This whole Net Neutrality repeal shit is just another fucking meme by Reddit

This whole Net Neutrality repeal shit is just another fucking meme by Reddit.

The first ISP to block data will also be the first to lose the majority of their consumer base.

Other urls found in this thread:

arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/11/att-and-comcast-win-lawsuit-they-filed-to-stall-google-fiber-in-nashville/?amp=1
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

True but ISPs have and will collude.

Dear God, user. We had 30 threads about Net Neutrality. JUST USE THE FUCKING CATALOG FAGGOT! STOP KILL GOOD THREADS.

>implying Americans have choice of ISPs

Most American homes have only two choices, the cable company or the phone company.

>The first ISP to block data will also be the first to lose the majority of their consumer base.
They would in a free market

PAJIT IS POOING IN AMERICAN INTERNETS AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAH

I am neither american or a poorfag, so I don't really care about the local laws of america.
But I was under the impression that americans do not have the option to choose between ISP's.
At least that was what part of the complaint was about.

They have the freedom to choose whatever ISP they want. They just have to move into a neighborhood which their preferred ISP actually services in order to go through with that choice. At most you have 2/3 options, and one of them is almost always completely unusable with any sort of modern usecase.

>to lose majority of the consumer base
To who? Comcast has virtual monopoly in my city. The second best is a shitty DSL provider that has very shaky connections and limited speed.

70% of US also suffers from these monopolies.

It's like you Americans have a choice. It would only work if you had hundreds of ISPs.

so not a monopoly

c) Make your own

What monopolies exactly?

If your shitty town was worth investing in, then your DSL provider would have went full fiber optic. ATT and Verizon are doing this.

tl;dr stop living in a shit neighborhood

You get what you pay for. If you faggots cared about not buying bad products this wouldn't have happened.
>Waaaah Comcast is shit but I'm still paying them every month because uhh well
Pathetic desu

Notice how most of the examples are not American. Because in America it all stops at "engage lawyers".

>jus do it urself bro
Economies of scale, nigger. Unless I can somehow convince all the mouthbreathing Comcucks in my neighborhood (well, really, the city, if it's really meant to be worth the effort), there's no way that I could make my own ISP.
>jus b rich bro
If your only solution to these problems is to throw money at them, then you're the kikes' wet dream and you deserve to become a eunuch.

>It is your fault for living in [location x]. You need to live in [higher population location] to get our services.
Imagine if water or electricity went by this rule.

Exactly what a monopoly is. Price fixing, high cost, shitty service, no competition, etc

lmfao fucking americucks

tfw goverment provides me free 25mb internet

>whaaa i want the best option for my money but then monopolies are created but I really really want faster internet
It's always been a choice of A or B
A few years of slower DSL shit leading into a better market or a few years of based fiber connection leading into a nightmare
And no, the answer isn't "I want the best for me and the gubberment will do the rest"
It's not easy and it's never BEEN easy

>Imagine if water or electricity went by this rule.
Soon, user, soon.

>The first ISP to block data will also be the first to lose the majority of their consumer base.
Yeah because people will stop using the internet because their ISP blocked a page.

How much are you getting paid to shill btw?
I'm curious why with how much money they're spending on government bribes why can't they afford better shills.

>The first ISP to block data will also be the first to lose the majority of their consumer base.
>only one ISP in my area
>they own all the infrastructure
Yeah sure okay that's exactly what will happen

I really hope not.

BTW, to the Yuropoors and others who are laughing at the Burgeristani people: Once the Burgeristanis get loved tenderly by the ISPs, Yurope is next. You think you are safe, because current laws protect you? As we can clearly see in Burgeristan, $$$ is more important than your rights. Your best course of action is to help the Burgers protect themselves.

location x people already get a service though

if you want faster internet then go to a higher population area

it's like this across the world not just the US

>it's like this across the world
It is amazing how much I am seeing this statement these days. Do you genuinely believe this? That ALL countries are as bad as yours?

Comcast is literally the best choice in the majority of the US. It's them or some retard tier dsl where I live. Comcast is already raping people with a 1TB limit per month.

And what are they gonna switch to when there's only one real ISP in town? Satellite? Mobile? Dial-up?

The funny thing is that I come from a third world country.
Now that I'm in America I can compare it to the shithole I used to live in.
America is worse in this regard.

tell me about your dsl

So you'e saying 100% of the population in Yurop has access to 1/1gig internet?

Laughable. Hell, Verizon is probably the only major ISP that even provides true 1/1gig. In Yurop 1gig usually means some BS like 500/200.

I'm in a shitty eastern-european country and there's highspeed internet from 4-5 providers in literally every village. You'd have to literally live off the grid to not have good access.

Fucking kill yourself Vlad.

Sure thing vlad.

To be fair, third world has been slowly getting better. We are no longer the absolute worst in everything. Just... most things.

>Everywhere is as bad as here
>Actually, no
>Oh? Can you prove that everywhere is heaven? Laughable!
You are free to imagine things I never said, and respond to your own imagination.

Yeah, I didn't live in mud hut or anything.
It's just sad that I had more choices in ISPs in a 3rd world country than I do now living in a fairly large city in America.

It's fucking insufferable how much this shit is being shilled on pure speculation. People are making up scenarios and pretending they're 100% going to happen when they have zero basis for it. Though that's most things in life.

>We should give away our rights because there's no guarantee that people will abuse the lack of them.

>ISPs don't want to invest in small towns, so they ask the government for money
>the governments gives them taxpayer money
>ISPs still don't invest in small towns
>they sell data plans they can't provide
>bandwidth needs vastly expand
>ISPs STILL don't invest what they must
>ISPs now want to have the legal power o throttle big websites so they don't have to improve their platform AND gain money from those big companies
>now they'll get money from customers, big companies and the government at the same time
>all this without improving their shitty platform
Only a retard would want to repeal NN.

They took our "rights" away when the government got involved in the first place. Yet another yuropoor trying to get some easy (You)'s.

>Implying that we have a choice in which ISP to use.
>Implying that Comcast and Verizon or whatever shitty pair of ISPs you have aren't both lobbying for it.

You could say the same thing for the other side too.
Why did that magical ISP competition didn't happen in 2014?

And whose fault is that? The governments have granted local monopolies. So she want the government to solve a problem that they created?

Yeah, because ALL regulation is bad.
Murder should be legal because laws saying it shouldn't is just a government powergrab.
The constitution should be abolished because it's a government powergrab, them giving us rights is taking them away!

I understand that it's both sides, hence my final sentence. I don't really know what the solution should be, I think it should be classified as a utility and follow the same rules as electric and water. The modern world pretty much requires the internet to get anywhere in life.

I don't think you understand what a monopoly is.

Monopoly on what exactly?

>I think it should be classified as a utility and follow the same rules as electric and water.
Get ready to be called a communist.

The biggest consumer issue here isn't about NN, it's how the telco infrastructure has effectively become a public utility maintained by a private monopoly. NN itself is just a push by other corporations to get everybody else to pay for their increased bandwidth usage. There are definitely concerns on both sides but I swear if I hear yet another soyboy on youtube tell me it's a fight for muh freezepeach and to be another good goy because they don't understand how the internet works I don't know what I'm to do...

>modern world pretty much requires the internet to get anywhere in life

There's libraries all over the place. Free wifi everywhere.

You can do most basic necessities like filing forms over dial up speeds.

> rules as electric and water

No thanks, i'd rather not pay per gig usage.

How exactly do you think the internet works?
Do you truly believe that those companies don't have to pay for that bandwidth they use?
Netflix just walked into an ISP's store, flopped their dick on the counter, and said "GIVE ME FREE INTERNET", and the ISP said "sure".
Is that what you believe?

Why does gook moot allow Comcast shills here?

$$$

>No thanks, i'd rather not pay per gig usage.
Who said anything about per gig usage?
Do you also pay more taxes if you spend more time in public parks? Do you pay extra for roads if you ride around town all day?

Water and electricity are products that cost money, they more you use, the more it costs them.
Internet on the other hand, like parks and roads, only cost to install and upgrade.

No it's that they don't have to pay comparatively more for their extra usage

>hurr everyone who's not a flaming liberal is a shill

>hurr muh comcast

even though they only have 27% of all LANDLINE internet connections. forget about wireless

2021

Then we can finally ditch shitty Comcast and get

>autist
oligopoly then

I have no problem with a businessman paying extra so his corporate VPN tunnel has priority over a cellular network than some dude's Netflix.

Wired internet doesn't have the spectrum problem.

I really wish the NN debate would differentiate between limited spectrum and home internet. But redditors can't think beyond what they read about the 'debate' (which there is none according to them).

>"but I only have one ISP in my area"

tfw too intelligent to cancel your plan when they start doing gay shit.

>t. poo

>>hurr everyone who's not a flaming liberal is a shill
I'm not a flaming liberal, I hate them probably more than you do.
However, making retarded arguments that amount to misinformation and further a cause that will have a negative impact on most people means 1 of 2 things.

1) You are a shill for the few that would benefit.
2) You are retarded and advocate against your best interests.

Seeing how big telecom would greatly benefit from this, it's logical that they would pay people to spread misinformation, and thus it's likely you're one of them.

Although it's just as likely that you're just a retard that has fallen victim to a shill I guess.

how do you stop bootlickers?

>Sup Forums
>Good threads

>The first ISP to block data will also be the first to lose the majority of their consumer base.

>implying there's competition in the ISP market

Elon's amazing spacejunk destruction derby

>implying there's competition in the ISP market

... so make your ISP compete then?

>The first ISP to block data will also be the first to lose the majority of their consumer base
You would be right if local monopolies didn't exist in the US

c

Monopolies have sued cities when they try to enable competition.

arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/11/att-and-comcast-win-lawsuit-they-filed-to-stall-google-fiber-in-nashville/?amp=1

I mean either way the internet will still be subject to jewing and screwing until all the private broadband lines are opened to use by competing ISPs, it will just be slightly worse without neutrality.

It's not about censorship. Google and the like are perfectly happy to censor stuff like daily stormer and cripplechan.

Source?

I can only choose between shitty Charter Spectrum and shitty AT&T. I have Spectrum currently but AT&T would be even worse. We wouldn't need to talk about net neutrality if we had real options but since we don't we need net neutrality to make sure they can't screw people over more and get away with it.

>The first ISP to block data will also be the first to lose the majority of their consumer base.
When Comcast starts blocking data and adding bandwidth caps I'll switch to...
Oh wait, it's only Comcast here. Shit.

nothing has made me despair at the state of discourse than the current NN debate. these Sup Forumstarded morons arguing against their best interests because they're so wrapped up in cognitive dissonance or are memeing/trolling so hard they don't know what reality is anymore. In the past week I've seen so many arguments where the two sides are just shouting at the other side because they're making two different, unrelated points. The irony is that the places where there is already no competition for ISP (rural areas) are the ones that are a majority Republican and the densely-populated areas with more ISP competition are the ones that are actually pushing against this. I can't believe how deluded people can be, it's just ridiculous.

Net Neutrality is just a bandaid solution though

maybe if I have a bandaid on it'll prevent me from bleeding out before I can get to a doctor who can stitch the wound

yeah but if it's over a bloody stump why bother

Don't forget they sue any new startup company that tries to sell internet too.

lol @ North Dakota

i think you are dumb

lets just say the shitification of the web started around 2015. Prior to that, the web was pretty dope. And because if that i say REPEAL NET NEUTRALITY.

Furthermore, i hope its repealed and the isps all charge out the ass and block sites. Maybe itll get people off the web and back into world. Even better, maybe itll encourage people to start building their own systems, rather than relying on the current 7 isps

Something's better than nothing. This is the problem with this debate.

Side 1:
>This solution isn't perfect but it's what we have
Side 2:
>Google and Facebook are run by jews so if we give an inordinate amount of power to our gentile friends at Verizon and Comcast they'll help us out!

Why would this set of big companies help you out better than the other? This magical thinking reminds me of the kind that makes people think a billionaire will somehow help out poor people because this billionaire is /our/ billionaire.

yeah but NN doesn't actually do anything

It gives grounds to the FCC to fine/prosecute ISPs for giving preferential treatment to certain users hosts.

Couldn't we all just get a VPN and just avoid all the issues of the repealment?

>same argument used to argue for not caring about gub'ment mandated 10 cent purchase grocery bag purchase (bags used to be free)

Dude, it didn't even change anything for a ten cent per bag purchase. You think the common man gives a shit? Sure there's fags like us who bring our own grocery bags, but the general populous is not resistant to change and loves getting buttfucked by their leaders.

no it doesn't, it prevents ISPs from traffic shaping. Getting rid of NN wouldn't suddenly allow them to engage in anti-competitive behavior like that

We're talking about the US of ass here. Most cities only have one provider, so your choice is either "A jewish provider that fucks you over" or "no internet".

>The first ISP to block data will also be the first to lose the majority of their consumer base
Except in a lot of places, there is only one ISP

>The first ISP to block data will also be the first to lose the majority of their consumer base.
Bullshit.

2005 - Madison River Communications was blocking VOIP services. The FCC put a stop to it.
2005 - Comcast was denying access to p2p services without notifying customers.
2007-2009 - AT&T was having Skype and other VOIPs blocked because they didn't like there was competition for their cellphones.
2011 - MetroPCS tried to block all streaming except youtube.
2011-2013, AT&T, Sprint, and Verizon were blocking access to Google Wallet because it competed with their bullshit. edit: this one happened literally months after the trio were busted collaborating with Google to block apps from the android marketplace
2012, Verizon was demanding google block tethering apps on android because it let owners avoid their $20 tethering fee. This was despite guaranteeing they wouldn't do that as part of a winning bid on an airwaves auction. (edit: they were fined $1.25million over this)
2012, AT&T - tried to block access to FaceTime unless customers paid more money.
2013, Verizon literally stated that the only thing stopping them from favoring some content providers over other providers were the net neutrality rules in place.
2014, In Verizon v. FCC, the FCC is stripped of the ability to prevent the above from happening again unless they classify ISPs as common carriers
2015, The FCC classifies ISPs as common carriers to prevent the above from happening again.
2017, The new FCC chairman attempts to repeal those regulations to make all of the above possible again.

All of that would still be going on if the FCC didn't put a stop to it.

A bandaid is better than having them basically have free reign to do whatever they want without consequence. Having "some" resonable and not much regulation doesn't mean communism like a lot of right wingers think. There's a balance between too much regulation and too much not regulation.

Why not? Genuinely curious.

most of that is in regards to VOIP and other services over Cellular networks, not internet. And as we see it was shut down before NN was a thing anyway.

first thing ISPs should do is block ads.

That'd kill the google/facebook monopoly quick.

Didn't Comcast attempt to kill Netflix before but fail? It's hard to really look at it as pure speculation when they've shown what sort of intentions they have in the past. The entire premise of the market sorting itself out if one ISP ends up undesirable is ridiculous when for many that undesirable is their only option outside of having no internet at all.

Giving preferential treatment to certain websites or services is traffic shaping. And yes, without Net Neutrality your ISP is free to engage in traffic shaping. Because of the ruling in Verizon v. FCC, the FCC no longer has the ability to prevent your ISP from shaping your traffic unless your ISP is classified under Title II as a common carrier. Since that is what Ajit Pai is trying to repeal, that would give your ISP the right to shape your traffic.

Because that's illegal

Until they start paying the ISPs for exclusive ads.