Press F to pay respects

Press F to pay respects

bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2017-04-26/fcc-chief-poised-to-roil-capital-with-net-neutrality-rollback

Other urls found in this thread:

bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-04-03/new-h-1b-guidelines-crack-down-on-computer-programmer-jobs
theverge.com/2015/11/21/9776052/comcast-stream-tv-data-cap-exemption-net-neutrality
broadbandnow.com/report/much-data-really-cost-isps/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

God dammit Pai Ajit!!!!

Fucking Pajeet!!!

>rollback of something that never existed

bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-04-03/new-h-1b-guidelines-crack-down-on-computer-programmer-jobs

>The FCC’s net neutrality regulations, passed with only Democratic votes at the FCC in 2015, forbid broadband providers such as AT&T Inc. and Comcast Corp. from blocking or slowing certain web traffic, or from charging higher fees in return for quicker passage over their networks.

You won't see a democrat wanting to reverse this.

Why do Republicans hate Americans?

this is the jurisdiction of the FTC, not the FCC. But blame Trump, or whatever helps you sleep at night

(((PAI AJIT)))

Was there ever a problem before they passed the rules in 2015? I don't recall ever hearing of one.

why do you hate freedom?

>not believing in the free market and consumer choices after the countless examples

most recent samsung bomb phones

There was the majorly public one involving Netflix, which is why the discussion always dissolves into
>Hurrdurr you must want to give Netflix free Internet
Which is an intentional misunderstanding designed to shut down any conversation.

>There was never a problem before so that must mean there will never be a problem in the future
you are pretty retarded

There have been no reported cases of demons from hell appearing in the middle of crowds and eating children, but just in case the government is stockpiling holy water.

>I'm scared of spying/botnet and the president is LITERALLY HITLER
>let's give him control of the entire internet

Pajeet Pai hasn't won yet.

I've talked to some lawmakers on this - holy fucking shit.

I knew most of the Internet savants of the early days were literal autists but I didn't think they'd be the same ones to talk to Congress. They are functionally incapable of explaining Net Neutrality to lawmakers in a way they care about.

I had a lawmaker give me a confused look when I mentioned Net Neutrality and he hesitantly said "Net Neutrality is important because it's vital to the Internet's ecosystem".

On the fly I tried translating this to something lawmakers should care about and he seemed to have a much better understanding after I finished (though I'm bad at on-the-fly stuff so I'm sure I bastardized it):
Net Neutrality prevents telecoms from picking winners and losers among the businesses and communities whose existence depends on the Internet.

(Cont.)

If you aren't a literal fucking autist, get involved in the political process. Go to town halls and speak to your lawmakers. The bar to improving their understanding of Net Neutrality and other tech issues is *very* low and they're much more likely to support what they understand.

>worried about telecoms picking winners and losers
>meanwhile Google/Facebook/Twitter/YouTube/etc are actively engaging in censorship picking winners and losers

Hi there telecom shill. You may want to calm down on your inhalation of every telecom dick you come across.

You can choose to use services other than Google and Facebook and Twitter and YouTube. You can't choose to connect to the Internet without a telecom.

Different industries and different purposes.

>worried about collusion that hasn't happened
>willfully ignores ongoing well documented collusion that happens daily

wrong you stupid nigger, it's the same industry, which is why this all falls under the jurisdiction of the FTC

Because the "free market!"
If you hate your ISP then just switch, idiot !

All these damn regulations are putting unnecessary strain on many "mom and pop" ISPs, lets roll them all back and let the consumer decide the winners and losers of the market! MAGA

Woah there! You're getting ahead of yourself on that script you're reciting there, shill. I didn't mention collusion at all.

And no, I don't connect to the Internet though Facebook or Google or Amazon or Netflix. They only know what I tell them. Your script needs some updating and you need some more training. Shills like you are *boring*.

wireless technology will make this issue obsolete in the near future, and this has nothing to do with trump you neon haired virgin

Give me one example of why net neutrality is needed without posting those bullshit articles about Netflix getting throttled that never actually happened

It won't, and Trump put Pajeet in charge.

t. phone poster

t. NEET

I'm at work bozo

Netflix was indirectly throttled through refusal of upgrading the hardware only on the interconnects Netflix was using to connect to major telecoms. But sure, I can provide you another example you sad, lying shill.

theverge.com/2015/11/21/9776052/comcast-stream-tv-data-cap-exemption-net-neutrality is an example of Comcast exempting its own streaming service, Hulu, from the arbitrary wireline data cap that Comcast imposed on areas it monopolizes.

>The Verge

A broken clock is right twice a day. Prove that article is wrong.

>
>Because the "free market!"
>If you hate your ISP then just switch, idiot !


This is not an option to many

In Canada Bell cell customers could have unlimited TV streaming (providing you were a bell TV customer) for free (not counting towards your data cap) meanwhile competitors were not free, if you streamed netflix you used your data.

Obviously the CRTC (the FTC here) put an end to that since they were unfairly favoring their own services over competitors.

Prove that the content is a bad thing. With the move to IP based video, this will only get more common and it will be needed with the proliferation of 4K video and beyond

That was his point. Sarcasm/satire dude

>If you hate your ISP then just switch, idiot !
Then first fix the fucking government sanctioned monopolies these ISPs have. They literally do deals with towns to lock any other ISPs out.

thats obviously because there is too much red tape ! If we eliminate the red tape competition will spring up and there will be more choice !

AT&T lets you stream DirecTV for free over their mobile network in a similar manner and I fail to see the downside. Giving the consumer more for their money is a good thing. I get the pushback against data caps on landline connection, but it is very valid for mobile

They will cut my internet if I dont shill

It's not NEEDED user. It's just a way to preserve the best parts of the internet and let it be a boon to the users rather than the corporations. Yes, it's a non-capitalist policy. But sometimes it's for the greater good. When a piece of technology gets to a point of being a basic need, you need a way to ensure fair use for everyone. It's this same reason why your electricity "just werks" and you don't have to go hopping between providers.

Your seem confused, shill.

You're making an argument in support of arbitrary data caps that aren't backed by reality while ignoring the Net Neutrality issue that you are incapable of defending your stance on.

To answer your new shill topic: Because the marginal cost for ISPs to send data has dropped to almost nothing. They can readily support a dramatic uptick in 4K video if they wanted to.

broadbandnow.com/report/much-data-really-cost-isps/

(((free market)))

its only a temporary gain.

Just like lowering prices (temporarily) to shut a startup competitor is illegal as well.

> I get the pushback against data caps on landline connection, but it is very valid for mobile
If you get it for landlines, why is it hard to understand for mobile data ? it is the same thing but different mediums.

>yfw a Pajeet decides on how internet is regulated in Muricuh "land of the free"

Wtf are you talking about?

Net Neutrality is *very* business friendly. Not every business in the world is Comcast, Verizon, and AT&T.

it is only business unfriendly if you happen to own an ISP/telecom since it doesn't allow you to use your position of power as the gatekeeper to select the winners and losers
Everyone else is good with this

It's all part of "we're taking our countreh back" mantra.

Taking it back means selling it to the big corps.

> Not every business in the world is Comcast, Verizon, and AT&T.
They cover like 99% of users so they may as well be.

I didn't say not every business *uses* Comcast, Verizon, or AT&T. I said not every business *is* Comcast, Verizon, or AT&T.

What's good for the tiny handful of telecom companies at the top of their sector isn't necessarily good for the countless companies that have no choice but to use them or use an ISP that interconnects to them or an ISP that interconnects with an ISP that interconnects with them and so on.

Oh, yeah, internet start-ups and smaller companies in general. Of course net neutrality is important for them. I considered them part of the "users" that I referred to originally.

mobile bandwidth is very limited in comparison, and NN arguments do not translate well to that environment

Doesn't even have to be small startups. Could be medium sized or even massive businesses. Net Neutrality protects their best interests as well as that of small businesses.

the isp game is not a free market, try again.

Consider a world in which every website has to pay each major ISP to have their site viewable by that ISP's customers. Then the ISPs pass the cost on to the users in the form of tiered plans. Basic internet includes all Google services, Reddit and Facebook. For an extra $10 a month you can add the streaming services package and get Netflix, Hulu and Vimeo. And so forth.

Or, in short, do you want the internet to be like cable TV? Because Comcast, AT&T and Verizon certainly do and that's where they're going with this.

Some of them do. Arguments against zero-rating in particular. Exempting an ISPs favored services from data caps while their competitors are crippled by data caps is absolutely an important issue that strong Net Neutrality resolves.

so you're against business class data connections?

I am against crippling existing services for the sole purpose of selling back the service they used to have piecemeal.

I mean, net neutrality is "bad" for the massive businesses the same way competition is "bad" for them. Net neutrality prevents the internet being dominated by massive businesses.

>crippling existing services
pic related

it already is like cable you dumb fuck, everything goes through the big tech conglomerates. any worry about ISP intervention is easily circumvented by anyone with the slightest knowledge of how the internet works

>pic related

Do you really need me to re-post the link explicitly detailing how Comcast imposed arbitrary wireline datacaps on areas it has a monopoly in and exempted it's own streaming service, Hulu, from affecting the cap while forcing competitors to be capped?


>it already is like cable you dumb fuck, everything goes through the big tech conglomerates. any worry about ISP intervention is easily circumvented by anyone with the slightest knowledge of how the internet works


Hey shill - shaming people with lies isn't gonna work here. The big tech conglomerates don't own everything and consumers still decide which website and services they use.

Bypassing ISP blocks only works so well when they can simply throttle traffic heading to services they don't like or don't know the purpose of.

Internet access is never going to be a basic right no matter how much you cry and scream. If you're upset with your service, don't use it

*Again* you're arguing something I did not say! That's two strikes, shill. Are you really that incompetent that you can only copy and paste from your telecom-funded script?

>mobile bandwidth is very limited in comparison, and NN arguments do not translate well to that environment
Again, what you are gaining in the short term you lose out long term due to competitors being shut out of the market/fewer choices for the consumer long over all.
This just hasn't gone on for long enough to see the obvious downside to this.

Those kinds of practices will only concentrate more and more power into fewer and fewer companies.


I know you guys hate facebook, so there is an example of how india snubbed FB's free basics

No is arguing that point with respect to Net Neutrality.
The point is your ISP shouldn't be the gatekeeper to content or services you want to access.

data caps have nothing to do with net neutrality. All of your other "arguments" are just straw man bullshit. Surprised you haven't posted that tiered web service pick with Napster and MySpace on it

Why do Republicans side with big corporations over the average American every time?

>The point is your ISP shouldn't be the gatekeeper to content or services you want to access.
they're not

Why do liberal retards not realize king nigger could have handled this instead of worthless bullshit like tranny bathrooms?

>b-b-b-b-but Obama

Trump is in office now.

MAGA!

>AT&T lets you stream DirecTV for free over their mobile network in a similar manner and I fail to see the downside.

It's taking away bandwidth for other services, and makes all other data more expensive.

Basically, people who choose Netflix end up paying for those using "free" DirecTV.

This is unfair competition which, like all disruptions of free trade, leads to worse service and higher prices.

Obama did handle it.

Trump is simply reverting what he did.

because they keep thinking that what is good for business is good for them

I know that satan, glad you've finally come around. I'm not worried about any of this at all, I just like to watch you all squirm

>data caps have nothing to do with net neutrality. All of your other "arguments" are just straw man bullshit. Surprised you haven't posted that tiered web service pick with Napster and MySpace on it

Data caps were relevant to Net Neutrality due to the selective bypassing of the cap. Nice try shill. You are *really* bad at this. Who do you work for? They need to know they're being ripped off by a shit-tier employee that can't even derail a fucking *imageboard* thread.

They effectively would become gatekeepers that decide which businesses and communities thrive and which fail. That's the logical end result of their service-selective practices in an increasing number of jurisdictions.

>Why do Republicans side with big corporations over the average American every time?

In this case it's because next to none of them have any experience with the Internet and still think it as an optional luxury that people can live without.

>>The point is your ISP shouldn't be the gatekeeper to content or services you want to access.
>they're not

Not yet.

But they will.
Thanks to Trump.

yet

That's nice. Is your Dad coming to pick you up or what?

good, only retards will be affected

>Make fun of Pajeets
>Pajeets destroys the internet

who's laughing now?

>wireless companies already literally control what services you get for free (pro tip: its theirs) and which you need to pay for
>not gatekeepers

What, specifically, is your mobile provider not allowing you to access on their network?

Substantiate your claims.

nothing will happen

Good. The faster the cancer like pic related is off the net, the better

Have respect for your fellow posters and substantiate your claims or leave the thread.

Not like the Internet was upended by the MAFIAA a decade ago and destroyed countless creative and FOSS communities. Nope. Not like that was a catalyst for massive centralization of the Internet.

Same shit here will happen and kill off what the MAFIAA didn't and then some.

Sure, like I said with Bell.

Bell would let you stream video through their own app (providing you were a bell wireless customer and bell TV customer) for free no matter if you had data on your phone plan or not.

be more specific

and that is bad, how, exactly?

Who are the "retards" who will be affected by a lack of net neutrality?

>US let a Poo in the loo fuck them up real good

TOP KEK

people who pay for video services

i hope you are shitposting. only 2 options exist in cities and towns.

How are people not seeing the sarcasm?

Sarcasm/satire. C'mon man

i can't hear your tone or see your face so it's hard to detect sarcasm. ever wonder why really stupid ideas meant to be satire end up being taken seriously on the internet?

That is part of the problem, there is too many regulations and other bullshit stopping competition from taking root.
We need to eliminate all this red tape and free up businesses to bring cheaper goods and services to consumers

Inability to detect sarcasm is a symptom of various spectrum disorders. I suggest seeing a mental health professional.

Sup Forums users. you think any ISP is gonna put this site on the low tier family tier? this site can barely make ends meet now, it will have to charge a subscription or go under if isp's make it pay up. Sup Forums played itself.

>detecting sarcasm over the internet

im pretty sure this is what happened to what is now Sup Forums

It's extremely easy. How the fuck can you think a guy talking about mom and pop ISPs is anything but sarcastic?

>mom and pop ISPs
Surely you are memeing

>he can still tell when he himself is sarcastic in a post-ironic world
but how