Death of Net Neutrality

RIP, net neutrality will be dead in a few years.

twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/532608358508167168

B-B-BUT MUH (((FREE MARKET))) WILL FIX IT

This Tweet is from 2014. Any idea if this is still his view on it or not?

He loves week-ke leeks

His view is whatever gets him the most marketing and publicity, and whatever gets the people repeating his name out of anger or else, thus creating a publicity domino effect on the surroundings.

Well, that was before and during the election.
What his REAL views are, we are about to find out.

Net neutrality is literally a meme.

Network companies should have the choice of letting popular websites be accessed faster. If a startup suddenly got popular, network companies should have the ability of dynamically making their users access the startup faster than mykittypictures.WordPress.tumblr.xxx.com. Otherwise all websites has to be as slow as it.

Prove me wrong

whatever gets him the most admiration, respect, and recognition, which..... may turn out to be a great thing?

Start ups will never get off the ground if they're slow as balls compared to the established sites.

That's my point
>startup slowly gets more and more popular
>network companies move it up the list of importance
>startup gets faster
>even faster
>and faster
>suddenly startup has same access time as Google who pays 100x as much

Otherwise, the startup has to pay proportional to network speed, and that's not always so cheap for a company of 3 programmers
literally prove me wrong

The only way to do that is to increase bandwidth.

So basically you are saying that they should be able to throttle mykittypictures to the point that it isn't usable to free up bandwidth for somestartup.com

yeah that makes sense. idk why legislate how a private company handles their service but I guess corporations are all evil and people are entitled to internet access as a human right.

He is mis-informed, regular QoS already does that while retaining neutrality.

>network companies move it up the list of importance
Except this wouldn't happen.
It would literally be whoever pays more has faster connection. Granted, it would be popular companies as they would have the revenue to pay for this.

I just did.
You didn't actually counter my point.
Why would it get more popular if it's too slow to use?

People don't realize that a scenario like that is going from a subscription based game like world of warcraft to a pay to win shitty chinese mog where you pay for "access" to facebook.

please state your level of education and tech experience.

What is Net Neutrality to begin with?

Prevents ISP from charging or de-prioritizing/blocking based on content.

Equal speed for everyone in the world,
no throttling of sites,
no fast-lanes for special people,
everyone gets the same treatment as traffic.

I can't tell if they're shills or just ill-informed.

>Why would it get more popular if it's too slow to use?
This

...

>mykittypictures to the point that it isn't usable
Websites aren't going to stop working completely. The free market still takes care of that and if the owner of the website wants such, they can still pay for more bandwidth

>The only way to do that is to increase bandwidth.
And you're calling me uninformed?

Net neutrality makes it such that the only way to get faster internet speed is if you pay for more bandwidth. If we don't have net neutrality, then companies have the ability to prioritize certain ips such that they are faster routed.

College and 3 years in network programming.

You're making the assumption that it'll take 10 minutes to load the page.

>You're making the assumption that it'll take 10 minutes to load the page.

How long it will take to load a page is up to them, whether it's 10 seconds or 10 hours.

COMCAST HERE! Buy access to Sup Forums today with our special PEPE PACKAGE for only $49.99 a month.

Of course why would you do that when you could use Comcast's social media, news aggregator for normies instead that comes included with your basic 25 baud internet connection!

>de-prioritizing/blocking based on content

Then
>net neutrality
>firewalls and/or QoS
choose just one.

Then no website would pay for the internet, then the network companies would lose money. Then they go bankrupt. Then they get replaced by people who offer more reasonable services

LIterally prove me wrong

Pro tip:
Y O U C A N T

Right, it's definitely not about money or power.
The shills got to you bigly.

>AOL wasn't popular and people stopped paying for cable television without an alternative

Alternatives do exist???

Not for long without neutrality

Net neutrality is dead in the third world

t. Third worlder

> have optimum - want to get Verizon
> net neutrality gets abolished
> can no longer switch to Verizon
Wtf

>he thinks there is competition

>getting it totally backwards
Nigger, it's not about making popular websites fast, but rather about limiting connection to those websites to prevent customers to use the bandwidth they paid for.

Who said we have net neutrality now?

> my site is slow
> oh, it must be my internet provider
>hmmm i did just get a special offer from (insert company here)
> *switch and internet works better*
wtf i love communism and socialism now

Wtf do you think happens to the other sites that aren't limited? Stay the same speed?

You literally can't prove me wrong

>my site is slow
>oh it must be my internet provider
>hmmm i did just get another notice of increasing prices and decreasing speeds
>only choice is faceberg nonfree basics
>*can't switch and I have to pay more*
wtf i love communism and socialism now

Relocate your server to get Google Fiber???

>We are proud to announce that Google Fiber is merging with Faceberg Nonfree Basics to provide you with best speeds at even better prices!

Relocate and get a different provider???

>We are proud to announce Faceberg World Fiber, the best and only provider

Make a new provider???

>Stallnet Freedom Services is proud to announce that we will be merging with Faceberg World Fiber

It'd be more effective in the long run to not sell out
Also that's considered a monopoly and we have legal precedent to split it up ourselves

See ATT for example

Trump is going to get rid that kind of anti-business regulation.

Source? Oh that's right. You're full of bullshit and still can't prove me wrong

>We’re going to get rid of all these ridiculous – everything is so bad – we’re going to get rid of the regulations that are just destroying us.

It's part of the official Republican platform so yes this is the end of net neutrality.

Trump is right here, let's not interfere with how free markets conduct their business.

Trump was openly against the AT&T Time Warner merger.

Are monopoly rules what he's talking about there? Or a 70000 page tax code and bull shit laws that only exist because reasons?

>/sci/
>Sup Forums
>/lgbt/
All absolutely REKTED by god emperor Trump.

>it's bad to give someone what they pay for

ebbin' meme, my fedora lord user! Pirate any games lately? ;-)

What's wrong with that? It's their network they can do whatever they want.

Trump is doing the right thing for businesses by removing net neutrality.

Don't need net neutrality, just need to remove the regional monopolies that ISPs have.

Correct. Is he going to repeal monopoly rules but leave an exception for media companies that he hates?
Who knows at this point?

So, how many more decades is this going to take?

> who knows at this point
Skepticism is not an argument

He would have to prove CNN MSNBC HuffPo have a monopoly on news media, which he can't.

The comment doesn't even make any sense, I don't know if he is stupid or just trying to appeal to conservatives.

So let's say NN goes out the window, do you think it would be fair for consumers to at least be able to find out if say Walmart is paying big bucks to make sure it is ahead of amazon ?

isn't fox killing them with viewership/revenue ?
I had this kind of discussion with my father (baby boomer that is going full conservative as he gets older)
His view of the world is that the internet and everything else have a liberal spin to everything, and that somehow people can't view the 'real' news and conservative sites are hard to reach.

Well, I guess I'll just have to trust the Jews.

COMMENT IS FROM 2 years ago
who gives a fuck

The internet as a whole does not belong to the ISP's. It doesn't belong to anyone. This means that the small businesses on the internet have as much chance to be seen by users as the large ones.