Why does this need to go away or is this a grave mistake? I’m incredibly conflicted atm please give me some knowledge
Redpill me on fucking net neutrality
Henry Smith
Other urls found in this thread:
cnet.co
eff.org
for.tn
archive.is
eff.org
freepress.net
fcc.gov
nyti.ms
unvis.it
unvis.it
act.eff.org
en.wikipedia.org
npr.org
youtu.be
dailycaller.com
forbes.com
twitter.com
Levi Butler
Net neutrality says that all data must be treated the same and charged the same
Removing it means Internet service providers can charge different rates for different websites and services
Caleb Adams
this
Gabriel Cruz
>not sitting on years of free internet minutes.
Jason Wood
Kek, what up fellow 30 something old fag
Charles Kelly
>that /comfy/ image
thanks user
Samuel Roberts
Damn that doesn’t sound good. Why are all the corporations pushing for it to stay then? It seems good for the people and usually those 2 don’t mix
Camden Stewart
based
Jaxson Young
Because then Corporations can set up internet monopolies. Amazon Could pay ISPs to block Ebay or Amazon pays to block HULU, forcing people to utilize their service.
Essentially allowing companies to put up barriers around their opponents.
It'll fuck small businesses and upstart companies.
Cooper Wood
This is one of the few times where what's good for the people and what's good for (most) of the corporations are the same.
Levi Rodriguez
>redpill me on NN
Youre like 2 weeks late no one gives a fuck anymore
Wyatt Lopez
Corporations push it to stay because it immunizes ISPs from charging corporations more when those ISPs inevitably have to upgrade their infrastructure as a result of the corporations' increase in demand.
Cameron Carter
2005 - Madison River Communications: Blocked VOIP services before the FCC put a stop to it.
cnet.co
2007 - Comcast: Caught forging packets to interfere with user traffic
eff.org
2007-2009 - AT&T: Blocked Skype and other VOIP services which competed with their cellphone plans
for.tn
2011 - MetroPCS: Tried to block all streaming except YouTube
archive.is
2011 - Multiple ISPs: Caught hijacking search traffic to increase affiliate revenue
eff.org
2011-2013, AT&T, Sprint, and Verizon: Blocked access to Google Wallet because it competed with their bullshit
freepress.net
2012 - Verizon: Demanded Google block tethering apps on Android because it let owners avoid their $20 tethering fee. This was despite guaranteeing they wouldn't do that as part of a winning bid on an airwaves auction.
fcc.gov
2012 - AT&T - tried to block access to FaceTime unless customers paid more money.
nyti.ms
2013 - Verizon: Literally stated that the only thing stopping them from favoring some content providers over other providers were the net neutrality rules in place.
unvis.it
2017 - Verizon: Caught throttling customer data in direct violation of FCC Net Neutrality rules
unvis.it
Take Action:
act.eff.org
Justin James
...
Xavier Hernandez
Thinly-veiled government control over media, and making anyone into a "terrorist" on a whim.
The alternative is ass-fucking capitalist monopoly forever.
However, either way, life will suck (unless a lot of mindless high-level puppets are dealt with in a short span of time, that is).
David Rivera
Title II makes it difficult for private parties, namely ISPs, to restrict the content they provide to customers over the internet. Without it, a corporation would be free to either outright ban websites that go against their interests or, more likely, charge a monthly fee to have specific problem sites accessible in their full form and at full speed.
For the first couple decades of the internet’s life, net neutrality was vaguely enforced by general communications laws that existed anyway. When the relevancy of those laws to the internet specifically came into question, it was settled with Net Neutrality laws.
However, it was Obama that helped bring these in, which I guess automatically means you are supposed to hate it and something something communism, or whatever.
Camden Robinson
net neutrality is great . i hope usa loses it so we can get amerifats crying about having to pay 300$/month for the ISP's racist\edgy sites package to be able yo get on Sup Forums.
Asher Walker
Effect on 2010 Open Internet Order
The FCC Open Internet Order 2010 established three orders on fixed and mobile operators of Internet access.
Transparency
This order was applied to both fixed and mobile operators. It requires them to publicly disclose accurate information regarding their network management practices, performance, and commercial terms of service. This order was not vacated by the court.
No blocking
This order was applied to both fixed and mobile operators. This order prevents blocking, or otherwise degrading so as to make unusable, access to lawful content, applications, services or non-harmful devices.This order was canceled by the court.
No unreasonable discrimination
This order was applied only to fixed operators. This order forbids fixed network operators from unreasonably discriminating against lawful network traffic. The FCC did not order for mobile operators because, according to the FCC, competition in the mobile networking space rendered it unnecessary. This order was vacated by the court.
-Source: en.wikipedia.org
Aaron Reed
...
Oliver Wood
You have already lost.
No more free net for you, only cable packages.
Goodbye...
Bentley Morales
>laws exist which prevent fuckery
>lets create even more new laws and regulations which benefit our lobbyists
>you are evil if you dont like the new laws and regulations
Liberals.
Jayden Wilson
>buys all the shit made where none of those laws or regulations exist
>how did we ever get to 20trillion debt???
Justin King
Net neutrality means that all data must be treated the same and charged the same, regardless of how much data a particular client uses. Good for Netflix and Google, bad for ISPs.
Title II means the FCC has the power to tell ISPs how to run their business from top to bottom. Good for the FCC, bad for ISPs.
Up to you if you want to support either.
Easton Brown
We didn't have net neutrality before 2015. The internet was better back then so I'm all in favor of it going byebye
Ayden Turner
Being poor is immoral, if you can’t afford to pay for your internet traffic you don’t deserve it
Hudson Hernandez
Net neutrality is literally price fixing.
Netflix uses 35% of the global bandwidth, and they pay as much as you do to browse Sup Forums.
Liam Gonzalez
Additionally, the costs of innovation are far higher under NN. You saw this in real-time as Google Fiber stopped in its tracks after seeing the cost of entry, and anti-competition laws. We could've all had fiber in the US by now, and we were on track to do so, but after the Title II reclassification, it became unprofitable to upgrade.
Tyler Hall
right per unit of bandwidth
to spoonfeed the brainlets who can't understand market trends
Peak bandwidth usage is set to grow and grow as more people watch their media over the internet. Services and demand are also trending towards higher resolutions. For ISPs, continuing to provide the same speeds they would need to upgrade infrastructure to ensure the same services to consumers. This is regardless of whether you use those streaming services. NN effectively prevents ISPs from designing packages that could distribute the costs to the bandwidth hogs. For some reason, shills are trying to make the case that ISPs will start censoring 4chins or speech orwhatever when that makes no economic sense for ISPs.
Jacob Carter
Grayson Moore
NN Redpill = paid Spectrum shill.
It's not that fucking complicated.
Jack Peterson
It isn’t an entirely good thing to keep net neutrality as it is. The idea is good, but it gives the fcc a lot more power.
Easton Hall
One other thing: Facebook and Twitter have been violating NN for years now
Austin Ward
>npr
really
Daniel Green
That's not how net neutrality works m8. Governments (especially the US) have exploited the fact that you willingly give your data to private companies to violate the fourth and first amendment.
Liam Parker
It's a good article as is this
dailycaller.com
James Long
And this is why FCC needs to close their doors.
Nathan Reyes
Net neutrality is BAD
1: Isps will not charge more for different sites because the people won't allow it and they will make less money if they do.
Imagine if all the isps like Comcast, Verison, At&t, etc., decide to charge different prices for different sites. They will make a good amount of money compared to what they make now.
Let's say verison decides to revert back to original pricing (or a slight increase of the initial pricing without the 'different prices for different websites' policy).
After verison does this EVERYONE will want verison because they are more reasonable than the other isps.
Soon after Verison makes this change, the other isps will follow suit because no one will be using them.
TLDR: One isp like Verison will swoop in and realize they can have the whole market cornered if they don't charge more.
Because who wants to pay more, for less, right?
Christian Howard
sorry meant Verizon
David Lewis
anyone against net neutrality is a fucking retard
I bet you think ISP's logging your traffic is okay as well.
enjoy your capped trash internet, if you think the extra revenue is going into improved infrastructure you're deluded.
meanwhile in Sweden we have constant improvement and expansion of the fiber network with net neutrality and no traffic logging.
lalalacuck say whatever you want amerifats, if it's anything we do right it's the internet.
Tyler Fisher
tru
Aaron Ortiz
If you ever needed proof NN is bad here it is
Sweden thinks it's good
Josiah Evans
it's time to empty your asshole from all the cheezeburgers you've been storing in there considering the bullshit you're spewing.
we are second for fastest average internet speeds in the world. 100/100 fibernetwork is standard in both rural and cities areas, it costs $25 monthly with no restrictions, or data logging. data caps don't even exist
now tell me how your cheddar cheese slow internet with $30 youtube DLC package will beat ours. tell me you fat fucking american faggot
Brandon Long
2: Net neutrality is instituted by the government and the government will propagandize the internet.
Ok, this has happened before and it will happen again if net neutrality is not repealed soon.
In the 1920s when the radio (and later Tv) were first seeing popularity, the government thought it would be a good idea not to let stations and networks state their politically related (possibly biased) opinions on public radio or tv. They did this so that neither the left nor the right could use tv or radio as "propaganda" for their campaign.
Well, this meant that news networks and stations were basically the same thing, and eventually, the government themselves used these tools to propagandize themselves.
This same thing will happen to the internet if net neutrality continues, and that is why it needs to be abolished.
also this
Luke Powell
Right now it's basically about Netflix not having to pay extra for hogging most of the bandwith. This was more of an issue for them back then but it isn't now - they are way too rich to even care about fees.
People are freaking out because they are afraid that sets a precedent where ISPs will aggressively demand fee payments from competitors etc.
The gritty truth of the matter is quite messy:
forbes.com