>Repealing net neutrality will cause internet speeds to become slowe-

Oh.

Other urls found in this thread:

nbcnews.com/id/21376597/
wired.com/2012/11/facetime-restrictions-lifted/
highbeam.com/doc/1P2-3260.html
broadbandnow.com/
arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/02/isp-lobby-has-already-won-limits-on-public-broadband-in-20-states/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

that literally has nothing to do with net neutrality. Most places do not have fiber optic internet available so they're limited to one cable company and one telecom company that sells you DSL at 1/5 the speed for the same price as cable. The repeal hasn't taken place yet, and net neutrality never limited competition between ISP's. Local municipal government deals and regulations are what did that, giving 1 cable company exclusive access to provide services to their town/city.

If we had proper competition amoung ISP's we wouldn't need net neutrality regulations. The need is created by the local monopolies.

Enjoy having to pay to access Sup Forums, retard.

Average speeds at my house.

PAY

t. mad redditor

Nope. But if your ISP starts throttling your favorite sites what are you going to do? Downgrade to DSL? Drop internet altogether? Cause that's the options most people have.

And how was the Internet before (((net neutrality)))? Pretty much the same

It hasn't been repealed yet. The motion was pushed forward to the senate. Why do people make these threads?

I'll just leave this here...

Hahahahahahahaha ALWAYS RIGHT

Wait till you realize ISP drops throttles for speed test.net....

slow performance, you need them to check your pc boogie.

>increase competition by getting rid of NN
>B-B-BUT user THE MONOPOLY!!!!!
Fucking hysterical, you delusional retard

/thread

repealing NN doesn't undo the local monopolies that most ISP's have dipshit. That has nothing to do with the FCC at all. NN guarantees competition online, where repealing NN allows ISPs to limit competition to themselves or for any company that pays them extra money to throttle all their competitors.NN regulations had absolutely nothing to do with the lack of competition in ISP's whatsoever. If a fiber optic internet company starts to server your area, congratulations but that has nothing to do with Net Neutrality.

>If we had proper competition amoung ISP's we wouldn't need net neutrality regulations. The need is created by the local monopolies.
Alright, serious question. Instead of losing your shit over Net Neutrality, why not try to fight against the actual problem, which is monopolies?

>net neutrality never limited competition between ISP's.
>what are common carriers
Fucking dumbass

because there's no nationwide monopoly, it's regulated township by township, county by county, state by state which is a lot harder of a battle. Not to mention even if there's no government regulation preventing competition among isps in a city the cable companies have all agreed to be territorial and let each other have monopolies over regions to heighten their profits by not directly competing with each other. You might repeal the laws but it 20 years later you might still only have 1 cable company servicing you.

Repealing net neutrality lets companies like ozarksgo create a foothold in the market and compete with the big boys.

NN was a set of FEDERAL regulations by the FCC. The localized monopolies have nothing to do with the FCC that's local governments.

Nothing to do with net neutrality you fucking retarded americunt

Will you concede that more regulation creates more overhead and a barrier to entry into a market regardless of this specific case?

PAY FOR MY INTERNET

Go the fuck back you brainwashed reddit retard.

you're a fucking retard please kill yourself. NN had nothing to do with the establishment of new ISP's fuckwad, the regulations only targeted how ISP's treated online traffic.

It has NOTHING to do with whether or not a new ISP can pop up in a town and compete with the cable companies. That was NEVER a part of the regulations.

What NN did do though, is if you decided to make a business, as a startup, with an online site, Amazon couldn't pay the ISP to throttle you.or the ISP couldn't extort money out of you to not be throttled. It allowed the little guys online to compete with the big boys. NN's repeal puts that at risk.

Still waiting for this throttling.

These fucks don't even know what those words mean. They saw some batshit propaganda on reddit and swallowed the head shaft and balls.

what was the increased cost in overhead by net neutrality regulations and how much will ISPs be saving by not having to follow them? since you seem to be such an expert on the subject

If big corporations started making/asking you to pay more to have access to sites, wouldnt the smaller business that doesnt charge you that get more customers? NN basically guarentee'd that the little guy couldnt compete

It can't get any slower out here in the sticks

i thought you guys loved jews now?

nbcnews.com/id/21376597/

wired.com/2012/11/facetime-restrictions-lifted/

highbeam.com/doc/1P2-3260.html

Why do you want the government in your internet? It worked fine for decades before nn. Nn just gave jewgle a bunch of fat ass subsidies.

broadbandnow.com/

what the actual fuck, thats like 2003 modem shit tier net even here in moldova

>it's regulated township by township, county by county, state by state which is a lot harder of a battle.
If anything, that should be easier. The reason US is state-based to begin with is so that you can deal with local issues more easily.

There are no ISP monopolies you lying asshole. I am the most rural American and I have 7 choices

You're stupid as shit. KYS

They should absolutely, 100% throttle/charge more for every faggot that streams 4K Netflix all fucking day. This will alleviate bandwidth problems across the board, and all those streamingbux could be spent on more infrastructure.

i don't think that's related to my question at all.

If all the chicken littles who are upset about net neutrality actually wanted a better internet they would be protesting for the break up of comcast and other big isps. Why is no one calling for google to be broken up. The companies that hold monopolies are the companies that are telling these mindless idiots that net neutrality is needed for a safe internet.

I have 6mbps tower-based internet in rural Texas, and I can still play multiplayer vidya and stream videos just fine.

No it doesn't because if Amazon was successful in paying ANY ISP to throttle service they'd get BTFO by cancellations the next day. If you're a little guy ISP and a big guy just throttled service, guess who just got a fuck ton new customers AND a whole marketing campaign GIVEN to them by their competition. Only reddit retards think you can just "screw the customer" because of less regulation. Regulation is the only weapon megacorps have to keep the little competitors from keeping their head above water, ask Walmart about all the regulations they pay to have passed so little guys can't compete. That's why as the gov't has continually regulated markets you continue to have less choices, weird. Stay delusional.

Yeah I don't fucking get these faggots. They say "Verizon isn't available in my area due to monopoly" but theres like 4 other companies you can choose from you're just being a entitled bitch and only want big names.

how much did you pay to get on Sup Forums today, homo?

Isn't Twitter trying to suppress Gab somehow?

power of the free market at work here boys! look at all these choices i have! thank god no more net neutrality won't matter because I can so easily move to another ISP if one is anti-competitive!

Net Neutrality is a bandaid solution to preserve a free market online when there is no free market among ISP's because of retarded regulations made by local governments. Should those local governments granted those monopolies? No. But is the repeal of NN in any way shape or form going to undo those monopolies? NO. Getting rid of the local monopolies was never what the FCC was debating, because the FCC isn't a part of those regulations. It was never on the table. It's not going to happen and even if some localities started to take action to encourage isp competition in their city, it will take decades to go city by city bringing in competitors. Just like it's going to take decades for fiber optic internet providers to spread, going city by city (fiber is an option because it's not telephone or coaxial cable so the monopoly regulations won't apply, just like they don't apply to cellphone companies which is why you'll have half a dozen cellphone companies in a city when you only have 1 landline carrier)

Why do you think the people shouting loudest about NN needing to be repealed were Time Warner, Cox, Comcast, Charter, Verizon, and AT&T? because this gives them back their monopolies for selling entertainment and long distance calling. Charter doesn't want you subscribing to Netflix, Charter wants you paying $150 a month on 500 cable channels. Charter doesn't want you subscribing to HBO Now, they want you buying an HBO package from them.

I live in a suburban part of a city of 2 million people and I have two choices. They both suck ass.

I could get a fiber line for what I'm paying in Europe or Japan.

That is completely fine.

Even ukrainians have a better connection than most americans, wtf is your problem burgers?

>There are no ISP monopolies you lying asshole. I am the most rural American and I have 7 choices
go do your zip through and prove it then

What exactly is the geographic size and population of the Ukraine vs the US?

The continental US is bigger than all of Europe combined and is filled with niggers who rob the people putting in newer lines.

>Most places do not have fiber optic internet available

Implying it's anyone's fault other than your own that you are a rural/suburban retard.

Yeah, cause in all the years the internet and 4chin itself existed before obamas faggot government internet regulations, I remember always having to pay to come here. That must be what you're so anally violated about right? Remembering shit that never happened?

Yeah, with few exceptions where a fiber optic company exists, most people have 1 cable company, and 1 telecom company.Given monopolies by their local government. So that ""little guy isp"" doesn't exist. Not to mention NN had nothing to do with competition between ISP's that's all local regulations, not the FCC. Educate yourself or kill yourself. Pick one please.

You've got it backwards, they'd pay to have "Premium" high-speed (i.e. Normal) lines to their servers while sites that don't pay get throttled.

Yea who would do that.

Never had to before Net neutrality.

How is that relevant to what I just said? So regulations through local government grant monopolies and kill competition...just like I said. Learn to read or kys, in fact just fucking kys.

comcast has a monopoly in most areas where they are, they get the governments to legislate them a monopoly in exchange for them installing cables throughout an area.

Spectrum rolled out a free speed increase to customers in my area. Where is your god now, reddit?

Yeah that would be crazy.

Would you concede that there is some cost in having to comply with regulations that force you to fully support every sites traffic going through flawlessly regardless of how much burden it puts on your system? Do you concede that this would cause some competition from happening? And this is besides the legal costs of complying.

when was this mythical period before net neutrality? do tell

>worked fine
except for the times when the FCC sued ISP's for violating NN prior to 2014 because ISP's were throttling skype and streaming sites. Then in a landmark decision in 2014 Verizon vs FCC, the court ruled that the FCC couldn't regulate ISP's as a utility because they were under title 1 instead of title 2. That's what triggered the move to Title 2 in the first place.

*stop not cause

try turning on Wi-Fi, retard

what could you possibly need those speeds for?

i can think of a few things, none of which a fat retard who plays vidya all day would apply to.

42 million poor people and largest country in the Europe (No idea if that's still true after recent events). You may say there are not enough cables to supply US like Ukraine, but there is 3g internet with 10mb download and 6 mb upload all over the country

>there's no competition because i don't like the competition
I only stream movies on Netflix, because I don't like Hulu or Amazon. Government regulations when???

PAY FOR MY DIVORCE

>filled with niggers who rob the people putting in newer lines.
Looks like your shithole has a lot bigger problems than the internet

>Would you concede that there is some cost in having to comply with regulations that force you to fully support every sites traffic going through flawlessly regardless of how much burden it puts on your system?
No, because that's nonsensical. I as an end user pay for a certain download speed per second. If an ISP is basing their price on the assumption I won't actually be using that speed, that's their fault. It doesn't cost the ISP any extra whether that traffic comes from netflix or youtube or some random degenerate porn site.

>two options, both lying about their pricing and speeds with

>there's no competition because i don't like the competition
did you even look at the image?
>literally only 2 ISPs above even 10% coverage

That's a big camel toe

Ukraine:
Population: 45 million (2016)
Area: 233,062 mi2

USA
Population: 323.1 million (2016)
Area: 3.797 million mi2


Texas is larger than Ukraine.
Population: 27.86 million (2016)
Area: 268,597 mi2

Logistics are a thing.

>run for local office
>promise to rescind that legislation and install a municipal network that delivers faster speeds, lower prices, and no throttling

Nothing is permanent. If things suck, try to fix them. Making Comcast a federally-sustained, pseudo-utility is not a real solution to the problem of them generally being dicks.

So you admit you're completely irrational about this issue and to boot you don't even know how the internet works. It has nothing to do with your bandwidth.

you're asking this as if in every town there's a dozen cable companies and telecom companies providing broadband internet to choose from, that's not the case. American cities generally have 1 cable company, and 1 telecom company. Because the telecom and cable companies digging cables under the ground is a significant investment by the company, so they tell a city they'll do it, as long as the city gives them exclusivity. Either that or, a city digs and establishes its own cable/lines, and then makes a contract to lease them out to one cable company and in that contract the cable company pays for all the maintenance.

It's usually done township by township. check out a map of cable companies in the LA area, you'll see descrete borders between which townships are served by cox, which ones are served by Time-Warner, and which ones are served by Charter. There's no overlap/competition, and if you want to switch from one to the other you have to move physically.

How does the internet work then? you seem to have all the answers.

arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/02/isp-lobby-has-already-won-limits-on-public-broadband-in-20-states/

And you seem to have none of them yet you're very sure about your opinion. Netflix's traffic was bottlenecking, the ISP had to completely upgrade their system and asked Netflix to help pay for it so they could fix their issue for them. That's all that happened.

Any speed over 50 Mbps is not needed unless your hosting a server,

the absolute state of the le 56%

s-s-s-s-s-s-sHUT UP POPULATION SIZE RUINS ALMOST EVERY SINGLE LEFTIST ARGUMENT. STOP RIGHT NOW.

like, 2 years ago dumbfuck.

>he never went on the internet before obongo

Go be 14 somewhere else

>Telling me what I need
Get fucked, Commie.

in one of these threads one guy literally thought everyhting was fine because he buffered videos for an hour before streaming them and didn't seem to realize that was abnormal.

>nigga acts like he's gonna download cheeseburgers now.

You aren't actually answering the questions, but you seem very upset I'm actually asking you to do so when you act like you have the answers. How does the internet work? How much overhead does NN regulations add?
>Netflix's traffic was bottlenecking, the ISP had to completely upgrade their system and asked Netflix to help pay for it so they could fix their issue for them.
and can you source this? and then explain why it's netflix's problem that traffic was bottlenecking on poor ISP servers?

These are all state-level restrictions, none of which will survive when people actually start getting pissed at Comcast. Also, there's still 30 states with no restrictions.

>commie
I agree with every ancap memeball as logical solutions.

if net neutrality didn't exist 2 years ago then why was comcast suing the FCC over net neutrality in 2010?

...

Thanks Verizon (: