Ted Cruz

Absolute madman.

Other urls found in this thread:

cnet.com/news/california-washington-take-action-after-net-neutrality-vote/
freepress.net/blog/2017/04/25/net-neutrality-violations-brief-history
pastebin.com/8jmbCQ6k
amazon.com/Book-Broken-Promises-Billion-Broadband/dp/1505211964/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1426825012&sr=8-2&keywords=bruce+kushnick
ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/policies/open-internet-net-neutrality
berec.europa.eu/eng/news_and_publications/whats_new/3958-launch-of-the-berec-net-neutrality-guidelines
youtu.be/0ilMx7k7mso
youtube.com/watch?v=oInAlTKlw64
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

cnet.com/news/california-washington-take-action-after-net-neutrality-vote/

I have never felt more blessed to live in a commie state in my life.

Can I get a "virgin snowflake/chad informed observer" meme please? Don't wrap it too tightly, I'm hungry now

Funny how two months ago the same faggots all mad about this net neutrality shit were openly calling for censorship regarding Nazis. Member that? How it was Comcast’s right to deny Nazis a platform and how it was perfectly okay for the daily stormer to be deplatformed.

DAHNALD

Wasn't the issue brought up in 2015 because Comcast was fucking over Netflix?
So it technically wasn't working?

Informed observer checking in.

Wtf?! I'm Cruz missile nao!

These laws were being made for literally decades. They were simply implemented in 2015 to fight back against ISPs trying to fuck their consumers over.

-Liberal argument

comcast should fuck over netflix, netflix uses the bandwidth to peddle degenerate shows

i dont see why is everyone mad

>fucking over netflix

No they didnt. Netflix was having speed issues because they were using way too much bandwidth. Comcast offered to direct route their content instead of using consumer "public" internet at an extra cost.

I made this exact same argument to someone yesterday and his response was literally just "lol."

Damn...................................................................................... I knew we could put our faith in a trusTed and proven conservative, I told you all.

>i dont see why is everyone mad
ISP's will throttle traffic so that certain websites will go much slower. You have to pay for a usable internet.
-Liberal argument

HAND OVER THE NET NEUTRALITY DANHALD

B-b-but I want to watch all my yaaasss quueeeen slaaaayyy shows

Family Guy season 15 is comfy

wtf im a cruz missile now

maaaan he fucking torched that strawman, how does he do it!?

>Netflix was having speed issues because they were using way too much bandwidth.
You know what drives bandwidth? Infrastructure.
You know who controls developing that infrastructure? Comcast.

Doesn't help their argument everything was fine and dandy after the uproar.

The only way this day could be better is if we killed the commies.

freepress.net/blog/2017/04/25/net-neutrality-violations-brief-history

>>>/rabbit/

But we have had net neutrality like rules since the 1996 telecommunications act.
Then the isps began finding loopholes to abuse their power which is the whole reason we needed these new rules.
Net neutrality is an anti trust law and it's repeal will bring nothing but the return of pic related. Absolute oligopoly

...

pastebin.com/8jmbCQ6k
it's not repealing the whole thing.

Most of the US internet infrastructure was directly funded by the US government, not Comcast.

Stupid nigger

Another short list of lies by T_D


1) The FTC has said clearly that they are ill suited for policing Net Neutrality of the ISPs, their structure ensures that if an ISP merely e-mails you about their NN violation beforehand they will not do a thing

Netflix is not getting some free ride, they have spent millions to their equivalent of an ISP and have built out their own CDN to deliver content, content and bandwidth that are paid in full by their users to their ISPs

Oh and AT&T was proven full of shit when they invested heavily in infrastructure after claiming Title 2 would kill such projects

The inherent issue in handing jurisdiction to the FTC is that ISPs hold a oligopoly over the market, meaning if your ISP has no local competition, they can do whatever the hell they want, as the internet is a necessity in modern society.

Entryway is incredibly expensive and established companies share city halls with local and municipal governments to develop infrastructure.
You think a startup will just jump in and alleviate those established relationships?
Free market has never worked well with mass infrastructure projects.

Sup Forums has supported Net Neutrality since its inception, and you want to talk about blind shilling?

This isn't actually true. All this means is the isps can indeed fuck you over they just have to warn you first about their "fast and slow" lanes
>Sherman act
If this anti trust act were actually enforced at any point then Comcast, Verizon and At&T would not have the power they have and the reach they have, they would be nowhere near as big as they are now.
They actively collude already not to step on each other's toes so they don't have to compete and they've done this for over a decade.
They literally colluded a few short years ago to prevent google wallet from functioning.
Did the FTC stop them? Nope, it was the FCC that had to step in. This repeal was nothing short of stupid and the damage control is utterly pathetic. I did not sign up to get fucked by corporations.

its ok blacked surely wont be slown down.
yfw only interracial porn sites get nice speed.

DO I LOVE ME SOME COREY CHASE INCEST PORN OR WHAT?

>he supports net """neutrality"""
lol

Comcast and other ISPs is in charge of developing those projects, due to them having the technical expertise to do so.

However, those subsidies and funding have been mostly squandered.
I recommend reading:
amazon.com/Book-Broken-Promises-Billion-Broadband/dp/1505211964/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1426825012&sr=8-2&keywords=bruce+kushnick

Interesting story of ISP fuckery.

Why is anybody defending Comcast. The CEO is literally a jew. All this is doing is letting him buy his 5th yacht at your expense. How the hell has Sup Forums fallen so far?
Never ever ever trust a jew but suddenly you're all shilling for them

just because they paid for their cdn doesn't mean they aren't getting a free ride by dominating 70% of bandwidth at certain times to the detriment of other users.

The users of that bandwidth paid Comcast for it in full and if Comcast couldn't handle it they should: 1) Have refused the government tax breaks, subsidies and regulatory fees

2) Not sold them to the customer in the first place

>to the detriment of the ISP and its consumers
I live in Georgia and my internet has never suffered a slow-down. A friend who lives in Los Angeles has their internet die in the evening. This might be an anecdote but it's an important one.

ISPs are supposed to adapt to consumer needs. But they don't.

I remember when the seatbelt laws came in. "We will never pull you over just for not wearing a seatbelt"

10 Years later.... Pantywaist hiding in the bushes with a walkie talkie and a mass pull over point 1/4 mile down the road.

Its all a slippery slope. Watch it you'll see.

who remembers when net neutrality limited Apple from having AT&T as a provider for the iPhone?

Oh wait

What I find the most entertaining is that even in their worst case scenario, they'd be paying $5 more per month for their Netflix subscription.
This is their big fight and the supposed doomsday scenario.

The NN rules have been in place since 2015 and not one single violation by the FCC against the ISPs has ever been cited. Ever. Tom Wheeler in-fact specifically listed parts of Title 2 that would never be used against ISPs and have not.

In contrast: Between 2013 and 2014: The ISPs have made several offences against Net Neutrality in US counties

So: Between Corporations with a track record of violations and clearly delineated rules that have not slowed innovation one bit? Only a moron hands his future to the corporations

Sup Forums here, just checking in to see if Sup Forums are still a bunch bluepilled retards

That's a little bit different, actually. What network the device runs is irrelevant because there's a ton of competition in the mobile device market.

We're talking about the 0s and 1s that show up on your screen, not the screen itself.

>that pic
Funnily enough, when I actually tried to find that on Meo's website, I couldn't see it anywhere. And since none of the shitrags that call themselves newspapers bothered to cite the source, I also couldn't use a direct link.

Wut. There are many more worst case scenarios than that. Netflix as it exists could have never even become a thing if the powers that be at the major ISPs had their way. They are mostly Cable Companies, they have a clear and vested interest in strangling companies like Netflix in the crib.

You're a goddamn Kraut man, you are literally protected by NN laws and shilling against them.

>you are literally protected by NN laws
Germany does not have any NN laws and the EU laws specifically allow providers to discriminate against certain types of traffic if they can state a technical reason for it (as in, "streaming takes up too much fucking bandwidth and we don't want to upgrade our infrastructure").
Yet none of that ever happened.

They wouldn't do that, it would cost them customers. Customers = money, and money is what ISP's value most.

That's not how technical reasons work. At all.

ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/policies/open-internet-net-neutrality

>it would cost them customers

And where would those customers go exactly?

You probably have 2 internet companies to chose from right?

You no longer have a free conduit of bandwidth, the people that are selling you 1 minute of commercials for every 2 minutes of propaganda decide everything now.

You getting excited about this would be like you getting excited about all roads being converted to toll roads, the proceeds of which go to the toll operators while you still pay for the roads regardless of use.

The reason they did this is because they are losing their cable broadcasting business to internet broadcast suppliers.

Haha yeah. ISPs spent billions of dollars to get Trump elected but nothing will change, trust me goy.

In most places there is more than one option for internet service providers.

If an ISP were to start blocking/throttling bandwidth to specific sites, all their competition would have to do is advertise that they don't do that and bam, a whole lot of customers just switched providers.

berec.europa.eu/eng/news_and_publications/whats_new/3958-launch-of-the-berec-net-neutrality-guidelines
>ISPs are prohibited from blocking or slowing down of Internet traffic, except where necessary. The exceptions are limited to: traffic management to comply with a legal order, to ensure network integrity and security, and to manage congestion, provided that equivalent categories of traffic are treated equally. The provisions also enshrine in EU law a user’s right to be “free to access and distribute information and content, run applications and use services of their choice”. Specific provisions ensure that national authorities can enforce this new right.

You're right. But that's not the same as throttling services because it impedes with their profit or interferes with their views. That's the issue here.

What an tech-illiterate piece of shit trash.
freepress.net/blog/2017/04/25/net-neutrality-violations-brief-history
>COMCAST: 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.

>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.

>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 2010 open internet ruling, hoping that rejection of the agency’s authority would allow the company to continue its anti-consumer practices.

>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 hot spots. By blocking those applications, Verizon violated a Net Neutrality pledge it made to the FCC as a condition of the 2008 airwaves auction.
There's more where that came from. They have the means motive, and now the opportunity.

Or everyone could just start using proxies.

No, there isn't. Learn the fundamental facts before you try making suppositions on them. Even if there are two in some places, one generally offers only much lower speeds, like cable vs dsl.

Ah, Mr. Free Market
Hello, My Old Friend

youtu.be/0ilMx7k7mso

>all their competition would have to do is advertise that they don't do that and bam, a whole lot of customers just switched providers.
What if both options are doing so?

Because people crave for their shitty propaganda .

The ISPs have been putting out pieces, on why and how, they should throttle: Proxies, VPNs, Encrypted traffic for literal years.

And thanks to a poo-in-the-loo: They can do it with impunity now with a simple e-mail to you and the FTC

LYIN' TED

>Propoganda
>Protecting something that was inherent to network etiquette since before the internet was born

Pick.One.

This is already wrong there are at least 3 options that I know of for broadband in Phoenix 2 in Indianapolis that I know of and that’s not including Sara lite, dsl or other alternatives like phone hotspots

Realistically, this is all normies will use anyway

>why won't you support the government jew instead, reeeeeeeeeee.
Fuck off, commie.

Does the FCC have a backup plan when all this turns out to be a disaster?

>They have the means motive, and now the opportunity.
Aside from those illiterate in this particular regulation or using false equivalencies to non-telecom industries, it has almost universal bipartisan support.

The issue here is whether Congress will do anything about it.
One would hope, but we all know how things are going up there.

Yes, and if you had watched the video you would know that markets with more "choice" are an illusion. The ISPs have sat together and carved up areas in a way in which competition is a joke.

Pai will go back to Verizon and collect a massive paycheque while the people at the FCC not paid off have to claw back a reasonable stance to which republicans with hammer it down with the review act. All while trumpeting that government policy on NN doesn't work.

He is right.

Member when he posted some Brazziers on twatter?

>it has almost universal bipartisan support.
Actually, I take that back.
The hyper-partisan politics of today has shifted a lot of conservatives towards that blanket deregulation mindset.

user, the entire internet is up in arms. Not one forum or sub or site was free from appeals to stop this. With so many informed and smart people saying it was bad, it must be bad. It was totally organic everyone knows it's bad and this was like the power of the internet to rise up together and fight. Lol you're just ignorant or something.

How would the government profit from keeping the internet accessible to everyone?
Just curious.

The FCC regulation specifically forbid state and local government from going around then too issue new regulation in that regard.

Wrong. NN was a thing created in 1993.

youtube.com/watch?v=oInAlTKlw64

>Sup Forums is one person

South the issue is for the feds to come in and break the local monkilies enforced by the states and cities via anti-trust not freeze the situation as is

There is now (or was) no incentive for competitors because they can’t make a new way to provide internet between the local mopolies and the way nn co-opts your infrastructure it would be literally retarded for anyone to try to provide an alternative

Everyone forgot about ICANN in a week even though ICANN affects the internet at a greater global scale than NN.

And ICANN's former boss ends up revealing he was a Communist and showed up in China, promoting China's stance toward the internet.

You didn't see reddit doing anything about ICANN either.

So yeah, Obama handed ICANN away to Commies.

>I want governments, who have murders countless millions in the last few centuries to control stuff

How does one become like this

No, but it was united on one issue because on the other side of the issue are ISP paymaster puppets and blind shills.

Why don't you advocate for all men on Sup Forums to cut off their own noses with a rusty spork or to stop breathing and see how much unified support opposes you.

See

Top kek

this

You keep waiting for anti-trust to be enforced, especially with the current administration and climate. Know the last time a real anti-trust lawsuit was filed in US tech? Microsoft, over a decade ago.

Netflix sends enormous bandwidth.
They were stressing the servers too much

Already debunked up-thread.

Netflix offered to install network boxes on the backbone of any ISP that was having congestion issues due to "stressing the servers too much" for free and pay for everything but power to the box.

Know how many ISPs took them up on the offer?

I can still access stromfront. Explain yourself.

>Name calling is debunking

Poor troll meme flag

>Sell 300gb/mo to customer
>They use 250/300 on Netflix.com
>REEEEEEE NETFLIX USES SO MUCH BANDWIDTH PAY US OR BE THROTTLED

They somehow got their domain back after a month, but daily stormer's was.permanently seized by (((Google))), hero of the battle of the net.

>I want organizations focused around profit with no restrictions, that have cost hundreds of millions of lives due to negligence and pollution, to control our lives
See, I can strawman too!

To say all government is bad forever, is just as fallacious as saying all profit-driven business is bad forever. Don't resort to commie tactics.

Wait, I don't want to lurk, is this what got repealed or is this what the FCC is putting in place?

>Can't work a comment thread

It was debunked from the onset because trying to say that NN is a 2015 Obama invention. Tell that to a network engineer and he will laugh you out of the room for being a moron.

FCC is handing regulation to FTC. ISPs can throttle anyone now, as long as they tell their customers they're doing so.

Informed observer not on ISPs's payroll : "It's worrying that Net Neutrality is being written off"

Professional lobbyist who gets monthly donations from ISPs : "This restores the status quote ante" *nose growing*

Leftists- the internet will be shut down, internet providers will slow down or shut down access to certain sites

Me- didn't stormfront and the daily stormer, and some other right wing websites get forcefully shut down with it. Also internet before 2015 was just fine

Leftist- fuck you fascist

t. Shartblue

Thanks for the reply