Net Neutrality

I cannot believe that pol is on favor of paying for a literal monthly gold or platinum Sup Forums pass through an ISP just to access this shithole just to call leftists cucks for liking a free and open and unlimited internet.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=B03eByZia5I&t=9s
news.bitcoin.com/blockchain-data-reveals-someone-is-trying-to-slow-down-bitcoin-cash/
pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2458307,00.asp
twitter.com/AnonBabble

What's Net Neutrality anyways?

Sup Forums does whatever its masters choose.

Much love to Russia. I'll trade net neutrality and selling the rest of the US to the Koch brothers if I can keep my guns and block the niggers.

You can't have everything, but we can still help choose which Jew rules us.

tfw only americans with shitty Internet care about net neutrality.

We've not had NN for the entire history of the internet.

Explain to me why we need to grant government massive power to address the cable packaged boogieman that nobody's even cared to implement in all this time.

why are lolbertarians so retarded?

when the worst scum and villainy all support NN, it's clear which side we should be on

Net neutrality is pro consumer. It's literally the position the government is supposed to take to protect our rights.

You 150% deserve a bullet if you are one of those "pivatize it" libertarians

Net Neutrality, conceptually, is the status quo ever since we had the internet.

Now you may be against the recentish increased regulation by the Obama administration, which was put in place to put ISPs back in place after they started doing everything people feared they'd do when NN was abolished.

It can safely be stated that there wouldn't be a free and open internet anymore without it entirely. You can argue about the details, but the concept itself is necessary due to the fact that ISPs do not compete properly and form natural monopolies. The barrier to entry was increased largely in part due to ISP lobbying, this can take extreme forms such as in some states and counties where it is illegal to provide a competing service or cable infrastructure. Other forms include lengthy waiting periods during which the existing ISP just offer a lucrative deal with a long contract period, so by the time the competitor is allowed (legally) to enter the marked, there is no customers left who don't currently have years of contract on their current service and thus won't switch.

WTF I love shitting in the street now

Because it's already fucking happening on smaller scales. Comcast is already trying to throttle netflix, and is attempting to throttle bit torrent.

Fuck out of here

No it's not, it's literally making sure that anything that ISPs make are treated as fair use.

weev makes the point that stock traders want hyper-low latency on their trade applications and providers can't build a special channel for them to pay for because that's not 'neutral'.

NN is making consumers cattle so that ISPs have to give Netflix and Facebook priority access for whatever infrastructure they can squeeze out of consumers.

Now if you would argue "let's abolish those regulations and net neutrality", I do agree, this would be the best solution, however it is necessary that we FIRST remove the barriers to provide a competing service and THEN remove net neutrality. It CANNOT work the other way around.

Net Neutrality protects the average customer from predatory, anti-economic and anti-competetive tactics by ISPs that stifle all future growth and development and do not constitute a healthy market at all.

This is the reason the FCC was forced to increase regulation, it was a response to ISPs testing the legal waters with how much they can get away with. It's a response to something really bad. It's not an ideal solution, but a necessary one.

As they should. 99% of people don't bittorent, why should we socialize the costs of that?

Why should I pay more for internet access so some NEET faggot can binge Orange is the New Black all day?

Give me $20 broadband so I can shitpost for two hours a day and get on with my life.

There is zero words about bandwidth or data caps in the NN regulation.

NN isn't about that, that's just ISP propaganda. NN is about making sure your ISP can't fuck you over for using Netflix over Amazon Video.

Data caps are already a thing, bandwidth limits are a thing. The only thing NN ensures is that the CONTENT cannot be treated differently.

Wow none of that is a good argument.

"Muh taxes are theft I don't understand infrastructure"

Please kill yourself

Meaning that nobody can pay for special use. AKA the way that any new tech gets funded.

youtube.com/watch?v=B03eByZia5I&t=9s

I really don't care either way.
Maybe making the internet shitty is a good thing because so many people are becoming addicted to it.

If you listen to weev for any points you definitely don't get to have an opinion on this

Address his arguments please. Otherwise stop posting.

This.

Look at who's pro NN and who's against it. I'll give you goys a hint, Soros, jewgle, hookbook, jewflix, plebbit, trannyfeed, every mindless slogan chanting lefty, and their mother/grandmother is on one side....
And on the other side.... Verizon (been fighting in court with the govt over warrentless spying for years, Sup Forums approved) AT&T, Comcast (two companies that are getting leeched off of by Jewgle, Hookbook, etc.) Trump, a based poo, and Sup Forums. It's not the little guy who's getting fucked by this, it's internet giants we hate. Look at facebooks stock right after NN was buttfucked. THIS KILLS THE JEW PARASITE.

I'll try to explain it with this use case:

Say I'm a revolutionary new internet service. Something like Google or Netflix, except those already exist. I hit the market running in a time where there is massive potential. My customer base is growing.

Now, Amazon is offering a similar service, except inferior in every way. However, they have a deal with Comcast.

Comcast now throttles my new service to the point where customers cannot access it anymore and they leave, I go bankrupt.

This is the OPPOSITE of a good market infrastructure.

With NN, Comcast would not be allowed to fuck over my upstart in favor of a competitor.

sorry fag a 2 year old obama edict that never was fully implemented isn't going to have any impact on us.

I mean we all paid for Sup Forums gold accounts back then so I don't see the problem

It's either people who don't understand what it is or it's people who subscribe to the anclap package deal. Sieg heil, regulate it.

I don't respect weev as a functional human being so hard pass there family.

They've been doing traffic shaping in multiple countries for decades, you just have to find an ISP that doesn't.

Why don't you start your own ISP. It's perfectly possible in America.

>poor netflix
You get the fuck out of here, kike. Dear white people season 2 is out, why don't you leave this site and watch that instead

>Big companies like Amazon and Google who partner with Comcast are backing net neutrality to protect the little guy so they can cut into their own profits

Nigger are you retarded?

Netflix vs Amazon is the wrong comparison.

Let's say I made a cached video service. You pay less because your videos download in the background and you watch them locally when they're ready.

Cox says
>"whoa, Cachevid is great for our network, it's not dependent on low latency like Netflix is, we hope more consumers use that, let's optimize our network for this kind of video serving"

Government officials step in and say
>"hey, we have a complaint from Netflix that you're not treating their data fairly, you need to ensure that their data served smoothly just as Cachevid's is."

>"B-but, our midwestern backbone will take billions in upgrades and will double the cost for our Cox broadband customers, we're more than happy to offer a special Netflix packa--"

>"comply or face a seven figure fine"

>"o-okay"

drumpftards will jump to their death if dotard tells 'em to do it.

>An anarchist attempts to think

>Why don't you start your own ISP

Yeah dude, let me take that extra hundred million dollars I've been stashing away and go make my own ISP.

>we need X amount of finite infrastructure
>it costs Y
>should we charge the 2% of people that use most of X so that it's proportional to their use?
>lol, nah, make everyone pay, Facebook moms on $80/mo packages, lol

Parasite.

4 chan and especially pol wants to end net neutrality because that is the most obviously evil position.

>weev makes the point that stock traders want hyper-low latency on their trade applications and providers can't build a special channel for them to pay for because that's not 'neutral'.
Except they can.

Net neutrality keeps them from ONLY offering that service to them. They'd have to be willing to do that shit for anyone willing to pay the initial cost.

Fuck's sake ISPs offer different bandwidth at different rates all over the place.

...You are aware how the internet works, right? It's not like fucking water where physical water gets taken from somewhere and pumped through a pipe. That's just.... Not how digital technology works.

Is this a troll or are Amerimutts actually this stupid?

>100s of millions of dollars
No.

I barely garnered the motivation to look up this non-issue. The real question is which corrupt entity made all the redditors into zombies for another day and another issue.

That's how the market works right now, why do you need the government to hold people's hands then?

It will probably prevent all the newfags from flooding and shitting up the boards.

But at the same time might increase paid shills to push ideas.

Giving ISPs the ability to discriminate online services is too dangerous. Any, and I mean any positive repercussions are far outweighed by the likely negative impact.
>"Hey company losing the entirety of what brought you to power (cable), we're going to give you the ability to destroy your competition without a second thought. Don't do it though! K?"

They are backing NN because it would completely make them dependent on ISP goodwill, no matter how big they are.

It would basically make every Internet based company a slave to ISPs.

kek

>pol is on favor of abolishing net neutrality

it isn't. Bots might be, but Sup Forums is not...unless its for some elaborate endgame of mass riots in typical misanthropic fashion.

From my point of view neutrality niggers are evil.

More like

>Woah Cachevid is good for our network, we're gonna throttle Netflix into oblivion now until they're dead
>Btw we collected a 7 figure fee for not doing the same to Cachvid
>Pay us or we will bankrupt you

>That's how the market works right now, why do you need the government to hold people's hands then?
So that stock traders can't pay ISPs to refuse to provide other stock traders with hyper low latency.

Throughput, latency, electrical use, all finite resources dependent on the scale of infrastructure.

Think of it like Old Jerusalem where Muslims and Christians take up large swaths of your city and you can't utilize them ever because you're forced to share against your will.

This guy knows what's up.

>Big businesses want to rely on the goodwill of other big businesses
That sure makes a lot of sense.

If they invest in the R&D to make some insane system, why shouldn't they benefit from such great tech?

Only $5 per year for unlimited Sup Forums. Awesome! I can stop subsidizing all the netflix normies.

>be casual contract worker at ISP tech support
>play around on system during calls yawn
>search traffic to Sup Forums
>match IP to post too easy
>name and address lel this guy what a fag

>leaving money on the table
That's not how companies work, silly.

Wtf I love net neutrality now! If based Soros puts money into something, you just know it's good for goyim. Based ShareBlue is pro Net Neutrality too! I can't stand these bots that aren't real fellow 4 channers that say NN is bad! They're evil!

It would make them dependent if NN is removed.

Sorry I was not clear.

The Internet is like roads, as soon as people can decide you're not allowed to drive on them with Sedans, you're gonna have issues.

NN makes sure the customer has more choices, NN forces more competition between ISPs, NN encourages more market development on Internet based companies.

It's wholly good for the Internet, as a concept. Debate the individual implementation, but if you disagree with the concept itself, you simply don't understand what it does, or you're paid to represent your position.

Netflix and youtube is already cached inside every major ISP.

>based shareblue
>inb4 phonefag, at work

Giving the government the ability to discriminate is much more dangerous. I can get a different ISP, but moving to a different country is much more difficult.

You can't have it both ways, either ISPs profit from Netflix or they don't.

Luckily NN gives zero power to the government. The gov cannot discriminate either under NN.

Best believe it son

And we pay out the ass for them to do so.

$70/mo for shitty DSL, man. I just want less regulation so I can get a pay-for-what-you-use package at a good price.

>If they invest in the R&D to make some insane system, why shouldn't they benefit from such great tech?
For the same reason we don't let people build damns even if they own the land on both sides of the river. It doesn't matter how god damn much they paid for that land. Literally everyone needs the internet nowadays and ISPs tend to have regional monopolies. Letting private individuals decide who gets access at what rates with backdoor dealings with ISPs is a horrible fucking idea, as is giving ISPs the power to fuck over whoever the fuck they want regardless of ability and willingness to pay.

You get a 70/month package because large parts of the US have zero ISP competition and you're forced down a single provider, effectively a monopoly.

That's not what it does.
It prevents ISPs from doing so. Nothing more.

To give the government the ability to do so would require another bill entirely.
In most places, you can't just switch ISPs. For instance, I have at&t, along with a no-name ISP hosted from my apartment complex, which I'm pretty sure is just at&t under a different name so they can cut special deals and monopolize my complex.

Can't they just charge for data usage so people that use more pay more and nobody subsidizes anybody else? That is what all our plans are in Australia.

Now ask yourself why that is.

Because ISPs successfully lobbied to make it almost impossible to enter the market.

See:

$5/month?

Are you able to buy single channels on cable tv?

No.

Because constructing an ISP network has massive front end costs and once large companies got involved they were able to choke out and buy out competition over the last few decades until ownership was congregated in a select few hands for most cable services?

Now ask yourself how repealing NN is going to make laying down cable cheaper.

Let me explain something to you.The only expensive part about connecting high speed internet to a house is laying the physical cable. After thats happened, theres essentially no additional cost involved in utilizing that cable's maximum potential. Once the cable is hooked up, If the cable to your house can handle 100mbp/s the ISP saves essentially nothing by giving you 30 instead. Data speed plans are literally just ISPs milking goy consumers for their shekels.

How fucking stupid are you that you didn't know this?

Its my startup ISP. It will be called ispol. I will only buy enough equipment to serve pol to users. $5 per year.

I actually want the internet to die altogether. Sup Forums is fun and all but seriously not necessary in life.

Arm yourself. When the government comes to oppress you, kill as many of them as you can before they kill you.

You dont need the internet to live by this principle

As long as the government decides what is fair treatment and what is not, they'll always have power to abuse.

>Excuse me, ISP, we know you just converted much of your assets into cryptocurrencies, but if you don't allow this interference network traffic that's effectively bogging down said cryptocurrencies, we're going to fine you

news.bitcoin.com/blockchain-data-reveals-someone-is-trying-to-slow-down-bitcoin-cash/

Good luck without NN, as soon as your users connect to competitor networks, they'll get throttled to the point of unusablility.

So now you have to literally recreate the entire cable network to prevent this. Enjoy your 10b startup cost.

So the barrier to entry is high.

So the direction we should head in is more red tape, not less?

>I actually want the internet to die altogether

me too, and I am a software engineer.

>free and open and unlimited internet

The same way they like free and open unlimited healthcare?
Free and open and unlimited housing?
Free and open and unlimited food?
Free and open and unlimited everything?

Net neutrality is socialism and anyone defending it as retard who wants the government to tell companies what they can charge for
And then complain that internet sucks

Lol me too

see
First the red tape needs to go, THEN remove NN.

Not the other way around. We cannot afford to give the ISPs more power in a time when we need to remove regulations THEY wanted in the first place.

Pity that isn't covered under net neutrality either.

pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2458307,00.asp

It is, NN essentually dictates you cannot discriminate traffic.

NN allows an upstart ISP to reuse competor networks without them destroying you.

Why would adding more red tape make things cheaper?

I'd love to set up a high powered wifi service in my neighborhood, get a fiber connection, a few thousand dollars in gateway equipment and plant a few repeaters around the neighborhood. Sell bandwidth for something like $5/mo I can't do that because the FCC are a bunch of joykills.

>Kike companies like EA getting BTFO by EU consumer watch dogs
>Burgers getting kicked off the internet
2018 is going to be a great year, boys.

...

>So the direction we should head in is more red tape, not less?
This particular red tape has fuck all to do with the barrier to entry.

You want to pull down red tape that would actually fucking effect that, I'd be first in fucking line to help you, but that isn't NN.

But you have to do a deal between one ISP and another ISP or t1 provider. You can't just send millions of GB of data over someone elses network for free. So even if they can't throttle it, they can charge you whatever they want.

I want tjem to throttle Kikeflix tho

>it’s not a problem if it doesn’t affect me
Ultimate beta male

Net Neutrality movement has been around the internet for ages

Some of the left is against NN too

>concern trolling allegations

You're just as horrible as those SJW fucktards at rationalwiki.

>Comcast is already trying to throttle netflix
And we should stop them ?
Comcast could be sending a robot army set Netflix's office on fire, I would applaud.

Also not how it works.
The government doesn't mandate what can or cannot prioritized. Simply that all data be treated equally.

As for the cryptocurrency bit, it just seems like a DDoS. I don't see how it's relevant.

Check out the shill replies

>Why would adding more red tape make things cheaper?
There are laws that prevent price gouging on shit like water in a crisis.

nobody said we were smart

Yes you have to strike a deal. Usually this involves the competitor also using your network.

neck yourself underage faggot