Donal Trump is killing net neutrality and we voted him

>Donal Trump is killing net neutrality and we voted him
wired.com/2017/01/year-donald-trump-kills-net-neutrality/

Why do we love him?

Other urls found in this thread:

arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/09/att-sues-nashville-in-bid-to-stall-google-fiber/?comments=1
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

because you are ameridumbs

I didn't vote for him.

>we

As long as he abolishes policies that make competition between ISPs impossible (which are a part of current "net neutrality" package), it's all going to be good.

>believing fake news

...

sauce?

Telcoms are natural monopolies. There will never be enough competition for Corruption 101 of holding content providers hostage to not be feasible. Remember, under Trump they won't have to admit they're throttling, so how are you as a consumer going to compare even if you did have choice?
Any ISP that advertised it didn't throttle like the others would probably be shut down for being "anti-business."

>implying

>under trump companies won't be held liable for provided services as stated in the signed agreement.

So he's going to eliminate false advertising, and every other law that prevents companies from doing such things?

yeah but what if you have some kind of business or you are a user of a web page that the ISP really hate? what if, for example, those ISP are being ruled by lefties and other democrats? What if they see Sup Forums as a threat or a usless web page? No more Sup Forums 4 u m8

>So he's going to eliminate false advertising
False advertising? That's librul speak! In conservatism it's called "success."

>we

because this site is crawling with 20 something edgelords who are too ironic and badass to have sensible political opinions. also they're american.

It is if you're an Intel shill at least.

>As long as he abolishes policies that make competition between ISPs impossible

How does that make comptetition impossible? There is no hardware or engineering reason why ISPs want to get rid of net neutrality. And places with net neutrality and where they don't even discuss getting rid of it has much better competition than America.

>anything that isnt breitbart is fake news

Net Neutrality was never needed, what was needed is making it easier for smaller ISPs to form and destroy laws that enable monopolies, thanks obama.

So Sup Forums, which 2016 candidate (from all of them, not from just shillary/trump) was the best/least bad computing/internet/online privacy wise?

None of them because they're all oldfarts with no clue.

Net Neutrality means that the ISP is not allowed to police what it carries. Without it, be ready to pay more for sites which are not sponsored by your ISP.

>trusting the same govt who does massive surveillance on you to regulate internet providers

They won't pull that shit if they know someone can easily jump to an ISP that won't do the same thing. Monopolies enable this behavior.

>6 million illegals voted

You don't vote for a king.

>Trusting ISP who historically had monopolies will just magically regulate itself.

The reason the ISPs have monopoly is because they lobbied the government for regulations to make it that way.
Besides, do you really want net neutrality regulation that badly that you're willing to let the ISPs fucking write it?
When the foxes are designing the chicken coop, don't ask for more redesigns.

much better than having them make solicitations and loopholes with the Fed under the name of "net neutrality" in order to protect their oligopoly even further desu

Good thing trump wants to make it illegal for a company to do any lobbying.

We love him because his zany antics create dynamic and interesting new web content constantly. We need more great men like him.

Or else boredom will catch up with us, after all cat videos could only consume half of our lives at best. And even the greatest TV writers couldn't make up stuff as good as this.

Also all the new content and spin off memes will create exponential demand for hardware and software development as we try to store and stream all of it. This also creates new job, just like how Trump promised.

Gary Johnson. He had some dumb ideas, but the all around platform was superior to the platform of the other candidates.

No one said monopolies will be gone. Quite the contrary. I expect Trump Inc. to start buying more telcos very soon.

1. Become president
2. Buy all telcos and strengthen their monopolies.
3. Kill Net Neutrality
4. ...
5. Profit.

McAfee
But he didn't take the election seriously and conceded to Gary "What's a Leppo?" Johnson

LMAO
That will never happen, you know that right? The very people he's putting in people are those that heavily utilize lobbying, and have been doing such for decades.

Trumpet delusional levels are reaching an all time high.

he's not in office yet and you're acting like he hasn't done what he promised
oh well all the more pain to you when he's elected for another term

I voted Hilldawg.

Except he promised just about everything, and was very self contradicting about several key issues.

Wrong. His key issues stayed the same if you look on his website.

because le maymay 2016

>promises the world
>IT'LL HAPPEN TRUST ME I BELIEVE IN THE DONALD
as i said
delusional
he won't be elected for a second term, don't worry friendo :)

>we
only people who voted for him are contrarian retards

His rhetoric and several backtracking statements speak otherwise.

Go back to The_Donald if you're just here to shill generally and not about net neutrality.

>Trump will make lobbying illegal, remove lobbyists from having too much white house influence!
>I know, let's just appoint the CEO who the lobbyist works for instead

top kek that's what they said about his first term

oh wow using big words like rhetoric now huh? big boy let me tell you something, net neutrality protects monopolies
grow up maybe?

CEOs have much more experience than politicians who never held a real job in their lives

I voted Johnson too, but he's a democrat posing as a libertarian. I would have voted for McAfee if i could. Too bad the libertarian party is terrible in it's current form.

>Anyone who likes trump is an /r/the_donald reddit faggot
Why is it okay for liberals to project this hard?

I left my teenage libertarian phase when I turned 18, why haven't you?

because Sup Forums is a reddit colony at this point

now fuck off

Well, seeing how Sup Forums has been invaded by the_donald posters, his statement isnt false.

And letting ISPs run wild won't restrict your access to information and quash any new, small ISPs that they need for competition and technology advancement?

>false advertising

>The reason the ISPs have monopoly is because they lobbied the government for regulations to make it that way.

Yes, which is why there is a focus on Net Netruality, and only Net Neutrality. It's one of the laws that they don't profit from. ATT, Comcast will prevent new competition from appearing by colluding with Congress.

.
>Undoing one regulation, is going to magically remove all of the other regulation that benefit ISP by keeping the compettion.
>He thinks ISP won't just rig the market to block competition.
arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/09/att-sues-nashville-in-bid-to-stall-google-fiber/?comments=1

please tell us about your journey away from libertarianism and towards the dark enlightenment

>he won't be elected for a second term, don't worry friendo :)
I'd like to believe that but it's probably not going to be a clean sweep if he even loses at all.

This is what I think will happen. He'll probably coast on the remnants of Obama's policies and take credit for them while removing the parts that are less popular. After like 6 years of removing unpopular policies the economy will start to teeter and it will collapse by the 8th year. This clears the way for the democrats to win by a fuckhuge margin and people compare Trump to Dubya. So then we get Clinton/Obama 2.

Republicans ruin everything and democrats pick up the pieces. People keep electing republicans expecting a different result and people keep electing democrats hoping for the same result.

Trump is literally saving the economy and he's not even president yet.

In China its called success.

In the u.s. its called false advertising.

USA is the only place with net neutrality.

>false advertising,
Right wing cuck speak for fraud.

>we

isn't net neutrality a bad thing that is in actuallity just the opposite of its' name??

Found the lolbertarian retard.

No.

since when? and why does the fight the future foundation say that's what it is?

Well to be fair, anything that wasn't Breitbart was completely wrong about Trump.

ok just looked it up and it's just so much smoke and mirrors. everything it claims to be against is still common practice. the only thing that will achieve what net neutrality aims for is content providers like netflix, hulu, etc... suing big telecoms over unfair business practices

>since when?
Always? America's internet has pretty much always had net neutrality. When we switched from phone lines to cable and fiber the rules that were in place on phone lines didn't get carried over to cable and fiber, broadband companies were in a blindspot in the existing regulations. The FCC finally addressed the blindspot by adding cable and fiber to title II but now Trump wants to get rid of the FCC which will probably fuck up everything.

You really don't understand how legislation is written, do you?
First you get a central idea; in this case it's net neutrality.
Then, during discussion and debate, it gets passed around and every person paid off by the telecoms industry adds their own little clause to it along the lines of "unless you're running an ISP" or some other bullshit. Then they pass this law, and the loophole become law. So now current ISPs don't have to give a shit about net neutrality but possible new competitors (like google fiber) do.
The monopoly is reinforced since you're asking telecom paid politicians to go against their employers. Which is not the american public.

His twitter account alone is soild gold and it stablizign the markets as he posts.

America is to big for competition to realistically ever appear in this market.

You have to lay tons of wires, lines, etc

>Still trying to rationalize voting for someone who only wants to make himself richer

The denial is strong

both of the main presidential candidates were shit, sorry to say desu

One was a giant turd the other was a hurricane of diarrhea. We got the hurricane

Good. It should've died a long time ago. This isn't commie europpa where everything needs to be regulated by the government.

>Believing news outlets after they lied about Osama having weapons of mass destruction causing thousands of deaths

You'd have to be pretty braindead desu

>Prohibits the federal government from taking discriminatory action against a person on the basis that such person believes or acts in accordance with a religious belief or moral conviction that: (1) marriage is or should be recognized as the union of one man and one woman, or (2) sexual relations are properly reserved to such a marriage.

First amendment protection act, this is why we voted for Trump. Faggots and globalists are harmful to America.

By cutting taxes effectively cutting corporation tax to 0%? Ha, sure.

All he does on his twitter is claim responsability for things he didnt do and promise to do things he never will.

1st amendment protection doesn't need protection it automatically supersedes all other laws that are not amendments to the constitution. Looks more like pandering and restating what has already been stated. It might actually infringe on the 1st if it allows the government to discriminate against homo couples.

>not filtering the cancer that is killing this website

>elect a fag into office whose entire campaign consists of MUH GUD OLD TIEMS
>act surprised he's a statist luddite control freak

Good job, MAGA fags.

Its to prevent homosexuals from taking legal action against someone for believing that they are immoral for fucking men.

If you live in a SJW infested area like San Francisco and tell a faggot you won't provide flowers for his wedding, he can sue you for discrimination. This law will protect you.

>We voted for him
>We love him
>We

Nah. I'm not even mad he won compared to Hillary but loving him is an entirely different story.

why is Sup Forums so full of cucks?

>implying Trump won and the media isn't just hiding that it was someone else.

If you live in a state that doesn't care about homos then you're already allowed to do that. Don't set up a Christfag cakeshop in California where they care about homos.

>states rights until the states make laws we don't like

>he fell for Trump meme

kek, I'm lmaoing@ur life from my sofa in syria

Can you explain how net neutrality bolsters monopolies? And if so why would they be pushing to end it?

Net neutrality isn't a thing outside of US and everything is fine. Because of this my mobile provider gives free data for facebook and stuff.

The problem is provider monopolies.

If you didn't have had your head in your ass, you would realize that Google lobbys for net netruality and ISP lobbys against it. Whatever, don't shitpost on Sup Forums when your torrent for your anime throttles.

You fucking scared the shit out of me. My monitor is known for shipping with like 3 dead pixels for unlucky people. I thought i had a late bloomer.

That's not a first ammendment right, though. I agree that businesses should be allowed to discriminate if they are private, but doing so isn't a first ammendment right at all.

You deserve to be sued for descriminating against pure lesbians.

Watch Hypernormalization by Adam Curtis. In fact watch all the Adam Curtis documentaries.

I can think of two situations where this particular problem has surfaced recently and in both cases the person or entity discriminating were clearly in the wrong.

First one was a private entity, a cake shop that didn't want to serve a gay couple because the owner claimed to be religious which would have been okay but they did not register their shop as a religious organization so they were not allowed to discriminate against the couple in that area.

Second time was a county clerk who refused to issue marriage licenses and refused to resign so that someone else could. Since they prevented everyone from getting licenses it was technically not discrimination but a judge ordered them to start issuing licenses and they still refused, so they were arrested for contempt of court.

Good, fag men are a diseases. I'm just glad they didn't turn a lesbian couple away.

Net neutrality is the EU law

You only think that because you are a bigot that believes being a gay couple is ok. You need to respect my right to not want to be around degenerates.

Who fucking cares.