While we have so many leftists visiting today, please answer the following:
Why are you so certain ISPs are going to suddenly screw you if they never did it prior to 2015? They made some tiny jabs at netflix but is that really so dreadful? They had this power before however nothing happened.
Other urls found in this thread:
extremetech.com
techliberation.com
forbes.com
cadc.uscourts.gov
youtube.com
congress.gov
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
>Why are you so certain ISPs are going to suddenly screw you if they never did it prior to 2015?
extremetech.com
>Verizon caught throttling Netflix traffic even after its pays for more bandwidth
>July 20, 2014
Net Neutrality was enforced precisely because these ISPs started testing how far they could get away with fucking around.
plenty of conservatives are upset about net neutrality as well, seems to be just the betas here that aren't
if nothing changed under it and it just made sure they stayed in line then why get rid of it?
when yanks say theyre perfectly safe then others say they have no need for guns then they ree so if traffic is safe why get rid of NN?
>LouderWithCrowder Watermark
>Why are you so certain ISPs are going to suddenly screw you if they never did it prior to 2015?
but they did, why are you so certain they didn't?
...
bluepilled fag. Why do trust the corporate state? you're fucking nothing to them. Your illusions of security will shatter eventually.
The internet is already not free. The changes will be subtle, but mark my words a year from now you will understand why this is bad.
>Why are you so certain ISPs are going to suddenly screw you if they never did it prior to 2015
>Crowder shit
Oh god so you're one of those people who think that just because you don't have knowledge of something, it doesn't exist. There were myriad lawsuits and issues prior to NN that specifically led to NN. We can probably agree it was a toothless bit of legislation, but it needed to be built stronger, not torn down entirely. You're sticking it to Jewgle, and lubing your ass up for Verizon, truly baffling.
Netflix (and YouTube, Amazon, Hulu, Facebook, etc.) traffic should get throttled, unless that traffic pays a premium to be on it.
The retarded endless video streaming is clogging up the net -- *paying* to clog up the net is the least that the cloggers should be doing.
Net neutrality was de facto even before the 2015 ruling. Even the FCC committee members under Bush supported these policies, even if they didn't call it Net Neutrality specifically.
>The retarded endless video streaming is clogging up the net
But that's complete bullshit. Time Warner, Verizon, Comcast etc. were all paid hefty government sums to upgrade their infrastructure well over a decade ago. Instead the CEOs and other higher-ups decided that money would be best used to pay for yachts and other fancy toys.
Nowhere else in the world are these websites considered an issue, because ISPs actually have the foundations to support what consumers and corporations are doing.
So net neutrality is gone ? Something changes for Europe?
>be 2014 netflix and rage because you have to pay for your own bandwith
>get in bed with other major websites and make leftie government force your costumers to pay it for you, on top of your subscription fee
>be 2017 netflix and watch all leftie cucks defend you
>corperate fucks keep fucking us
I have an idea
>give more authority to government
YEAH
because that worked before
>Jewgle: 730.94 Billion market cap
>Verizon: 213.52 Billion market cap
I actually get into a contract with Verizon and they provide me services. I am Jewgles product that they resell and I have no say in where or how they use it. I dunno, which one of these is the massive evil corporation
Internet Companies have a history of slowing/blocking content from their users, its happened before, it'll happen again
Wait, they are going to slow down YouTube videos? Fuck that, how am I going to watch let's plays and the young Turks?
>corperate fucks keep fucking us
I have an idea
>give more power to corporations
YEAH
Because that's really going to be in your best interest.
I am all for charging the companies, but we all know the isps/companies are gonna charge the consumers.
What if I told you there was nothing in the existing net neutrality rules that stopped providers from throttling speeds, blocking content, or creating fast lanes?
>The 2016 court decision upholding the rules >was a Pyrrhic victory for the net neutrality >movement. In short, the decision revealed that >the 2015 Open Internet Order provides no >meaningful net neutrality protections–it allows >ISPs to block and throttle content. As the >judges who upheld the Order said, “The Order…>specifies that an ISP remains ‘free to offer >‘edited’ services’ without becoming subject to >the rule’s requirements.”
forbes.com
>But the DC Circuit suggests that a walled >garden is fine as long as the provider “mak[es >it] sufficiently clear to potential customers that >if provides a filtered services involving the ISP’s >exercise of ‘editorial intervention.’”
Court document here,
cadc.uscourts.gov
TL;DR: Nothing in previous rules prevented ISPs from throttling or blocking content. Just like before 2015.
Euros, we have our own problems- get in here.
corporate just wants to fuck us over. it's a tale as old as time. now that they have the opportunity to do it more effectively, it'll get worse. net neutrality was put into action because the internet has become a necessity in this (USA) country. now prices are just gonna fucking jack up so that poor fucks are left behind yet again, once again setting back our socioeconomic system
Net Neutrality supporters almost always resort to fear mongering and contrived hypotheticals without actually knowing wha net neutrality meant.
I don't swig one way or the other, but if your entire platform is built on fear mongering then I think you need to reassess your position.
how many new isp will pop up?
>now prices are gonna get jacked up
Under what logic? I hear this all the time but I never get a nuanced well detailed analysis of why this HAS to happen.
why would i trust people who hired you to shill for them? why cant their ideas stand on merit alone? why do you think we cant tell youre a culturally tonedeaf russian marketing intern?
Net neutrality isn't liberalism you dumb yank, liberalism=more freedom.
Net neutrality restrains the freedom of companies.
its a de facto monopoly because the current players got a $400Billion heard start in tax money for infrastructure
They won’t jack it up all at once. They’ll split the Internet into different packages but for a while it will be in total cheaper than before. This will sucker in Ma and Pa Dumbass who only use the Internet for Facebook, YouTube, e-mail, and MSM websites.
Once things have calmed down, they’ll analyze which packages get the most use and then jack up the prices.
"plenty of conservatives are upset about net neutrality as well, seems to be just the betas here that aren't"
No, the only conservatives which are pro NN, are conservatives who un-ironically think that voting a straight Republican ticket, without looking into anything further makes them "redpilled."
TY
>Net Neutrality
The name alone is Orwellian Double Speak
>Return to 2015 levels of freedom
Nigga, you realize we had NN style regulations in place at that point, right? They were there because the IPs kept trying to dick us over. You remember Big Bell? It's gonna be the same damn thing over again.
>Verizon caught throttling Netflix traffic even after its pays for more bandwidth
So literally Netflix was hurt in the past like OP had already stated? I feel like this is all one big Netflix jewop to protect the fact that they are using over 35% of the US internet traffic at the cost of less shekels for them.
Also, why exactly are we certain the internet service providers are going to charge the consumer over the network hogs like Netflix again? I'm seeing lots of sources for anti-NN and not so much from the "they could, they may, they might, suggests that" liberals.
>netflix pays more for fast speeds
>tranfers that increase of cost on the customer who will now have to pay more for netflix
>start-up, cheaper alternatives to netflix cant get off the ground because they cant afford the fast acces netflix buys
but it's ok because daddy trump said this is good and liberals are mad
If you honestly believe that capitalists won’t fuck you like a virgin in a Roman bath house, then have I got a bridge to sell you, my friend.
And anti-nn always resort in wishful thinking saying corps and trump won't fuck them just because they're pissing on reddit, equally stupid.
And how is that statement supposed to convince me of anything?
Monopolies are not good for freedom.
So... I have a question.
Is the dark net exempt from these rules? Like does it operate on its own plane of reality or has it been lumped in with the rest of this nonsense? I haven't been able to find a good answer about this.
kudos to whoever wrote that out
Let me add a question
Why do you leftists cry about how much power ISPs have and cheer that Disney bought yet another major company and has become a stronger conglomerate?
>was just forced to listen to a liberal rant about how drumpf is destroying net neutrality which "has existed since the internet was invented in the 90s"
>he didn't know what Title II was when questioned
>he couldn't define net neutrality except through vague references to cable television packages which he also didn't really seem to understand
>he still got standing ovations from libshit college kids afterwards
We're living in a world where the "college educated" are the definition of low information voters
Hahahahaha netflix is for homos anyways
And here I was thinking net neutrality was the one issue in america everyone agreed on... except the assholes repealing it of course.
there should be a liberal tears sticky for NN
>It's another globalist conspiracy!, trust me, i made this long post no one want's to read poving it is so.
Well, another thing I can't do anything about.
>$0.05 has been deposited to your account by Comcast LLC.
>how are dire warnings backed up the historical greed of corporations supposed to convince me? I'm just fine walking into the lion's den
>Man shoots himself in the foot, heard screaming “you mad, libtards?”
So is this whole NN issue just to kill Netflix?
>Verizon paying off the FCC sandnigger to get the repeal in works.
>Disney buys Fox (who owns marvel and Hulu) for 52 million and will take marvel off Netflix for Hulu exclusively
>ISPs are the least liked corporations in America.
>Most tech giants in the industry are against the repeal.
>Tech savy people are also against the repeal (including one of the remaining motherfucker who built the internet)
>Handing them the free rein of the internet is good.
Jesus Christ Sup Forums is one big nugget of retardation.
>$0.04 has been deposited to your account by Google Inc,
I'm a conservative, but I don't like spending money for shit. That's it with me.
The guy that invented was against NN in 2014
I have been trying to determine this as well through research of the repeal and title I vs title II.
If all social media giants are getting upset, it seems like they are fearful of getting taxed by ISPs for bandwith usage. Under Title II as a common carrier, websites are protected by regulations that prevent ISPs from charging companies for using more than other websites.
As Title I, the net neutrality regulation is removed as it is no longer a common carrier which gives the providers, ISPs, a chance to tax large social media giants for their usage.
The worst thing that is going to come out of this is those social media giants actually being the ones to charge their consumers due to this tax, while blaming Trump of course.
Yeah well go back to the terrible dark days of Internet like in 2014.
Who’s problem is that? Oh right, Obama’s.
>BUT DATS DA FREE MARKET YOU CHEAP POOR SHILL NIGGER YOU GOTTA PAYE DA BIG BOYS AND IF DA MARKET DICTATES DA PRICE TOO HIGH THE LIBERALS ARE FUCKED
I took the liberty to just save you from reading the remainder of the thread and condensed Sup Forums's responce.
Should a company be able to slow down, or even alter the packets coming to and from your house because there's a registered democrat living there?
start up wouldn't have as many customers and wouldn't need to pay for the same amount of bandwidth as netflix only scaling up as they grow
How is something from before Obama took office his problem?
Except for the fact that if they got big enough Netflix could either buy then out or operate at such a loss that it starved the competition out.
god you didn't do any research did you? clauses like this have been in place since about 2002
check it
Because Sup Forums is still mad over a combo breaker.
so jewgle and faceberg spent millions shilling against net neutrality for solely altruistic purposes? They actively hinder freedom of speech and expression and sell all of your data to the highest bidder and I'm supposed to trust them more? At least with my ISP i am choosing to pay them for a service, and contrary to popular belief it is possible to live a normal life without internet access.
>It's another globalist conspiracy!,
with citations
...
>Be commie
>Think you have the right to dictate to companies how they should charge you for using their infrastructure
>Thinks being unable to shitpost on twitter 24/7 will literally end their life
>Have to go outside and get sun on their pasty skin
I say this is a win. The internet is a joke as it is anyway, it's social media vehicle at this point and a platform for commies.
No it isn't. Everything is moving online.
Netflix is probably already big enough to buy most competitors.
>netflix
literal trash
get out of your basement every once in a while you gigantic faggot and explore the outdoors.
>it is possible to live a normal life without internet access
No it's not unless you are some type of mountain hermit. Business and communication is done over the internet now. I don't even want to think of the massive efficiency drops and money losses that come with trying to do things the old ways
Suck my freedom.
I got an idea how to use this to destroy reddit
>a year or so ago leader of reddit, SPEZ, edited a bunch of comments on /r/the_donald
>This violates safe harbor laws, which protects owners of websites from what it's people post so long as they don't edit anything
>this issue can be taken up directly with the FTC now that NN is gone
>if we do this, we can hold reddit responsible for all it's illegal subreddits like /r/darknetdeals and others, getting it shut down and it's owners arrested
>giant hivemind of liberalism is dead and so is the_donald, so no more spew into Sup Forums
>"hahaha! This nigger just fucked me in the ass! Take that libtards!"
Because we gave them the idea.
The EMP strike can't come soon enough then
enjoy paying for ports
You don't deserve to use the internet, or breathe.
ISP's and normie book and twatter are banning Nazis didnt you hear goy
There have been a few leddit salt mining threads. Check the catalogue
I could happily go without using the net and if companies have to pay more for using it why do I care? The only thing I use it for these days is shitposting on Sup Forums. TV movies and music are fucking woeful now and I only play single player vidya.
>Kikes = Revealed
>Net Neutrality = Repealed
>he thinks no one on Sup Forums is autistic enough to read all of that, let alone research it.
Buddy, you just made your first mistake.
Okay, let's see if we can unpack this shitshow:
>ask yourself why NN came out of nowhere
It didn't. It was a court case in 2014 that raised the issue of NN by abrogating the previous rulings that NN had been enforced under. To be clear, the Obama administration's introduction of NN in 2015 only maintained the status quo that had existed before that case. It didn't introduce anything new.
>who benefited from it
Internet companies like Google, Facebook, Netflix, etc. Obviously. You don't need a massive government conspiracy to explain why a lot of big corporations would be for NN, nor do they need to have nefarious political motives - the end of NN would be a huge threat to their bottom line. It would be like if Walmart had merged with an electricity provider and wanted to hike the electricity bill for Costco and Target stores through the roof.
>Bill Clinton's Telecommunications Act 1996
This did the exact opposite of NN, in that it reduced the amount of government regulation over telecoms companies. I almost can't believe that anyone would be so brazen as to use the negative effects of the last time the government stepped back from regulating telecoms giants (the author is at least correct that it led to the consolidation of the media in fewer hands) as a reason why the government should step back from regulating NN.
Maybe whoever wrote this thinks the average Sup Forums user is a complete moron, or something.
>be major corporation
>seek only to maximize profit
>thousands of ideas people pushing the company towards this end
>no one figures out something that a bunch of dumb faggot liberals figured out on their own that's an obvious PR nightmare
>do it anyways
>the competition kills you within a month
Wowwee gee I better get in my nuke bunker for when Comcast kills itself and everyone else just laughs at them.
>Countering Information Warfare Act 2016
This doesn't give the government any new statutory powers. It certainly doesn't give the government the power to call up the head of the FCC and demand that they revoke broadcasting licences. The Countering Information Warfare Act 2016 simply sets aside money for the creation of a joint State Department and Defence Department task force (which does not report directly to the White House, so that's another lie) to coordinate and assist efforts between different government agencies to identify foreign propaganda, and come up with means of countering it.
It's a completely ordinary bill that doesn't give the government any new powers to regulate the internet in any way. It was written and introduced as a bipartisan bill passed on December 2 in congress, was passed by the Senate on the 8th of December, and was THEN incorporated into the 2017 NDAA (as is usual for bills which set aside Defence department funding) which was signed by Obama on December 23.
>Identifying current and emerging trends in foreign propaganda and disinformation, including the use of print, broadcast, online and social media, support for third-party outlets such as think tanks, political parties, and nongovernmental organizations, and the use of covert or clandestine special operators and agents to influence targeted populations and governments in order to coordinate and shape the development of tactics, techniques, and procedures to expose and refute foreign misinformation and disinformation
Funny how whoever wrote the screencap didn't feel the need to include the next sentence of that subsection of the bill
>and proactively promote fact-based narratives and policies to audiences outside the United States.
That section of the bill is talking about countering anti-American propaganda in foreign countries - the same shit the US has been doing for decades. The only difference is that the committee created by the bill will focus on the internet and social media.
Here's the text of the bill so you can read it for yourself. I'm assuming that whoever wrote the posts in the screencap assumed no one on Sup Forums would ever actually read a source.
congress.gov
en.wikipedia.org
In other words, the Countering Information Warfare Act 2016 has fuck all to do with NN. It's a budgetary bill to set aside funding for an anti-propaganda task force - it doesn't introduce federal laws against 'internet propaganda'. It doesn't affect how the FCC enforces NN in any way.
The only thing the Net Neutrality rules allow the FCC to do is punish ISPs that throttle a particular website's bandwidth. That's it. It's the exact opposite of the government controlling the internet, because the only power the FCC has is to order an ISP to STOP throttling bandwidth. It doesn't have the statutory power to order an ISP to block content - if it tried, the ISP would simply sue and win easily. And because I know some idiots are going to say something along the lines of 'well, the government will find a way to use regulation to control the internet': if you think the government is just going to ignore the law, why are you bothered by NN in the first place? If the government is operating extra-judicially then it wouldn't matter what the laws on NN say.
The assertions in the screencap are a bunch of half-truths and outright lies. Maybe it was even crafted by someone working for the ISPs - a sort of shill inception, where a corporate shill used a fake conspiracy by government shills to shill his anti-regulation message.
I swear pol's entire stance on this shit is simply to do and support what liberals hate, no matter whether it fucks everyone in the ass or not. Sometimes this place's contrarian ways boggle my fucking mind. Liberals could be in 100% support of not burning themselves alive and pol would be saying everyone should douse themselves in lighter fluid and strike a match.
What I mean by that is all competarive businesses operate online and all communication is done online. It's naive to thing we can go back to the old days of a newspaper and rotary phones. People will not throw away technology. Neither will your government. Or your businesses.
You havent seen nothing yet. Wait until the throttling begins.
Americucks, fucked by Drumpf.
and yet the proNN shills wont look at these.
all they do is cry
>BUT DA WEDDIT AND GOOGLE AND SOROS AND NETFLIX PEOPLE TOLD ME REPEAL IS BAD
like there was no fucking internet before 2015
>the competition kills you within a month
What competition? Its a fucking monopoly you fucktard. Thats the main reason this is a major problem to begin with. You either buy from Verizon or Comcast or you don't buy at all.
So it's this what happened after that verizon vs fcc ruling, that title 1 no longer carries open internet rules?
Who the fuck cares about reddit?
this gentleman is correct sirs. we should boycott the internet from here till they give us our neutrality back. like in the age of prohibition, we must create our own means of communication.
I like this idea
Ummm, no sweetie. Businesses should be able to operate how they want.