Goodbye net neutrality

Goodbye net neutrality

dslreports.com/shownews/FCC-Effectively-Puts-Itself-on-Pause-At-GOPs-Request-138360

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=ziwYbVx_-qg
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

>"i care about internet freedom"

Good, it's important.

I don't know, wouldn't it be better to gut Net Neutrality and think something else up? From my limited reading of it it seemed that it had good parts but also gave control to our government unneededly and could kill innovation/competition. Smelled a little funny just like Obama singing a duet with Jimmy Fallon on the TPP which would cause an estimated 480k jobs lost.

>inb4 getting flamed for having a different opinion

More like
>getting flamed for being a retard

Shit bro you got me good. Don't even know how to respond to that. Peace out niggas looks like I got owned this time

>could kill innovation/competition
i can't tell if this is bait or not but i'll humor you and ask how net neutrality could possibly kill innovation/competition?

please don't come back

>net neutrality
Wait... did I want this?

I'll read the whole Wikipedia page now but it just didn't make sense to me why Obama was for it. Smelled like the old, "don't criticize our democracy, because democracy is objectively good" argument when we live in an oligarchy. Hiding behind a good idea while doing the opposite. Yes obviously Net Neutrality is good in the sense that it would prevent ISPs from discriminating, but I suspect that there are other motivations behind our government trying to get it passed. I'll have to look into it, I definitely don't trust Obama after that shit he tried to pull with the TPP though.

youtube.com/watch?v=ziwYbVx_-qg

Remember when the smart people were telling you not to vote for Trump?

So these are the morons who the GOP count on. Obama also drinks water so you better stop. I bet there's something sinister going on

If you didn't want people to throttle your connection to certain sites and services because they either don't like it or got paid to throttle it, then sure

Nice misrepresentation of my argument. My point was that much of the laws that get passed are for the oligarch's agenda which benefit corporations who lobby for government and whatnot. I don't trust Obama to be a good guy while no one is watching. I'd like to hear an actual response to my concerns though.

Obviously net neutrality is good, my concern is that they may be misrepresenting what they are trying to get passed as "Net Neutrality," similar to how the TPP is supposed "Free trade" or the no fly zone in Syria was to be called a "Humanitarian zone" despite the fact that it could cause WWIII

wow dude. you seem sincere and i can sympathize with your distrust of government but net neutrality is probably one of the most important issues of the information age and you should really try to be a little more informed about it if you consider yourself even remotely tech-savvy. it can be summed up pretty simply with pic related, this is what internet would look like without net neutrality.

you're a tinfoil moron, we get it

I like how America is the only country in the world that needs "Net neutrality" not to get fucked by their ISPs. I think your problem is something other than lack of government regulation in this case.

Maybe it has something to do with.. oh, government sanctioned and enforced telecommunications monopolies?

Net neutrality aims to provide equal access to all sites.

>So why the fck should I care?
Well for one, if companies like AT&T, ComCast, ... get their way you will be charged more money for less service.

>How the would they do that retard
By throttling other websites who don't pay them money (FaceBook, SnapChat, ...) So this means you will be stuck with a few big sites and they will make everything else extremely slow.

>But I only use those websites
You are on Sup Forums right now which is not considered a very big website so will be throttled.

>It's their fucking network nerd
True, however if these companies have their way, YOU will be fucked over. If you like taking ISP Dick up your ass be sure to keep screaming against net neutrality.

>The free market will fix this
Not quite, at least it's not happening Trump doesn't do something about it. The barriers of entry are VERY, VERY high to lay your own cable network. So we are kind of stuck with these 3. Even Google one of the biggest companies in the world is putting a halt to their cables.

>So how is Net Neutrality bad?
It's not bad at all. I don't understand why anybody would be against net neutrality. You have to pay more and get less all while ISP's just make more money.

>something other than lack of government regulation in this case
>government sanctioned and enforced telecommunications monopolies
hm.. if only there was some.. governing body that could impose.. regulations to prevent such monopolies from forming.. hmmmmmm

I'm tinfoil for not liking the TPP or bombing Syrians and instigation with Russia? This is a common pattern of behavior our government acts in. Frame us as the good guys and whatever they are doing as the right thing to do, regardless if it is or not.

You think the TPP and no fly zone in Syria were good ideas?

just go back to /x/ and Sup Forums kid

The fuck? Am I really alone here?

This board likes the TPP and wants us to be bombing the fuck out of Syrians?

Don't even respond to that guy, he's just being retarded on purpose.

>Maybe it has something to do with.. oh, government sanctioned and enforced telecommunications monopolies?
America is definitely not the only country with these lol.

>Obviously net neutrality is good, my concern is that they may be misrepresenting what they are trying to get passed as "Net Neutrality,"
fair point, but what evidence is there that net neutrality laws in the US are nefarious in any way? if you can demonstrate there will be negative consequences or some hidden agenda buried within, i'd agree with you. there is just no such argument to be made, as far as i'm aware. just blindly distrusting government doesn't feel like justification enough for sacrificing the free internet.

Prevent them from forming? Those fucking monopolies are enforced by the government. Why the fuck would they prevent monopolies when they are getting fat wads of cash paid to them by lobbyists from these corporations in return for regulatory capture?

Just wait, he'll bust out the infographs saying that everyone is a paid soros shill

The government can do good things AND bad things. I know that's a difficult concept to grasp, but you'll get there eventually.

the government allows the monopolies to exist which is why regulation is needed to break them up. who else do you suppose is going to "prevent them from forming"?

Yeah you are right, looking at them a bit more they don't seem nefarious. I see on the Wikipedia page that one of the main arguments against them is that the best way to prevent ISPs from discriminating is to encourage competition, which I agree with. I think there should be more competition and free market.

As says, it seems a bit backwards to me. Allow the monopolies to exist yet regulate them in small ways. When the real right thing to do would be to shatter the monopolies entirely.

true, but they're sort of two separate issues. you can have ISP monopolies and still have a free internet (i mean, it's what we have right now), and you can also have a lack of monopoly but have a ton of small companies still fucking you in the ass with anti-neutrality packages.

>When the real right thing to do would be to shatter the monopolies entirely.
You say this like Obama can just flip a switch and instantly destroy decades of consolidation. If the government ever wants to destroy the monopolies it'll be a drawn out, difficult process.

Say Net Neutrality gets passed, and control is handed over to the FCC to decide what should be charged for internet and they have more control over it. Do you think there should be concern about the FCC not doing the right thing, and doing things like overcharging for internet or jacking up prices? Wherein a free market competition could keep prices low.

net neutrality and base pricing for internet access are two different things, and even if they weren't, the FCC under obama declared broadband a utility which is beneficial to consumers. what incentive/precedent is there for FCC to mandate that internet have a minimum price? net neutrality just prevents ISPs from throttling sites, restricting access and selling packages etc. they're still free to charge what they want for that UNIVERSAL access.

The regulators and the corporations are one and the same. You're practically saying that you want them to self regulate and break up their own monopoly.

Which they will not. If that wasn't obvious enough.

like i said, who else, if not government, holds the responsibility of regulating industry and preventing those monopolies from forming? i have no vested interest in promoting government if there is a better alternative.

Ah yeah I can get behind that. That doesn't make any sense why that's not illegal yet, that's just misrepresenting a service. Basically stealing. Paying for internet access but really you're getting internet access to everything but torrents.

What I don't agree would be the government regulating pricing models, for example I can't pay $100 extra for google fiber or something, killing innovation and competition.

Still the real problem here is the monopolies, there can be no net neutrality laws and no one would break them because they would lose all their business for throttling with more competition.

>What I don't agree would be the government regulating pricing models, for example I can't pay $100 extra for google fiber or something, killing innovation and competition
yeah definitely to an extent. i think it's reasonable for govt to regulate that there be at least SOME cheap service available to people, whether its a municipal project or just requiring ISPs to provide a $20/mo "basics" package for poor people, but i agree that you should be able to pay for better service. i feel the same about healthcare desu. poor people should be able to get cheap, basic services but if you're rich there shouldn't be any restriction from getting really good service.

>
Still the real problem here is the monopolies, there can be no net neutrality laws and no one would break them because they would lose all their business for throttling with more competition
hadn't thought of it that way! its a good point but at the same time i'd feel safer with a law on the books that just outright says no bullshitting around with net neutrality. i wouldn't put it past telecoms companies to find some way of colluding to fuck up NN, they've done it before iirc to keep bandwidth prices unnecessarily high. not a monopoly, but people still get boned.

True, it just sucks that we have to have all these surface deep regulations rather than getting to the core. The monopolies and corporations who run our oligarchy. Not that I disagree with the sentiment or concept of Net Neutrality, just the direction we are going in and the fact that this even has to be a thing in the first place.

There are plenty of states and cities with 0 anti-competitive laws or whatever garbage you think there is... Why aren't those places full of Gigabit lines?

Google Fiber, unlike other BIG BAD isp's got favorable deals from cities (meaning they were allowed to only wire the rich neighborhoods) and Google Fiber still failed hard.

So what's your point? Why did Google Fiber fail hard while Comcast succeeded?

I just think that we do a lot better with more competition. I think it's how America got to be the, now debatable, greatest country on earth. Not exactly sure how to do it but I think more competition more innovation, less monopolies and corporations controlling everything under the sun = better

So what do we do going forward? Should we just opt for Darknet?

Won't help. The websites will still be throttled.

>gvet it passed
Daily reminder that net neutrality was the FCC standard until the cable cartel tried to destroy it in court, so the FCC started pushing for an actual law in retaliation.

God fucking dammit. So are we just fucked?

I'm surprised a former lobbyist like Wheeler would do anything good for the internet. What's his angle?

>Tor will be throttled

u wot m8?

It will. All data going through the wire into your house will be on a throttle unless verified to be premium approved content (like Facebook, Netflix, etc.)

You're lucky to get 800kbps on Tor anyway. Any throttling they did won't effect Tor.

...

Good. Fewer burgers in my sekret klub. How can I donate money to make this happen?

Jesus no. I'll be poor

>Sup Forums and Sup Forums as a whole is so contrarian they hate net neutrality and are pro mass surveillance now

honestly fuck all of you

Under Trump, it's inevitable. You don't have to do anything.

It's retarded but yeah, Sup Forums is now siding with the big cable companies. Because MAGA!

Who cares. If you have to rely on government to uphold your freedom I've got bad news for you buddy

You forget, the majority of current people on Sup Forums only came in after 2008 when their friend posted memes on Facebook.

Thank you based Trump. The internet will go back to the pre-2007 with normie containment sites. All the idiots who can't figure out proxies or VPNs will be stuck using Netflix and GoyBook.

Some people many be idiots that we have to deal with, but if there's a chance they can become informed in the future, that only helps us. It's never good when information is filtered. At least give some curious people the ability to discover the truth for themselves.

If the ignorant remain ignorant, nobody wins. The more informed people, the better. Even if it means having to coexist with the rabble, I'm willing to keep things as is.

>skype
>marketplace
What did they mean by this?

I just want to post dank memes without normies posting there asinine comments and predictably dull "jokes." Is that too much to ask?

We need to make a new site that nobody else knows about. I'm too lazy to do it though

First Second they wound have done the same thing

If we had decent mods that banned obvious shit posters and limited thread creation to two threads an hour per user, we'd be alot better off.

Well, Clinton might have installed someone in the FCC that was as bad as Trump's pick, but we'll never know. What we do know is that from the very beginning he was against Net Neutrality.

Never heard her voice any opposition to it (unless she was secretly against it this whole time).

>We need to make a new site that nobody else knows about. I'm too lazy to do it though
Those websites already exist. You don't know about them because you're being excluded.

Fucking up the internet is part of Trump's plan to make America great again.

>effectively banning all burgers from the non-mainstream Internet sites is bad

Yes, I'm sure 56k speeds are comparable to 800kbps user-chan.

>56k

Resorting to hyperbole doesn't ever help your argument, it just makes you look foolish.

Ok user-chan, everything will be alright.

It will for me because I live civilized country, where we expand the network when we're having bandwidth issues instead of throttling everyone. 100/100 for 15 euros a month. Stay mad, burgers.