Net Neutrality

Why aren't you fighting to defend it?

Is this the future you want?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=wtt2aSV8wdw
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_censorship_in_the_United_Kingdom
google.com/amp/variety.com/2017/politics/news/fcc-media-ownership-rules-sinclair-broadcasting-1202616424/amp/
arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/09/att-comcast-fail-in-latest-effort-to-stall-google-fiber-in-nashville/?amp=1
arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/10/comcast-sues-nashville-to-halt-rules-that-help-google-fiber/?amp=1
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

That graphic has so much nostalgia in it.

net neutrality is a ploy to give control of the internet to the government

El famuso skype market place.
Ofc I'm for net neutrality.
Better trust my elected gouvernements that companies.

the government has control over the internet at any time. they have had control over it before they employed net neutrality, how else could they enable and now appeal net neutrality? in the future, at any point, the government decides to employ some restrictions or lift them on the internet, they'll be able to do so. getting rid of net neutrality, which solely purpose is to defend the regular user and customer, you're only losing.

I honestly trust comcast/ a publicly traded company more than I trust my senators or any alphabet agency

I want to see Ameriyank burn

Yes. This is the future I want. A lack of net neutrality will lead to innovation in compression and the transfer of data. Meanwhile, all normalfags will be off the internet as complexly designed websites won't be as common due to data caps on both ends. There will also be increased competition in ISPs, with all of them attempting to expand over the country. This will drive down prices severely.

There's so much wrong with NN that I'm glad they're killing it. As it stands, it gives the government power to claim more power over the internet. In no time we'd be like britbongistan policing every instance of hurt feels. It makes it easier for corporations to use their influence to their benefit in an unaccountable agency. Fuck NN. If you want real NN, contact your Representatives and Senators. We need to do this in the open, and make it simple enough that it works the way we want it.

...

Economics 101 you retarded commie. Read it. Opening up industry to the free market increases competition.

...

Well I want to spend less time on the internet so whatever.

/thread

Because it isn't really going to affect us; the end users like your image illustrates (we'll likely never feel a tangible difference). Telecoms only want it gone because it might allow competition on their lines one day.

Also: your ISP doesn't need an excuse to raise the price or filter traffic tomorrow if that's what they wanted.

again, to iterate, the government will not have less power over the internet. the consumers will lose their protection against companies. that's like getting rid of the drugs safety checking, or getting rid of checks on food safety. your government will be able to change anything on it, whenever it wants (which is the majority of the votes). by getting rid of net neutrality, there's nothing that changes for the government, only the isps. i also want to note that your government doesn't govern the whole internet, there's a lot of different governments over the world. the government will only be able to tell you what happens with it in your region. again like your government was able to do before net neutrality, they'll be able to do the same things with net neutrality and without them.

Fucking retard I'm pretty lolbertarian and pro-free market but do you even understand how cable companies work? There is no fucking real competition between cable companies, they're all buddy buddy with each other. And what about if AT&T and Time Warner merge? There's even less """competition"""

if this happens im probably going to move to somewhere with google fiber
that simple
so i could care less

> that's like getting rid of the drugs safety checking, or getting rid of checks on food safety
Except these are functions established by laws, where NN isn't.
> your government will be able to change anything on it, whenever it wants (which is the majority of the votes). by getting rid of net neutrality
Typically a vote in Congress requires a supermajority. The FCC only needs a simple majority, so it makes it harder to keep NN since they can change whenever it's convenient.

The internet was a mistake

>that's like getting rid of the drugs safety checking, or getting rid of checks on food safety
Except I think we probably don't need a lot of those regulations either so your point is invalid.

>Except these are functions established by laws, where NN isn't.
Ehhhh, I don't know that you can argue that, those regulations are set out by the fda and usda, not laws, the agencies have a mandate from congress to achieve a particular goal.
I'll grant you that the FCC was given more explict instructions and the last administration's FCC basically re-interpreted the law as it was written to create NN rules.
I think Pai has the right idea, it should probably be under the purvue of the FTC not the FCC. but I'm also like you I don't wan the government within 300 miles of internet "regulation" of ANY sort.

>The FCC only needs a simple majority
It's also an unellected body.

So if Net Netrality laws are repealed and we do end up like OP's image will the anti-NN fags come out and apologize?

Wat, of course it will affect you.

Did you pay for a $40 asia premium package to be able to order online from china or call up a source on 2ch before?

Did your stores get limited to amazon and eBay because those are the only stores that paid off your ISP?

Telecoms want it gone because they could exploit the fuck out of having power over opinions and commerce.

Just give me your nation's road network and set no rules for me with regards to who I let drive where how fast and no need to even give anyone access to cross or use a street. I'll gouge the fuck out of you.

Depends on the details.

If the start offering a package that's equivalent to what you get now (dumb pipe maybe some qos and data caps) and it's suddenly drastically more than what I pay now then yeah I'll say I was wrong.
But if the product we think of as an internet connection stays largely untouched and they just carve out lower teirs to try and capture a market they wouldn't have otherwise, (grandma who is on fixed income and only ever uses facebook, email, and youtube) and they offer a valuable proposition to those customers. Then no I won't apologize. But there will still be people sitting there jumping up and down going see see and completely missing the point.

Will you be on the same Comcast premium + Chat US North subregion 1 (they won't pay for region 2-10, just theirs) to receive the apology? And what good will it do?

Honestly? It doesn't look that bad. I don't understand what people are fussing about.

Are you daft?

The way to monetize this is to make stores and services pay for their ability to even sell their product on the internet, by selling them into speed tiers and what not. Almost all sales go where its convenient.

Of course you also still extort money on the customer's side. If the sites didn't pay the only way they're even reasonably going to be reachable is when the customer pays extra.

Lets make AOL great again!

I'm in Yurop so I don't care. If the NN gets fucked for the US it would probably be a good thing for the rest of the world. The SV will become a pile of ruins and investors might even stop throwing money at Juicero type garbage and start funding real technology from competent startups instead.

It doesn't? Again, see .

Give me your road network or even just individual regions and give me the ability to let me decide who drives on it and how fast and on how many lanes. I'll extort the shit out of you.

For libtards: I mean the market will decide how much road access is worth and appropriate prices will be set, without doubt all that competition that will come from everypne now being free to build roads will provide the best service ever to everywhere.

ISP's have WAY more to gain from just capping your data and charging you overage fees, and that doesn't violate NN one bit.

>The way to monetize this is to make stores and services pay for their ability to even sell their product on the internet
They can't do that. They can only limit access to THEIR customers. and they can only do that insofar as it doesn't upset their customers and cause them to go somewhere else. (lack of competition in the ISP business is something that needs to be addressed, I'll grant so don't even bother going down that hole)

The doomsday scenarios that are always trotted out, will likely never arise. What we do see is ISP's playing hardball with peering partners trying to shift costs around. That's just business as usual.

> Ehhhh, I don't know that you can argue that, those regulations are set out by the fda and usda, not laws, the agencies have a mandate from congress to achieve a particular goal.
> it's also an unelected body
That was my point, but it was poorly made.

> I think Pai has the right idea, it should probably be under the purvue of the FTC not the FCC.
Agreed.

> but I'm also like you I don't wan the government within 300 miles of internet "regulation" of ANY sort.
I support NN, it just needs to be passed like any other law in our elected body created for such purposes, and it needs to be clean and simple, doing what we want without a bunch of bullshit and unintended consequences. If you want a glimpse of the NN-free future, look at Facebag's initiatives in India. I worry about control of information more than the speed at which it's delivered.

>ISP's have WAY more to gain from just capping your data and charging you overage fees, and that doesn't violate NN one bit.
Are you nuts? Of course they earn way more if they also sell businesses the privilege of being accessible (with any speed and convenience). And then also sell their customers the privilege of accessing anyone who didn't pay for the highest tier on the business end.

> They can't do that. They can only limit access to THEIR customers.
And the point is? Please no utterly retarded fantasies of x new choices popping up and laying down a national and international network without ever meeding to use the current big ISPs networks they will compete against.

This American habit of inventing stuff and then being terrible at it is fascinating. It's like the Chinese with their gunpowder, or the Arabs and their alcohol.

why would they? that's what they want.

Net Neutrality:
Only two ISP's avalable. Both block domains they dont like. But hey. CNN and Hufpo come at full speed.

>look at Facebag's initiatives in India.
They are providing SOME connection to people who would otherwise not have it.
I don't think that should be looked at with the IRE that it is.

Others in the pro-NN camp have pointed to T-mobile's binge on or whatever it was called (music and netflix not counting against caps) like it was the devil. and I think that's absurd. There was no money that changed hands for that and the customers where the ones winning, and even if money HAD changed hands, the consumers still won. I don't think that should be prevented. That's the sort of thing regulatory over-reach has the capability to quash.

Oh my god I am so sick of this.

Rahhhh right-winger doesn't agree with me, or doesn't want the government to do a thing. therefore they MUST want the worst possible outcome, or for that thing to not get done.
As if the government is the only force in this world that could possibly do anything ever.

Go read Jonathan Haidt

Cell phones?
If they are only blocking the domain don't use their damn DNS service.

Free Market will fix it

But the Chinese made extensive use of black powder weapons

So you don't want to be certain that when you're sick, and take a medication, that it's not just some damaging chemicals thrown together in a third world country, that harms you instead of cure you? Or that you can get sick from any food you buy?

>10$ Hollywood
>”favourite” networks
>that unnecessary “u”

Fucking Canadians.

funny you want the gov't out of this, but have nothing to say when choice is artificially limited by agreements between big business and the government. so much for free market.
and where did i once mention right wing?

I still don't understand this meme

>but have nothing to say when choice is artificially limited by agreements between big business and the government.
Actually I have a lot to say about that.
ISP's represent a natural monopoly and I would be in favor of municipalities building and maintaining fiber netowrks and then leasing the lines to ISP's so we could have something like an MVNO for wireline service. I think that would be great.
The biggest problem in the ISP space is a fundamental lack of competition created by collusion between government and business. we agree on that.

>where did i once mention right wing?
Sorry, fair point I read way in to your comment, cause it had a similar structure to something I'm so sick of. Oh look here it is now:
No Idiot, I want the government to not restrict the things I'm allowed to put in my own fucking body, If I want to buy and ingest an experimental drug that may save my life or may kill me, then I should damn fucking well be able to do that.
It's hilarious hyperbole to say if there were no FDA people would just be cramming shit into capusles and selling it as wonder cures. It's not the 1700's we have the internet you can look up what experiences others have had with a product it's like magic.
It would be a HILARIOUSLY bad business model to sell people garbage pills that could harm you, because you are killing your customer, which isn't going to net you any more customers and it sure as hell destroys your repeat customers.

You can get sick from any food you buy TODAY. I've gotten food poisoning from restaurants that had 100% health dept ratings. Mistakes happen, There being some over reaching goverment bureaucracy that sets some standards doesn't magically make everything better. A food business has EVERY incentive to make food that Doesn't make you sick, so you come back again and tell your friends to eat there too.

Seriously, you give humans so little credit and take so little into account, what's it like in your world?

>murricans
Top fucking kek

>Why aren't you fighting to defend it?

Because this is the natural outcome of the internet and the web. It could have only ended with either total government control or total corporate control.

>he's never heard of MMS

NN in two words
youtube.com/watch?v=wtt2aSV8wdw

There's literally no point in net neutrality when the web continues to be dominated by 5 or so corporations.

>video games
>playground
It's like they know all gamers are 12 yearolds

fake drugs exist, retard. They may not harm you but they sure as hell won't be doing anything to cure your illness. You won't notice as your body continues to deteriorate from the illness that you already have. The average person has absolutely no idea how to evaluate the effectiveness of the shit they're taking. There are also kooky alternative """medicine""" bullshit like black salve and miracle mineral supplement that are outright harmful and people still fall for it. The government will restrict these without anyone needing to die. Your retarded anarco-capitalist solution requires someone to die or, at the very least, have someone's condition worsen before anyone catches up to the fact that drinking bleach may not be a good idea after all.

you are a dumb fuck, and you deserve what's coming to you

Fix what?

As an EU I cannot do much for Americans net neutrality.
Next time elect a government based on real reasons like protecting net neutrality not based on shitty reddit frog memes.

That makes no sense. There are already tiers for people with minimal incomes that just use Facebook and email, they're called slower speed packages.

All these excuses for why getting rid of net neutrality might not be a disaster...but why get rid of it in the first place? What will the CONSUMER gain? Fucking nothing.

And that's why Americans are currently being ripped off, with their shitty data caps.
Did you know that data caps on home internet are actually illegal in Europe? EU doesn't allow it, so it doesn't happen.

I don't understand the lack of net neutrality. How will search engines work if they drop nn? Like all those random website you visit only few times in your life when looking for something online? They can't possibly bundle everything "on the shelves" since there are just way too many websites, this isn't fucking tv.

You didn't adress any of my points, I'm not going to bother if you are just going to talk past me.
I'm not an an-cap if you had read my post you would know that (show me an an-cap that wants a municipality to run a fiber network)
I'm not arguing for a solution, I'm arguing for the freedom to do as I please and interact and associate with who I please in however I so choose.

as a matter of fact, I think imdid address one of your points
>It's hilarious hyperbole to say if there were no FDA people would just be cramming shit into capusles and selling it as wonder cures.

It's only been there for a couple of years, it wasn't worse before, and it wasn't better after.

There were no net neutrality laws before obama. they just wanted more control over the internet so they made it an issue.

OP's image will never happen.

beware shills

There will be an allotment "Other" with a few GB / month.

So you ignored the inconvenient points then. Furthermore you made my point for me then because all that shit you mentioned exists now and no amount of regulation is going to stop people from drinking silver water or other bullshit.
But it will stop companies from developing life saving drugs because the certification process is necessarily arduous, and expensive.

>google, facebook, netflix, and liberals all want NN

This alone tells me Net Neutrality is bad.

>exists now
and are having a hard time gaining ground because of government regulation. If there were none, you'd be seeing them all over ebay.

>Is this the future you want?
For USA? Sure. But keep your shit there, we already have ours.

>google, facebook, netflix, and liberals all want oxygen
we should all stop breathing
you go first

Now you are just being lazy.

Of course, some are gonna stay up until they catch wind of it. There's also the issue of international sellers. some guy ordered MMS, had his package intercepted and was given a letter from the government along with the package he ordered while the ebay seller was taken down
There's also the issue of fake drugs made from just flour. These things are much more difficult to see since the average person will not have the expertise to evaluate its contents and effectiveness.

It was the norm beforehand, just not law.

Because i am not American and I don't mind all you American cucks paying $30 per month to shitpost on 4chins.

Even I can only watch so much hockey and Degrasi Junior High.

Just like it did with the telephone service provider market back in the 70s and 80s, right?

Not exactly true if the barrier to entry is insanely high. Best you can do to have actual competition is to do what every other country with a competitive isp market do: publicly-owned fiber that are leased out to ISPs

prove to me that anything will change

> i don't understand burger politics but I'm going to comment anyway
The post.

This is what will happen.
The Tier 1 ISP's will push data rates onto their respective competitors.
Because each of these Tier 1 ISP's will then have an additional expense, they will charge their customers (Tier 2 and Tier 3 ISP's) more for their data.
These lower ISP's will then charge their customers more to offset these expenses.
This will be accomplished by having lower data caps, raising prices, or both. Mobile Internet connections will be the first to see price increases. Hard-line Internet connections will likely see an increase in prices that is comparable to an increase in cable and satellite television service prices.
That's all that will change. Google, Netflix, Amazon, all those guys will be charged more by the Tier 1 ISP's for their data, and so their streaming services like YouTube Red, Netflix, and Amazon Prime will go up to offset these additional costs.
In the long run, the lowly laboring consumer will see costs for Internet service and products go up while seeing no difference in speeds or delivery of content.

>There will also be increased competition in ISPs, with all of them attempting to expand over the country.
>burgers actually believe this

EU caps everything, including how many feathers you can put in a fucking pillow. You think we're screwed? You're being pwned by the technocrats. The only winners are Chiners and Ruskies.

AT&T was a de facto monopoly until the Reagan administration broke up Ma Bell into the Baby Bells in the mid-80s. It's actually gotten better since.

I like the idea of municipal broadband, but I don't like the idea of multiple companies operating on the same system. Redundant infrastructure isn't necessarily a bad thing, and it speeds up implementation of newer technologies.

There are severe barriers to expansion. You have federal, state, and local regulations to deal with, as well as the corrupt process of franchising. Not to say the big guys will start laying new lines, but it could help local and regional ISPs.

>There are severe barriers to expansion. You have federal, state, and local regulations to deal with, as well as the corrupt process of franchising.
And the current big ISPs fight hard to keep it that way. Why do you think Google Fiber is so slow to expand?

Wrong
See Belgium

> And the current big ISPs fight hard to keep it that way. Why do you think Google Fiber is so slow to expand?
Which is why reforms will hopefully lead to a new boom in construction. Either the incumbents step up or they lose business to regional providers. It's working where I live, but there's a hell of a lot more to do. It was actually Google that spurred reforms where I live, but they have teased and never delivered, so fuck them.

I'm outside amerikka and can't really do anything.
The shit thing is that when NN dies in america its gonna trainwreck itself over all of the world.

Comcast is gonna go global.

i'm actually happy to see that americans are getting fucked in the ass by isps, they shouldn't use the internet anyway, just look at this thread

> america its gonna trainwreck itself over all of the world
GOD BLESS AMERICA

Burger it sincerely doesn't matter to me at all!
>tfw cheap unlimited internet service on my country

>he believes what breitbart and pol say about the UK

Massive lols

Removing NN will only turn the internet in the same shit show that is pay tv.
>example german dive ball league
>have to pay for each day, friday games,saturday games,sunday games
>they purposely split the fucking match plan to introduce monday games
>tv channel has a de facto monopoly on dive ball because no other channel has enough money to bid against him
>other channels can't earn money to compete for dive ball because no dive ball licence
>actually it's the german dive ball association that's holding the monopoly but it works regardless as there is no competition
I don't know how anyone could believe that fucking ISPs out of all companies will have real competition in one area when a competitor would have to build the whole fucking net infrastructure to compete. OP's pic is probably as close to the truth as it gets.

Oh yeah, Comcast and all the other telcos will start investing money in making your internet faster.

Like, they totally were not able to do it before, but they are going to do it now, and because of competence, prices will not increase

HAHAHAHAHA I swear it's unbelievable how easy is to jew muricans

> we-we're not 1984 :^)
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_censorship_in_the_United_Kingdom

(Unelected) government officials, FTFY

>Id rather have the people who run the post office in charge of my internet than a company

>it will be better if we don't have it because competition is better for the consuer and without net neutrality we will have more competition because that's what companies want.

You really think that companies want competition? When they buy out other brands and merge all the damn time so that they have little to fight against? With the only thing keeping a single company from having a monopoly are laws? You really think that without any regulation, isp's will suddenly start caring about consumers and more competition is going to come out of it because it's good for the company?
google.com/amp/variety.com/2017/politics/news/fcc-media-ownership-rules-sinclair-broadcasting-1202616424/amp/
The FCC voting to relax a bill that kept any single company from owning too many franchises just goes to show how little they care about you. Companies don't want competition, it's why lexxotica owns most of the sunglasses market, it's why we have regional monopolies for ISP's
arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/09/att-comcast-fail-in-latest-effort-to-stall-google-fiber-in-nashville/?amp=1

arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/10/comcast-sues-nashville-to-halt-rules-that-help-google-fiber/?amp=1
It's why AT&T and Comcast sued the state of Nashville because Google fiber was actual competition. They don't give a shit about you, they just want your money. Defending corporations doesn't get you anything, they don't magically exempt you from anti consumer practices, they just want your money.

> state of Nashville
State of Sup Forums

The argument being made is that Title II regulations are somehow burdensome and that is what is preventing investment and competition. It's a dubious argument but I'm all for scrapping this shitty power grab disguised as pro-consumer policy.

>Economics 101 you retarded commie. Read it. Opening up industry to the free market increases competition.

Make it legal to put poison in food then. It will open up the market to new, cheaper, and poisonous foods!

>web without burgers
Sign me the fuck up.