I have to pay highway taxes for the damage caused by Amazon's deliveries?) ISP are saying the data PROVIDERS should pay, but the RECEIVERS are already paying for the bandwidth they purchased. ISP want to DOUBLE charge for the data through their networks.

>So since bandwidth is finite, there is nothing the ISPs can do to stop Google and such from hogging their lines. If they throttle they will get sued in a heartbeat.
I don't get that. If the bandwith is finite, wouldnt eventually someone be throttled? Who decides who gets throttled then? And why can't Comcast compete with Google over Big Five Data, or is there issue here that google is so good in collecting that Comcast has no chance of catching up unless they would be able to throttle google?

I have, a cursory look at the history of Net Neutrality is enough to show you don't know what fuck you are talking about.

Wikipedia. org/wiki/Net_neutrality_in_the_United_States

See

So Google and FB will have an added charge and some ISPs will drop them?

Sign me up for this reality.

I want Google and FB to go away. I want to hurt them in any conceivable way.

Life was better before the internet.

Because presumably in order to sign up for their service you agreed to those terms

Until they start charging for sites you like. Then what?

Obviously Comcast is afraid to do illegal stuff, so it is as simple as making laws about data collection.

That would make sense and be the goal of a good government, though. Don't have that here.

You make it sound like there's competition in ISPs.

So Netflix can take more? What's the point of doing that without legal protection?

good fuck netflix

>Wikipedia
Even says about the 2015 ruling in that article.

>imagine a company like Comcast starting their own Netflix-style service and then slows down Netflix... they'd be allowed to do that if net neutrality is abolished.
Sounds great.

So the evil censorious monopolies like Facebook and Google will be broken up.

Or maybe people will just turn away from the internet in general, go outside, raise families, stop being so addicted to fake realities.

Why would any of us not want that to happen?

In other words Pro-NN guys would throw in with all the devilish media corporations because they want easy ways to keep brainwashing themselves.

Where do you work and how do you know this stuff?

>net neutrality = government control monopoly
all these companies are donors to political elites and that's all you have to know
And if shit hits the fan all they have to do is let everyone know they throttle and they're exempt from net neutrality

"Ton of money" I saw a list of 'greased' politicians supporting NN. I think the alleged bribers hit maybe 1 million dollars over a hundred people. So many bribes its unfathomable

You're a fucking moron.

The ISP can stop over selling their bandwidth. Or increase their overall bandwidth.

The fact is very simple, I paid for it. What i do with it is none of your fucking business. If you can't provide the service then don't pretend you can you kike. Fuck the sooner we gas you cunts the better.

>It's hard to care about these big companies sometimes, but it is kinda messed up that Google can effectively use the law to prevent competition from entering the market
This is why were in this mess at all. Comcast lobbies local governments to put up road blocks to new companies laying down their own lines. That's why we have a few big ISPs instead of a lot of little ones. If there were more competition then the market would enforce nn to the amount we all like.

But because Comcast is jewing us Google has to Jew them. But the best outcome is the government gets out of the way and let's businesses compete on equal grounds.

Net Neutrality as a concept wasnt even a solid thing until 2002 you fucking mongoloid.

>tried
>tried
And were stopped

yeah it describes exactly how I described it, Net Neutrality was not made law in 1996 you moron.

ISPs want their customers to be able to buy preferential service. Like doctors and other things that require internet.

You don't seem to understand that legally there can be no distinguishing between the data. This is the issue. Netflix, by sheer force of magnitude, can take priority away from police offices and hospitals and such.

That's just stupidity. Not stupidly brave, just stupid. It doesn't hurt them, not in the grand scheme. There's still going to have billions of dollars and succeed - you're going to have slower/throttled internet speeds and have to pay more if you don't.

Cutting off your nose to spite you face is being the ultimate cuck. You could be a Canadian living in Sweden and ask some imigrants to gangbang your white wife while you watch from the corner and you still wouldn't be as much of a cuck as you are right now.

This, bid silicon valley companies are ALL pure evil CIA fronts. Anything that strips away their power is win for any freedom loving American.

because they dont want to get fucked over by ISPs like what will happen to the average internet user too

Because they are le good corporations who only care about customers well being of course =^w^=

You're basically asking why mcdonalds would be annoyed if a third party company could charge people to eat there.

It'd reduce the amount of people eating there and generally just piss everyone off, this third party company shouldn't be controlling what people eat.

Not if monitoring the nature of the data is illegal.
Which isnwhat net neutrality is.

No where important, and I do research and follow the money. I've also been watching the progress of big data and how it has become such a big money maker.
Conflict between Google and ISPs is a natural step of this process. Ever wonder why Google started, and then suddenly stopped, laying Fiber?

The 2015 FCC ruling is what made them stop. Their data was no longer under threat from the Big ISPs.

Police offices and hospitals operate with their own intranets you dipshit

>Life was better before the internet.

Yes, hospitals should be lagging because you want to watch your stupid cartoons. Makes sense.
Yep. No one is innocent in this, but favoring Google over anyone leaves an awful taste in my mouth.