First of all you need to acknowledge what nn does. It is regulation that favors the web giants. basically net neutrality everything has to be fair everything needs the same amount of data, everything needs to be able to communicate to point a to point b in the same time with the monopolies who control the internet the little guys could not keep up with the new government regulation on internet speeds which essentially supports the ISP oligopolies further. A big red flag on NN is, who supports it? Well NN is started by the Obama administration and has received support from other world leaders such as Justin Trudeau but most importantly it is backed by the enemy of the world's right wing.
Ok so he is saying all these great things... but how will this actually happen? won't it just cause the big ISP oligopolies to cuck us further? no actually. The NN further goes to support the crony capitalistic oligopolies.
>The FCC also has the power to prevent ISPs from charging websites at rates they deem to be unfair and ends "paid priority." This is bad economics, as Shapiro explained: >"Netflix consumes a huge amount of peak traffic bandwidth. That costs ISPs money. Pornography sites consume a huge amount of bandwidth. That costs ISPs money. Were an ISP to push YouPorn to pay fees for its higher bandwidth, consumers of the ISP who did not use YouPorn would be the beneficiaries — they wouldn’t be subsidizing YouPorn. As Alexandra Petri of Washington Post writes, “To use one of those dreaded analogies, if you are constantly driving huge trucks, full of big deliveries of pornography, along a road, why shouldn’t you have to pay more for the road’s upkeep?”
Jaxson Myers
>Meanwhile, other ISPs could calculate that they want to absorb the costs of YouPorn in order to carry YouPorn, since YouPorn could refuse to pay the fees to the first ISP. That would be an advantage for the second ISP. In other words, market choices take place, and those can provide options to consumers. Net neutrality would ban such deals." >ISPs are also prevented from engaging in what's known as "paid priority," where they pay to have certain bits sent to computer screens at a faster rater than others, under net neutrality regulations. This adversely harms smaller ISPs, which rely on paid priority since they don't have as much resources as bigger ISPs. >This ends up being a lose-lose for consumers, who will be forced to choose between higher costs or slower Internet speeds. >The better way to ensure net neutrality is to breathe more capitalism into the ISP market rather than government control. Tuttle explains how municipal governments are responsible for creating ISP monopolies: >"Finally, municipal governments should look for ways to encourage, rather than discourage, broadband investment. Local governments and their public utilities are notorious for charging broadband companies exorbitant prices for access to publicly owned “rights of way,” without which they cannot erect the infrastructure necessary for Internet service. These municipal monopolies are among the chief reasons that many places have little or no competition among ISPs. But it doesn’t have to be this way. Kansas City, Austin, and Provo all hammered out favorable agreements with Google Fiber, the Internet giant’s ultra-high-speed broadband project, and several other cities have followed suit. Kansas City officials partially credit the arrangement for the city’s ascendancy as a tech hub. Meanwhile, other ISPs have increased their offerings to compete: Verizon and AT&T both recently announced plans to offer higher-speed Internet hookups for customers in select areas."
If you are for net neutrality you simply dont understand how network traffic operates.
Alexander Torres
Good paid meme shill. Comast owns Buzzfeed. Kys before I do
Evan Young
Shill tip: add jews to your memes to make Sup Forums move in your direction.
Alexander Sullivan
If you actually believe this you might be retarded.
What will actually happen:
>Time to post on Sup Forums >"The website 'Sup Forums.org' is no longer available on Comcast internet service, if youre interested in social media, you may want to check out Reddit.com, available as part of our 5 dollar "social media bundle". Call 1-888-Get-Fucked for more details >REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEETHOSE FUCKING KIKES
Parker Hill
really makes one think
Jack Anderson
one shill has been added to your account
Ryan Diaz
Pretty simple. Soros wants to win the liberals over even more so after his recent shaky public identity.
Jordan Parker
...
Tyler Rogers
Or with less regulation on internet speeds and the ability for practices like paid priority, a small ISP may be backed by investors in areas with only one ISP to choose from and you'll be able to switch to another provider and Comcast will have to change its policy. Wow competition in the market works really??
Ayden Foster
>lets give comcast monopoly power over what websites you access! You don't have to pay more for water per liter if you drink it than if you water garden with it or if you take a bath with it. Why would you allow comcast to charge you more per bandwidth based on how YOU want to use it? People and companies are already charged by volume of bandwidth, sorry to break it to you shills. What anti-NN faggots want is to be able to "tax" politically inconveinent ideas, information, and services by charging you a ridiculous amount to access them. Effectively censoring the internet for all but the richest people who can afford a $500 / month all access package. They will strike deals with Netflix and Hulu, and other Jew Media companies. They are trying to re-instate the monopoly control of media the jews had in the 90's and prior.
Don't fall for these faggots co-opting our memes to try and sway you into fucking yourself over.
Kevin Rogers
If you are against network neutrality, you dont understand how the internet operates. Your ISP is supposed to be providing you access to the internet, not access to the parts that dont compete with their business or the parts theyre ok with you seeing.
But yeah sure, give control of the internet over to the 5 media conglomerates that own literally every other piece of mainstream media in america. Good choice. You will enjoy it when everytime you try to visit a non-approved site it redirects you back to cnn.com or huffingtonpost.com
Your ISP wants to kill network neutrality so they can charge content providers to deliver their content to you, and you to pay extra to receive it. Content providers who have already paid their ISP, and you who have ostensibly already paid your ISP.
If you got a delivery from amazon and your mailman demanded you pay him 20 dollars or hes not handing you the package, AFTER amazon has paid them to deliver it and AFTER you have paid amazon to have it sent, you'd be pissed. Its extortion. Its the same thing here. If you dont understand that, you arent smart enough to be having this conversation.
Ryan Sullivan
you mean yours?
Nolan Gutierrez
I support NN because ISPs are the bigger Jews in this case.
Nathaniel Reed
Shill OP will post shill threads.
You're blatantly lying right now and we can all see it.
Ryan Stewart
Some people think that Sup Forums is actually against Net neutrality, but is it actually the case?
Then why are the repealing censorship protections too shill nigger?
But don't worry guys, Satan totally supports repealing NN for le baased pajeet. See?
Nolan Lopez
Comcast and Verizon Jews love that guy
Austin Harris
Listen to this user for he knows what is going on.
Christian Green
you guys know this is a group of hired shitposters right? You can tell because their memes are soulless forgeries.
Zachary Evans
>a small ISP may be backed by investors in areas with only one ISP Except removing Net Neutrality will not in any way make it easier to create a new ISP. Also, Fucking Google itself failed to launch a new ISP. A smaller start up business has zero chance to succeed where Google failed.
As long as there is an ISP oligarchy, Net Neutrality IS required if you don't want small website being clogged down because they can not pay as much as Google.
Jordan Hill
NN protects this site from Jews shutting it down fool.
Alexander Jones
i’m so glad my OC took off. people need to see through the commie astroturf front page of reddit today B T W
Liam Morales
ty for that lad. You lay it out pretty well
Most people aren't dumb enough to be fooled by these anti NN shills.
That's all well and good but that picture scream the_donald so no thanks.
Lucas Reyes
How damaged does your brain have to be to believe this shit?
Youre literally shilling for megacorps right now.
No one is going to invest billions of dollars for dig permits. The only reason the big ISP's even exist today is given hundreds of billions of dollars for their infrastructure by the federal government. There is no "competition" when youre talking about 1/3 the fucking tax revenue of the entire united states, nobody has that kind of money to put up.
Even google couldnt afford to keep doing it. If google cant find anyone to invest in this shit when they have so much dark fiber already crisscrossing the country they can tap into and save those costs, who the fuck is going to pay for these new networks??
Julian Harris
this.
Sad to see how many of us will immediately fold to the globalists as soon as the issue effects us directly. Stand up to the soy boy reddit shills brothers.
Dominic Stewart
Yes, but the jews want NN so it must be bad. Don't be fooled. Jews want NN. It's bad.
Kayden Kelly
oh i so sleepy lets all go to sleep
Chase Foster
>reddit spacing
In the areas where local government actually supported Google Fiber it did really well. Kansas City, Austin, and Provo. Oligopoly lobbying is also a big cause of the issue and the current net neutrality law is a big government solution to a big government problem.
Jose Martinez
This is the real redpill: NOTHING WILL HAPPEN
Elijah White
you do realize you're pretty much saying "Oh yes plees suh take control of the last refuge not controlled by shills. Take away out ability to elect a candidate like trump ever again."
How are you all so unironically stupid to support digging your own graves?
Logan Lewis
easy for you to say mobnigger
Evan Ramirez
Anyone can just create a mobile network and off broadband speeds. Ohh wait, the FCC regulates that and blocks out small transmitters. Looks like the monopoly is government created, and you want the government to regulate the internet because of a promblem they made.
Evan Lopez
why don’t you explain to us what happens when an anti-conservative government is elected you stupid fucking kike
Justin Allen
Bump NN is commy shit and all supporters are shills idiots and plebbitards I can't wait for them to get BTFO
Levi Cruz
say goodbye to 4 chan say goodbye to any non main stream media unless you want to pay an extra 50 a month and wait 10 minutes just to see a site
lol that's the joke of it. that's the big joke. The same people who want to repeal are the same people who would suffer the most.
Either way I win. Sup Forums dies, all media is control by a few corporations, trump loses all traction or it stays in place, still freedom of information on the net
either way, I win.
Carson Collins
>Readable spacing
It did so well they stopped rolling it out.
The lobbying will definitely stop once they have even more money they extort out of people they have no business relationship with.
You pay your ISP to carry the traffic you request. That should be the end of the transaction. Its like the government setting up a toll booth in front of your business and charging people to cross the sidewalk to come in. "You got too much foot traffic here and we're spending too much on the sidewalks your property taxes already paid for, so we're going to toll everyone coming in or out. Its only fair!"
Network neutrality is not a "big government" solution, where ever you heard that, its a fucking lie. All it does is class an ISP as a common carrier, the same as the phone companies have been for almost 100 years, and says they have to service any requests you make and not manipulate the traffic theyre routing. Thats it. The bare minimum of their responsibility to you as a customer is now forced on them because they couldnt be trusted to fulfill their obligations. What crazy over regulation.
John Phillips
>shilling for NN >admitting to being a libtard
Colton Kelly
Sometimes the enemy of my enemy isn’t my friend. This is really a battle between different sections of capitalists.
The fact that ISPs form a cartel is a separate issue that getting rid of NN won’t fix.
Charles Nguyen
>>reddit spacing there is no such thing, it's jsut a new meme some butthurt anons made up when people disgreeed with him.
Bentley Flores
The only people that would suffer are faggots who spend all day streaming jewtube or netdicks. Those two services utilize 50% of ISPs bandwidth capability despite only 5-10% of their users utilizing those platforms regularly. Traffic to Sup Forums would use less than .01% of their bandwidth capability and thus cost them nothing to offer, yet I am sure more than .01% of their users visit Sup Forums. So it wouldn’t benefit them to block Sup Forums you retard.
Mason Foster
>pic what level of false flagging is that?
Jack Lee
So let me try to get this straight: what you (or rather, your sources) are saying is that because Net Neutrality requires all traffic to be treated equally, it places financial burden on the consumer rather than high-traffic sites like Netflix since they don't have to deal with the consequences their massive bandwidth usage has? While that sounds nice, I don't think that will necessarily result in more savings for the consumer. It also doesn't seem like it would result in the cable subscription internet that people constantly post as undeniable fact, just by virtue of the fact that consumers would be fucking pissed about the rug being yanked out from under them.
Information on this issue is especially fucking grueling to dredge up because it feels like no matter what direction I'm going in here, I'm getting jewed by someone with an agenda.
Jacob Bailey
The kikes control cable companies and ISPs.
Joseph Cruz
>Comcast and Verizon are on our side
Lucas Ross
OP is a ISP shill. Report and ignore.
Owen Baker
To add onto this, why the fuck is it the only people making arguments with any sort of fucking depth are anti-NN? Can you fuckers even make an argument that isn't just blatant fearmongering? If anti-NN is a jewish trick, then why the fuck does it consistently seem like the most logical side?
Present some fucking arguments, it's not like you don't have the resources.
Blake Jackson
It's like a cinema/theater. You pay for the film. But not only does the Jew want you to sit through 25 mins of trailers and commercials, they also want you to pay for overpriced popcorn and drinks, then sell you "upgraded" seating too.
James Foster
Quit fucking yammering and post some memes God damn it.
Brody Allen
Sad day when a Canadian knows more about the the system then that guy does.
Bentley Butler
What are the anti-NN logical arguments? I've seen huge lists of times ISPs tried to fuck over consumers and were stopped by regulation and explanations of how NN did not come into existence in 2015 but rather was a reaffirming of existing regulations. All I've heard from anti-NN is "well if Soros is for it it must be bad" and "uh did you just pass 4th grade (it's 4th grade every time btw) civics class xd?
Bentley Anderson
If you think this is about their costs youre a fucking moron. Its about giving them the back the ability to choose what traffic to deliver, and what not to. They dont want you using any streaming service, they want you paying them for their TV service. They dont want you visiting alternative news sites, they want you visiting cnn, huffingtonpost, msnbc, all the other sites they own. They dont want you visiting Sup Forums, they want you visiting reddit because they own the parent company of the parent company of reddit. They dont want you tethering your phone for free, they want you to pay the 50 dollar a month tethering fee.
Bandwidth at the level ISPs use is fucking hundredths of a cent. If you use 4 terabytes of downstream a month it costs your isp AT MOST 40 cents extra to service your contract. This isnt a "our users are getting too expensive" situation, this is "How can we jew out as much money as we can from people who wont use our services, and companies who provide competing services, while making our own services more attractive?" situation.
If you dont understand that, youre a fucking idiot. Take 10 seconds and look up all the properties owned by Comcast, Verizon, Time Warner, Deutche Telekom, or who owns them. I'll give you a head start and tell you that every single mainstream media outlet is included.
If youre anti-net neutrality, youre shilling for CNN to win the infowars, and youre a fucking dumb cunt.
Xavier Bailey
They can already throttle people who use too much bandwidth. The reason they're mad about Netflix is because it cuts into their own overpriced cable TV subscriptions. That's why they want to throttle traffic based on the website.
Brody Smith
You are an absolute fucking retard. They wont block Sup Forums because it is so fucking easy to circumvent such a block. What is the gain in that vs the effort they put in? For the love of god work that scenario out for me.
Nicholas Jackson
So OP arguments are
>I dont like NN because Obama
Wow what a brave stance and intelligent arguments
Brandon Edwards
Each and every time ISP's tried to fuck over consumers they were had in court, so the legal system prior to NN was sufficient.
Jaxson Thomas
The prior system is dissolved, they successfully sued to not be under it anymore that's the whole reason NN was made.
Logan Garcia
The 2015 OIO you call "Net Neutrality" brings the internet under Title II of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which gives the FCC full authority to regulate the internet like they do with TV. If you want an actual free and open internet, this is not the way to go.
Hudson Sanders
With Net Neutrality, the FCC is in charge of dealing with ISPs because they're classified as Title II, without Net Neutrality the FTC is in their stead. The FCC is a pile of shit, the FTC isn't.
Dylan Torres
>reddit spacing
Zachary King
that is because it isn't the FCC's job to regulate the internet to such a degree, it is the FTC's job. This already has been announced as the step moving forward once the 2015 OIO is repealed.
Andrew Evans
I can't believe people fall for this non-argument fear morgering
Josiah Cook
I'm sure it is possible to set a legal standard again if they wanted, though. I dont believe that there are laws that are inactive because of prior succesful lawsuits. That just means your legal system is fucked, which is an even bigger problem and you should focus on that desu.
Dylan Smith
They actually won every case and said "If you want to regulate us as common carriers, make us common carriers", so the FCC did. Now they are crying that they arent common carriers when theres absolutely no fucking difference between a phone line and an internet line.
Parker James
I think it's better for us if the internet is considered a tool of communication. I'm never going to support the legalization of throttling and selective website access, even if it's not abused I don't like it on principle.
Cooper Reyes
I'll ask again, whats the point of these threads? The people who are for NN are already doing all the calling in and shit, the people who against it aren't, what do these threads accomplish?
Dylan Nguyen
Just because you are too stupid to see the examples from the past, doesnt mean they dont exist.
Your country has no fucking money anyway so what are you worried about. You cant pay your ISP in shiny rocks.
Oliver Ortiz
>To add onto this, why the fuck is it the only people making arguments with any sort of fucking depth are anti-NN? Pro NN also provide in depth arguments.
Kayden Adams
More non-arguments and ad hominems. There is no reason to even debate you to expose you as a fraud, you do it for me.
John Turner
then you support the TV-ization of the internet.
Instead you should support measures to allow the FTC to regulate against throttling. There are some things they can do but they don't have quite code to fully implement yet.
Christian Miller
>I can't believe people fall for this non-argument fear morgering There was plenty of valid argument, and calling you out for pretending they don't exist ins't ad hominem.
Jose Wood
Of course there are cases when throttling web services are completely justified.
Jace Johnson
no they don't, they spout the canned fear mongering rhetoric every thread. I would not be surprised if they were copy pasting them from Reddit posts.
Jacob Hernandez
WHATS GOOD FOR (((COMCAST))) WILL NOT BE GOOD FOR YOU
Grayson Foster
Isn't "Net Neutrality" a new thing?
Didn't it not exist until the Obama administration?
>too stupid >Your country has no fucking money anyway so what are you worried about. You cant pay your ISP in shiny rocks >not ad hominems
Learn what an argument is, his post is riddled with assumptions. It's just a big red herring.
>LOL IF YOU LET BAKERS BAKE YOUR BREAD WITHOUT GOVERMENT REGULATIONS, THEY WILL ADD SAND TO YOUR BREAD AND CHARGE YOU MORE FOR IT
Brandon Green
Someone is getting paid well
Aiden Brooks
I'm fuzzy on the exact details but NN existed before Obama administration in the form of the Telecommunications act. Comcast sued to not be regulated by it and NN was made in response. If NN is repealed we aren't going back to the same system because it's already been established they aren't under the jurisdiction of the Telecommunications act.
David Price
Yes and they all went to court for it, what would stop them from going to court again? This all happened before Wheeler btw, so why is it wrong to not have the free market regulated by the goverment just like before Wheeler?
Charles King
> and then the shill said repeal
Angel Lopez
Net (((Neutrality))) Equal (((Rights)) Social (((Justice)) (((Affordable)) Healthcare ... ...
Will u noobs ever learn and wake the fuck up ?!?
Oliver Adams
How is the middle option bad again?
Cameron Nguyen
The fee source does a good job of explaining how it will also allow more competition in the industry as well.
Brody Ramirez
>>Your country has no fucking money anyway so what are you worried about. You cant pay your ISP in shiny rocks That wasn't his argument. here is a rule of thumb when arguing on Sup Forums, just because a poster insult you doesn't mean they don't also provide actual argument at the same time. Here is the actual arguments he made: > Your ISP is supposed to be providing you access to the internet, not access to the parts that dont compete with their business or the parts theyre ok with you seeing. ISP shouldn't determine at what speed you should get what you want to access to. >But yeah sure, give control of the internet over to the 5 media conglomerates that own literally every other piece of mainstream media in america. Comcast and Verizon are already powerful, no need to give them more power, even if it means the only counter-power existing is the government.
>Your ISP wants to kill network neutrality so they can charge content providers to deliver their content to you, and you to pay extra to receive it. Content providers who have already paid their ISP, and you who have ostensibly already paid your ISP. ISP want to charge twice for the same service.
Andrew Smith
>
Liam Hall
It implicitly existed since the internet was created since its the only way it can function. The internet falls apart when ISP's start trying to create their own walled gardens. Around 2005, because of abuse of their position as monopoly providers, FCC came up with guidelines specifically for ISPs that did not classify them as Common Carriers under Title 2. They tried to enforce these rules and lost in court every time, with ISPs saying "You dont have authority, we are not classified as common carriers". As a result of losing these lawsuits, the FCC in 2015 did exactly what they asked and classified them as common carriers so that they now fall under Title 2 regulations.
Title 2 of the federal communications act only says that you have to provide service to anyone who wants it, and you can charge them for your costs to provide that service such as running cable to their house and monthly fees to maintain the service, and that you have to interconnect with anybody your users want to reach, which in internet terms means you need to peer with the internet as a whole and cant create your own "internet" within your own network.
These regulations were originally implemented in the 1930s specifically to regulate phone companies, who up until that point were doing pretty much the same shit ISPs want to do today, charging you more based on who you call even if the fixed cost to them is the same, refusing to connect you to people in other phone companies networks, and refusing to provide service to customers when the "costs" to them were too great (ie, they didnt want to run wires a mile down a road and maintain those lines just to service 5 people). The FCC back then realised that a country needs a functioning telecommunications network to thrive, and allowing the telecom companies to blatantly refuse to build a real network despite hundreds of billions of tax dollars being given to them to do just that was fucking retarded.
Gabriel Campbell
So let me get this straight Upsides >Major corporations like Google, ect lose some power Downsides >ISPs get to shut down any speech they deem "offensive", Sup Forums would be a likely target Fuck off. The fact that you're shilling so hard against NN proves that you're a liar.
Cameron Foster
The phone companies ARE the ISPs they didn't just up and die. That's why they own all the lines
Liam Kelly
Keep on shilling you fucking jew.
Aiden Thompson
If network neutrality is repealed? Nothing, they could abuse their position as sole providers till the cows come home and win every lawsuit against them. But with network neutrality laws, they cant. The Title 2 regulations now applied to them explicitly tell them what they have to do. They have to provide you a connection and can charge you a reasonable amount to do so including costs to lay new wires. They have to route traffic you request. Thats it. Thats the end of their responsibilities and the language is irrefutable because its not some indecipherable tome of legal jargon, its a very specific, very straight forward regulation that says "You rent space on your data lines, dont think you are anything more than a delivery service".
If they could sue, they would do that instead of lobbying to remove the common carrier classification. They know, 100%, aboslutely, for sure they will lose if they try to argue that they are not common carriers and dont have these obligations, as they are plainly classified as that now, and by every definition of what a "common carrier" is, thats the business they are in.
Jason Morales
It also allows competition in the market. So if an ISP does shut down offensive speech, which they won't because it is not profitable, people would switch to a new ISP who promotes free speech. That's how capitalism works, if you want to BTFO these oligopolies you go anti-nn.
