If you want consumer protections against government backed oligopolies you're a communist!

>if you want consumer protections against government backed oligopolies you're a communist!

Other urls found in this thread:

corporate.comcast.com/comcast-voices/fcc-to-vote-to-restore-internet-freedom-and-innovation
youtube.com/redirect?v=nqJDW_s93rc&redir_token=cKiFM6HAuFPzEjYF7TvXT9pi-8t8MTUxMzM3NTkyMkAxNTEzMjg5NTIy&event=video_description&q=https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10726214500114/2016-07-26-complaint.pdf
freepress.net/blog/2017/04/25/net-neutrality-violations-brief-history
dailydot.com/layer8/net-neutrality-violations-history/
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

All of you idiots claiming NN will be the end of Sup Forums are stupid. Nothing is going to change.

corporate.comcast.com/comcast-voices/fcc-to-vote-to-restore-internet-freedom-and-innovation

Look

>Will Comcast broadband customers still be able to visit any lawful site they want to? Yes.
>Will Comcast block or throttle access to Internet sites? No.
>Is Comcast creating Internet fast lanes? No, we’ve said consistently we’ve not entered into paid prioritization agreements and have no plans to do so.

Look, Comcast themselves says that they're not going to throttle or blacklist any sites.

It's a big nothingburger and these pro-NN cucks are literally shilling for Google and Netflix to be able to bandwidth hog all they like. Good riddance, liberals absolutely triggered that there's no more communistic control of the internet.

Hahaha, a corporation would NEVER lie, r-right guys?

>calling others shills while shilling on behalf of ISPs

He's not shilling, he's telling the Chicken Littles to quit being reactionary retards.

It's over shareblue, you lost

Free markets and deregulation win against socialism

NDAA 2017 section 1287. you = btfo

then go to another provider gaylord. free market will take care of it self if there is enough demand

Communists want a stateless society, so you're more of a socialist.
Dumb statecuck.

The lolbergs and newfaggots are going full throttle on this shit.

This, the repeal ensures healthy competition among ISPs, only socialist cucks would hate that

I find most communists don't actually care about the stateless part

What part of 'government backed oligopolies' don't you understand you crony cuck? Up to 30% of all Americans only have one ISP in their region.

look up the definition of reactionary then kill yourself you literal retard

Don't you snownigs have like one ISP?

Let me guess, you go through each and every single spam advert in your inbox because it is oh-so convincing AND it is a bearing fruit of free market?

>NDAA 2017 section 1287
Interdesting. Soros jailed soon?

>SEC. 1287. GLOBAL ENGAGEMENT CENTER. (a) ESTABLISHMENT.— (1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of State, in coordination with the Secretary of Defense and the heads of other relevant Federal departments and agencies, shall establish within the Department of State a Global Engagement Center (in this section referred to as the ‘‘Center’’). (2) PURPOSE.—The purpose of the Center shall be to lead, synchronize, and coordinate efforts of the Federal Government to recognize, understand, expose, and counter foreign state and non-state propaganda and disinformation efforts aimed at undermining United States national security interests. (b) FUNCTIONS.—The Center shall carry out the following functions: (1) Integrate interagency and international efforts to track and evaluate counterfactual narratives abroad that threaten the national security interests of the United States and United States allies and partner nations. (2) Analyze relevant information, data, analysis, and analytics from United States Government agencies, United States allies and partner nations, think tanks, academic institutions, civil society groups, and other nongovernmental organizations. (3) As needed, support the development and dissemination of fact-based narratives and analysis to counter propaganda and disinformation directed at the United States and United States allies and partner nations. (4) Identify current and emerging trends in foreign propaganda and disinformation...

Get that also.
That might be why people think communism means socialism on steroids or something.

angry redd*t

-Current NN rules only recently passed under Obama Admin.
-Amazingly internet still existed before then and was just fine.
-Pro NN Claim ISP's will censor and charge more for content.
-While same Big tech and Hollywood companies freeload off ISP's and censor conservatives.
-Proceed to whip up faggot hysteria on plebbit because they will have to pay more shekels
-Useful idiots do masters bidding and try to claim it will cost money to use Sup Forums like retards.
-Meanwhile only people who will really pay more are SJW's at Netflix and faggot kikes like Bezos who should be.

I have seldom seen anyone so freely submerging oneself in a cesspool just because it gained a flow.
History doesn't end on Trump, so Amerifats will get to experience the full scope of his legacy rather than merely those cherrypicked, sugarcoated slogans that have been sprinkled so liberally all over their political compass.

Wouldnt this picture make more sense of it was the limit as x approaches 0?

NN has nothing to do with preventing monopolies.

>haha NN is only a few years old, everything was fine before it
>nevermind all those times ISPs were fucking caught throttling

It wasnt fine. ISPs were throttling connections and NN was the end result of a series of legal fights to make them stop

That's not what OP said it does either.

>Amazingly internet still existed before then and was just fine.

But were the related ISP corporations as massive and controlling back then as they are now?
Even now we get to observe how gigantic processes within internet industry work themselves out, so awareness that is several years old is guaranteed to be incomplete.

>"We won't do it, but make it legal for us to do it. It won't matter if it becomes legal though, because we PROMISE we ain't do it. But just let us do it though."

Nobody has explained how letting comcast gouge netflix will make my life better

All the pro repeal people just seem to be saying nothing will happen

If nothing will happen why spend so much money lobbying to repeal? Why defend repeal if your ideal scenario was the status quo already?

Several large areas of the country only have one ISP available

Apparently it will make the stack of regulations shrink in size.
As if that was a goal in itself.

>have one shitty provider
>other provider sees a chance to get some customers

I wonder what happens next.

> 'government backed oligopolies'

Fucking google execs were in the white house literally every week under Obama. This hurts googles de facto monopoly.

Of course they were. The ISP's built the cable internet network in the US and are far less wealthy and influential than big tech today. I'm an oldfag so I can remember there was no real price difference 20 years ago when the ISP's had substantially greater market share. Nor is there any throttling unless you are using more data than you pay for which is only fair. This has nothing to do with plebbit faggots $50 internet bills and that will not change. It's about charging big tech companies that use tons of bandwith more money. They don't care about any of you or anybodys faggot blogs and the notion that the ISP's will censor or throttle based on content any worse than the Silicon Valley fags already are is absurd.

There isnt another provider because the ISP owns the infrastructure and it isnt legal to just randomly build more

If google with its unlimited money and influence can barely get google fibre rolled out to a handful of cities what makes you think others are going to swoop in and do it?

Region based monopolies are rampant in the us.
Spectrum is the only ISP in my area. If they go full Jew, it's their way or the highway.

>trusting comcast

why bandaid the problem with more government regulation when you could fix it at the source: deconstruction of state enforced monopolies

It stays:
> regulatory measures put in place
> equal internet for everyone
> single global policy of "tolerance" forced upon all users
> the slightest ping of dissenting thought will promptly have you un-personed
> used as a veil to market "personal image" products, and squelch competition
> you will be a good consumer and develop your identity using only products that you have purchased
> you are not allowed to compete with your government
It goes:
> ISPs do the obvious and fuck everyone sideways forever
> you will pay $$$ to exist on the internet
> you will be a good consumer and develop your identity using only products that you have purchased
> you are not allowed to compete with your ISP

So far, I'm not impressed with the "lefts" ability to negotiate or sway people to their cause without appealing to emotion at every turn. On the other hand, I find the human condition generally unapproachable, so I can sympathize.

Just remember this: We live in the bizarro universe. If the bill has a "nice-sounding" name, it is generally full of anti-individualist regulatory spider's webs.

How do you do that with ISPs though. There kind of naturally forming oligoplies since cities dont want multiple companies digging up the roads putting there seperate infrastructure. Also theres the problem with ISPs will just bribe the city to prevent competitors setting up shop.

either you untangle state laws and regulations that ruin competition, stop municipality contracts and start subsidizing new start ups

or government must take control of the existing infrastructure and lease it out

as long as ISPs maintain their monopoly status you're going to get shafted no matter what, though it may be slightly worse without NN

haha wow guys, isps never did anything bad guys.. never I swear it was fine!

youtube.com/redirect?v=nqJDW_s93rc&redir_token=cKiFM6HAuFPzEjYF7TvXT9pi-8t8MTUxMzM3NTkyMkAxNTEzMjg5NTIy&event=video_description&q=https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10726214500114/2016-07-26-complaint.pdf


heres a little list

MADISON RIVER: In 2005, North Carolina ISP Madison River Communications blocked the voice-over-Internet protocol (VOIP) service Vonage. Vonage filed a complaint with the FCC after receiving a slew of customer complaints. The FCC stepped in to sanction Madison River and prevent further blocking, but it lacks the authority to stop this kind of abuse today.

COMCAST: In 2005, the nation’s largest Internet provider, Comcast, began secretly blocking peer-to-peer technologies that its customers were using over its network. Users of services like BitTorrent and Gnutella were unable to connect to these services. 2007 investigations from the Associated Press, the Electronic Frontier Foundation and others confirmed that Comcast was indeed blocking or slowing file-sharing applications without disclosing this fact to its customers.

TELUS: In 2005, Canada’s second largest telecommunications company, Telus, began blocking access to a server that hosted a website supporting a labor strike against the company. Researchers at Harvard and the University of Toronto found that this action resulted in Telus blocking an additional 766 unrelated sites.

cont.

AT&T: From 2007-2009, AT&T forced Apple to block Skype and other competing VOIP phone services on the iPhone. The wireless provider wanted to prevent iPhone users from using any application that would allow them to make calls on such “over-the-top” voice services. The Google Voice app received similar treatment from carriers like AT&T when it came on the scene in 2009.

WINDSTREAM: In 2010, Windstream Communications, a DSL provider with more than 1 million customers, copped to hijacking user-search queries made using the Google toolbar within Firefox. Users who believed they had set the browser to the search engine of their choice were redirected to Windstream’s own search portal and results.

MetroPCS: In 2011, MetroPCS, at the time one of the top five U.S. wireless carriers, announced plans to block streaming video over its 4G network from all sources except YouTube. MetroPCS then threw its weight behind Verizon’s court challenge against the FCC’s Open Internet Order, hoping that rejection of the agency’s authority would allow it to continue its anti-consumer practices.

PAXFIRE: In 2011, the Electronic Frontier Foundation found several small ISPs were redirecting search queries via the vendor Paxfire. The ISPs identified in the initial Electronic Frontier Foundation report included Cavalier, Cogent, Frontier, Fuse, DirecPC, RCN and Wide Open West. Paxfire would intercept an Internet user’s search request at Bing and Yahoo and redirect it to another page. By skipping over the search service’s results, the participating ISPs would collect referral fees for delivering users to select websites.

cont.

>American education

It's lim x --> 0

AT&T, SPRINT & VERIZON: From 2011-2013, AT&T, Sprint and Verizon blocked Google Wallet, a mobile payment system that competed with a similar service called Isis, which all three companies had a stake in developing.

EUROPE: A 2012 report from the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications found that violations of Net Neutrality affect at least one in five users in Europe. The report found that blocked or slowed connections to services like VOIP, peer-to-peer technologies, gaming applications and email were commonplace.

VERIZON: In 2012, the FCC caught Verizon Wireless blocking people from using tethering applications on their phones. Verizon had asked Google to remove 11 free tethering applications from the Android marketplace. These applications allowed users to circumvent Verizon’s $20 tethering fee and turn their smartphones into Wi-Fi hotspots. By blocking those applications, Verizon violated a Net Neutrality pledge it made to the FCC as a condition of the 2008 airwaves auction.

AT&T: In 2012, AT&T announced that it would disable the FaceTime video-calling app on its customers’ iPhones unless they subscribed to a more expensive text-and-voice plan. AT&T had one goal in mind: separating customers from more of their money by blocking alternatives to AT&T’s own products.

VERIZON: During oral arguments in Verizon v. FCC, judges asked whether the phone giant would favor some preferred services, content or sites over others if the court overruled the agency’s Open Internet Order. Verizon counsel Helgi Walker had this to say: “I’m authorized to state from my client today that but for these rules we would be exploring those types of arrangements.” Walker’s admission might have gone unnoticed had she not repeated it on at least five separate occasions during arguments.

so yeah they din do nuffin

>If you don't want 5 unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats having unlimited regulatory/censorship control over broadband internet behind closed, you're a fascist!

>missing the big picture

Except for all those times they did
freepress.net/blog/2017/04/25/net-neutrality-violations-brief-history

> In 2005, the nation’s largest ISP, Comcast, began secretly blocking peer-to-peer technologies that its customers were using over its network. Users of services like BitTorrent and Gnutella were unable to connect to these services. 2007 investigations from the Associated Press, the Electronic Frontier Foundation and others confirmed that Comcast was indeed blocking or slowing file-sharing applications without disclosing this fact to its customers.

dailydot.com/layer8/net-neutrality-violations-history/

>Even though Comcast switched to using data caps as a way to manage congestion on its network, the company still found itself dinged for breaking net neutrality rules.

>Starting in 2008, Comcast imposed a 250 gigabyte monthly data cap for all of its users. A few years later, however, the ISP announced a streaming service that could run through Microsoft’s Xbox gaming system. As a way to incentivize its customers to use its own app over third-party alternatives, Comcast said any data streamed through the service wouldn’t count against a user’s data restrictions.

>Comcast argued that this move didn’t violate net neutrality rules because the content from its streaming service never actually traveled on the public Internet, which is technically true. In order to facilitate integration between its Xfinity on-demand service and Xbox consoles, Comcast struck a deal with Microsoft to allow all the data from its streaming app to travel exclusively over the telecom giant’s private network.

>The result was that Xbox-owning Comcast customers had a strong incentive to use Comcast’s streaming service over ones operated by competitors like Netflix or Amazon because doing so wouldn’t put them in danger of incurring overage charges for exceeding their data caps.

>telling ISPs to not throttle there traffic is somehow unbearable government censorship
dumb dumbposter

>thinks we're talking about ISPs not being allowed to throttle
LMAO!! In other words, you have no idea what's actually happening. Please return to Reddit before you humiliate yourself.

>if you want net neutrality you're a commie
>if you voted for an israel-loving president you're a nazi

the absolute state of the united states of america baka desu senpai

Imagine being a fucking Leaf so contrarian, you shill for American corporations.

...

except sucking off ISPs is the most quintessentially Reddit thing you can do

Imagine being a leaf so fucking retarded that you shill for 5 unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats on an agency dedicated to censorship having the sole power to regulate\censor broadband internet behind closed doors with zero recourse. Oh, and they were appointed by a literal fascist NazI kkk putin buttbudy retard who drinks 18 diet cokes a day and shovels big mac into his neck hole.

Trumptards really are the most stupid crowd

>free market will take care of it self if there is enough demand
good bless you toothpaste someone finally said this

How am I shilling for that? All I did was point out the retard shilling for corporations.

>uses "literal" for something non-literal

Stupid burger. Won't miss you from Sup Forums in the coming days.

Sucking off bureaucrats they claim to hate is the most quintessentially Reddit thing to do.
>HOW DARE THIS PAJEET NOT WANT UNLIMITED REGULATORY CONTROL OVER BROADBAND INTERNET!! REEEEE

Spotted the butthurt Pajit shill.

In other words, you have no idea what's going on. It's okay leaf, you can admit it. You would have plenty of company. In fact, there's an entire website dedicated to clueless fucks like you.

Muh internets freedum

>trusting corporations
I honestly want people like you to get the rope before the commies

>All of you idiots claiming NN will be the end of Sup Forums are stupid. Nothing is going to change.
>shilling for Google and Netflix to be able to bandwidth hog all they like.


WHICH. FUCKING. ONE. I keep seeing this constantly. You anti-NN shills are beyond unreasonable. Your only decent argument is hurr durr libtears.

>Trusting 5 unaccountable bureaucrats on an agency dedicated to censorship.
Hope all you want. You'll be the first to get the rope.

>basic consumer protections like dont fucking throttle your customers is unlimited regulatory control

Except that ISPs have been caught multiple fucking times throttling. And it was the FCC that had them fucking stop it, you unbelievable fucking goddamn spunk slurping AIDs riddled nigger faggot.

Says the Reddit poster who has not provided a single argument in favor of giving 5 unaccountable bureaucrats unlimited censorship control over broadband internet behind closed doors. Reddit is on the wrong side of every issue and this is no exception. The insane amount of power Obama handed to the FCC in 2015 was because it was supposed to be "her turn" next. Had they have known that Trump was going to win, they would have waited until the next democrat president. They've now fucked themselves because Trump appointed an FCC that doesn't the power the Hillary FCC would have had. Count your blessings.

what the fuck did the FCC censor you retard
and if your fucking concerned about censorship why the fuck are you shilling against a rule put in place after Comcast was preventing people from using torrent (ie actual fucking censorship)

That's not what we're talking about, brainlet. Jesus Christ, Keep up. We're talking about the Obama administration reclassifying broadband providers as "common carriers" in 2015, giving a handful of unaccountable bureaucrats unlimited regulatory control over broadband internet in the USA. Why can't you swear on the radio or on broadcast TV? Hint: It's because the FCC will fine you, and if you continue, they will shut you down. These are the people you want to have the power to set ANY SINGLE RULE THEY CHOOSE for broadband internet and the content therein. Trump's FCC is trying to tell you stupid faggots that it's a bad idea. They're trying to tell ou fucks that it's too much power for them to have. They're trying to tell you retards that it was for Hillary's FCC to censorship anything she wanted, and you're responding with random buzzwords you've memorized from the TV. It's pathetic.

>t.i just wanted to post a brainlet

you are a literal fucking retard who is bitching about non existent government censorship on the pooor fucking ISPs were caught doing actual fucking censhorship that you claim to care about

do you understand now just how fucking profoundly stupid you are

>can't actually argue
>just does "hurr durr" and dismisses other people's points
Good shill! Ten rupees have been deposited into your account.

Not an argument, kiddo. Keep up or find another topic to pretend care about.

He's a paid shill. He doesn't care as long as his lies get spread.

Why aren't Google and Netflix companies?

Sup Forums was better before 2015 anyway

...

You haven't made a single point. You don't even know what the topic is. You think we're debating whether or not ISPs should be allowed to throttle. That's how retarded most of you are about the topic at hand. The debate is whether or not ISPs should be classified as "common carriers", giving the FCC the same power they have over broadcast TV and radio, which is used primarily for censorship. That is what they do. In the case of the 2015 reclassification of broadband internet, they immediately used that power to implement 400 pages of prewritten regulations that you haven't read, which were going to be one of many more to come under Hillary's administration.

Educate yourself or fuck off. Too much time is spent trying to explain this to you brainlets because all of your information comes from Reddit and your favorite partisan hack on the TV.

>pulling out the molymeme when your entire point is shown to be hypocritical and retarded
lmao

Still no arguments? Color me shocked. Your job: Muster up a single argument in favor of this pajeet and 4 other unaccountable bureaucrats on an agency with a history of censorship having the sole power to regulate\censor broadband internet and the content therein behind closed doors. Explain to me why the internet should be more like broadcast TV and the radio where you get automatically fined if you say certain words.

Protip: You can't. That's why you're posting such bullshit responses. The FTC is fully capable of saving you from your hypothetical ISP boogieman.

>government protects monopolies
>government grants consumer protections against monopolies
So a government solution to a government created problem. Why not go against the government backing a monopoly so you don't have these problems in the first place?

You are a communist because your only solution to government created problems is more government. This creates a feedback loop leading to a consolidation of power to the top which becomes communism.

> Does America really have that, laws against business just blatantly lying to the public and performing malpractice?

The old image needs to die in a hole.

>still pulling the molymeme
Its a pretty simple argument actually you literal retard, my argument is your a giant cocksucking faggot who keeps using censhorship as a buzzword to complain about the non existent tyranny of the FCC because they enforced certain rules after ISPs were caught fucking censoring shit.

To summarize again: you're a giant retarded faggot who needs to go back to r/the_donald where your free to slurp all of the BASED pajeets semen that you dream of

I'll just leave this here. Shills BTFO.

the next shoah can't come soon enough

>don't worry goy, we won't throttle
>but even if we do, we're likely to be the only ISP in your area so you won't be able to complain

>because they enforced certain rules after ISPs were caught fucking censoring shit.
Again, that's not what we're talking about, brainlet. Jesus Christ, it's like you Reddit fucks go out of your way to be completely oblivious about the topic. We're talking about the 2015 reclassification of broadband internet as "common carriers". Make an argument in favor of the reclassification\FCC power grab intended for the Hillary administration or fuck off.

to enforce the said rules you unbelievably giant retarded faggot

You don't need to go full retard and reclassify ISPs as common carriers to implement that one single "regulation" you're reeing over. Again, make a relevant argument or fuck off.

>putting actual weight behind the FCC is going full retard
let me guess your going to pull the molymeme again to deflect from your own batshit retarded """""""""""""""""argument""""""""""""""""""