What will actually most likely happen when net neutrality is repealed?

What will actually most likely happen when net neutrality is repealed?

Other urls found in this thread:

reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/7etu6x/iama_guy_who_setup_a_lowlatency_rural_wireless/
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

probably nothing at first but after it becomes legal to throttle and strongarm fuckers left and right it'll probably become more common

better internet

According to ajit pai guy he thinks this will somehow help small businesses and induce freemarket something because this will somehow help consumers

You paid 3rd world shills will stop posting a million threads a day on this chinese cartoon forum

thisis probably the first post ive made in months

Jew win again

As always, nothing. People will make anecdotal claims about how we are living in Nazi Germany on Facebook and Twitter with fabricated letters and stories, and life will go on. Shills will continue to shill, Reddit will continue to be Reddit, and we will be stuck here forever

ptg/torrents throtled to oblivion
nothing of value would be lost

Torrent throttling will probably happen immediately, possibly consumer VPNs as well. Maybe some near term zero rating that appears beneficial to the consumer on the surface.

ISPs will wait for the outcry to die down before they start the serious traffic shaping. This will give Pai and anti NN advocates enough time to say I told you so, and make backlash (legal or otherwise) harder to gain traction.

If nothing changes by late 2018, expect to be paying more for the same service.

how is he a shill if he didn't even make an argument or choose a side?

You will have to pay a premium to get youtube at 720 or higher and facebook infinite scroll will be slower unless you get the normie package. Smaller websites will be unaffected because they are like 10% of ISP's bandwidth.

Requesting proof to back up this meme

Nothing really, apart from the people obsessed over it going back to obsessing over drumpf.

I'll probably just never use internet again unless Sup Forums is still around and I don't have to pay extra for it

This is annoying to me I just cancelled my Spotify sub and starting torrenting my music again and like 3 days later its NN this NN that

I guess I'll torrent as much as I can while I can and after that just go buy CD's

But yeah, I'm tired of the internet anyways, need to get off the porn anyhow. I think it'll be good for me.

>Believing memes

Internet packages like cable TV packages. It's the cable industry's wet dream. They'll start out advertising it as a way to save, then slowly raise the prices every year until you're paying far more than you did originally.

most likely shit to happen is throttling of Youtube, Netflix, VoIP and other shit that competes with all the ISPs in any way.

Because the FTC let that happen during the prior 30 years

>What will actually most likely happen when net neutrality is repealed?
high traffic sites like netflix or youtube will get throttled to avoid ageing infrastructure getting saturated. the most annoying part is there will be little to no data available to the consumer to make an informed decision as to what ISP performs better in your area other than the advertised 'up to' speed which was already unpredictable enough at peak times etc

but hey at least it's the LESS REGULATION MORE FREEDOM that americans crave above all else

a TOR type internet will be built with increasinly equal speeds as regular internet

or

netflix, amazon, google, etc. start laying their own fiber optics and make internet free

Nothing
Just like the world didn't end when Trump was elected

Which would be true if a) the barrier for entry was not astronomical and b) ISPs did not regularly disallow competition through local, legislative means.

Google Fiber was originally going to use my city as its first location. Cox Communications kept them from competing.

>requesting proof for a future event
Obviously I don't have any, but there's a ton of supporting evidence to suggest this will be the case.

Comcast has already tried to throttle torrents in the past. Verizon throttled Netflix back in July as a "network test". The Verizon CEO has explicitly stated NN is the only reason they don't throttle currently(he also stated NN does nothing to hinder profit or investment). There are countries without NN protections where paying for the sites you use is already a reality.

You can web search these to find the sources and much more.

No americans.

>What will actually most likely happen when net neutrality is repealed?
Intransparent Double dipping.

You pay your ISP for an Internet connection.
A website pays their ISP for an Internet connection.
Your ISP blackmails a popular website into paying that his users can reach it, lest someone would throttle the website.

Normally. The ISP's peering costs (HIS Internet connection) would rise, if he had more Ingoing traffic than Outgoing traffic.
He would have to raise his prices.

With this he can blackmail the website into raising their user prices (because they have to pay the ISP lest they be throttled, raising their cost of business).
(Mind you they already pay for their peering costs via their own Internet Connection).

[deleted]

This isn't about isps. This is actually about content providers.

>Obviously I don't have any, but there's a ton of supporting evidence to suggest this will be the case.
Just like the evidence supporting that Trump will round up gays and take them to therapy camps?

The same thing already happening with mobile carriers. AT&T subscribers get free Netflix, Comcast subscribers get free Hulu, YouTube is throttled to 480p speeds and counts against your monthly data cap unless you get the premium video streaming package which gets you unlimited streaming at unlimited speeds.

Of course it is. But one of the touted pros of the absence of net neutrality is this ability of the ISPs to more effectively "compete" with one another. This does not happen in the real world.

It will increase competition, actually. Before, you had to comply to the regulations set by the government or else your isp couldn't be considered standard. With the removal of it, smaller isps actually can compete now since they don't have to spend loads of money just to fit the government's requirements, which is already a thing in the utility industry of water and electricity (btw, wondering why there's little innovation there? Cause politicians don't know how water or electricity work and make decisions solely based on finances and profit, not feasibility or convenience).

Except, once again, municipalities regularly sign non-competition agreements with a single ISP.

Not an argument and probably a logical fallacy, but sure let's go with that. You got me real good, user.

There's nothing hypothetical about what ISPs will do when net neutrality is eliminated.

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.
2007/09 - 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. They actually sued the FCC over this.
2011/13 - AT&T, Sprint and Verizon were blocking access to Google Wallet because it competed with their bullshit.
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

Shills will argue that Net Neutrality is unnecessary because we've never had issues without it. I think this timeline shows just how crucial it really is to a free and open internet..

THE ABSOLUTE STATE OF AMERICAN POLITICS, IN SUMMARY
>OH GOD TRUMP GOT ELECTED
>Nothing is gonna happen. (false)
>OH GOD TRUMP IS GETTING RID OF NET NEUTRALITY
>Nothing is gonna happen. (false)
>OH GOD TRUMP IS GOING TO GET NOTHING DONE FOR THE FIRST YEAR IN OFFICE
>He got rid of net neutrality! (true)
>NONE OF THIS WOULD'VE HAPPENED IF WE ELECTED HILLARY
>No, it'd be even worse (true)

Except, that's not a problem with the isp. It's the very people that do that. That's something you have to then bring up with your local government. Tell them to have apartments or regions stop signing agreements to various businesses. This happens with utilities, too, if you're not aware. But it's a lot more complicated than that. In the end, however, isps still are beholden to consumers. And if a city sees an isp not favoring their consumers, they allow others in, including smaller ones. There's always checks and balances to keep that shit in check. All the memes you heard of lawsuits and stiffening competition is just fearmongering. The former happens cause business do that to one another all the time, and the latter happens cause buyouts is a legit business strat that isn't illegal.

You just said it yourself you don't know what will happen but you have evidence that it MAY happen. So you might as well be saying the sun will fall tomorrow or something else equally illogical.

Some enterprising engineers will find a way to mask who is using what bandwidth so no one can be charged extra for how much they use. Kind of like a VPN but more like spoofing your PCs or server cluster's identity. Then it won't matter if net neutrality exists or not. ISPs won't be able to analyze the traffic in any meaningful way, nor will they be able to levy usage charges on content providers or customers. And, as of right now anyway, all of this would be 100% legal.

The FTC has done absolute fuck all and it's legally debatable whether they could or not. All Net Neutrality enforcement has come from the FCC, who no longer has the ability to enforce as they did prior to 2014 unless ISPs are declared common carriers.

I'm surprised Akamai and the like aren't pissed about this, none of your videos come from "YouTube" servers they come from proxy content distribution nodes, how are they gonna get around this?

>the bootlicking happening in this thread
Noncollege graduates need not reply

ISPs get converged by sjws and start blocking and/throttling """hate""" sites (which they define as anything to the right of Mao Zedong)

> Just like the world didn't end when Trump was elected
Only applies if you're not an immigrant, black, Muslim, Democrat, or live in a state that votes blue.

Piratebox makes a comeback.

Deep packet inspection is really good about figuring out what kind of data is being transferred via signatures. If you've got a WAF you can already filter YouTube.

They don't even need that. All ISPs do these days is read DNS requests to figure out what's going where.

Except I have no actual evidence that the sun will fall tomorrow, while the evidence that ISPs are going to fuck us over is pretty strong.

You seem to be assuming that since some evidence is wrong, all evidence is wrong. By that logic we should completely do away with the legal system, science, and archeology since they also rely heavily on evidence.

There was "supporting evidence" that electing Trump would also cause a stock market crash and that we'd be dead in nuclear hellfire already. Maybe people shouldn't be so quick to assume the apocalypse will happen. Take what's happening to EA as a good example. People thought they could get away with anything but this BF2 fiasco has somewhat actual consequences.

>while the evidence that ISPs are going to fuck us over is pretty strong.
The sun is going to fall tomorrow cause I have evidence right now outside that the sun is closer to the earth.

Becuase we are much better reddit right??

You know how you buy 5000 channels for tv but starz, espn, hbo, etc cost more? like that

>Maybe people shouldn't be so quick to assume the apocalypse will happen.
you're right they shouldn't, but this is a case where:

>ISPs have already tried to throttle on multiple occasions
>ISPs have already tried to charge per site, and already do in some countries
>It is clearly in ISPs best interests to throttle torrents (which they have already tried to do) and VPNs
>This is especially true when in many cases they have a regional monopoly or duopoly
>Competition is basically impossible due to local municipal laws which favor existing ISPs and lobbying (even Google failed to roll out fiber in some cases due to this)
>It's very unlikely this will help innovation or infrastructure improvement considering 400 billion taxpayer dollars went into building a fiber infrastructure which spoiler: didn't get built

The evidence is OVERWHELMINGLY in favor of the consumer being fucked over because these companies have a long and storied history of doing just that.

Ultimately you have to judge the evidence yourself, but this isn't just some stock market prediction by a buttmad lefty. Everything points to this happening.

I hope I'm wrong, but I don't think I am.

The only evidence has been exaggerated cases where companies went after other companies. Get some some fucking context for a change. This is reddit tier propaganda.

Best case scenario: Really slow peering

Worst case scenario: Pay for play Internet

lol Netflix has incredibly low bitrates you wouldn't even reach 4TB by streaming 24/7

>where companies went after other companies
You act as though that has no impact on the end users.

And why should I care about users crying about their favorite company?

You're not wrong about the low bitrates. Their 4K is 15.6mbps. Which still ends up being just shy of 5TB if you left it going all month.

and at that point you've probably seen all their 4K content

>What will actually most likely happen when net neutrality is repealed?
ISP will set up a fast lane for paid content.
So instead of waiting hours or days for your 100 GB steam game to download, it will take minutes, because it will ride on the fast lane. And you won't have to buy an ultra fast internet connection, either.

Russian troll

>So instead of waiting hours or days for your 100 GB steam game to download, it will take minutes
You'd need a 1.4gbps connection to download 100 GB in five minutes. You don't even have the hardware to handle speeds like that and your ISP sure as shit isn't going to give it to you for free. In reality, you'll have the current speeds you've got and they'll throttle other content so your current speed is the "fast lane" and everything else gets the throttled "slow lane"

lol, way to build a wall then walk right into it.

If the problem is caused by governments, why would even more powerful levels of government be the answer?

I'd bet nothing changes for most people either way for a while. Hopefully eventually more competition will spring up so it can do what it always does, drive down costs while driving up quality.

So basically pirates get BTFO? I'd be okay with that.

you will be capped on "misc" data (torrenting, large file deposit sites, unsanctioned streaming services), and provided various "sponsored" services where the data is exempt from cap

basically right now, the ISPs have to spend money on infrastructure to keep up with demand, and they don't like that
so they want NN repealed so they can "reduce demand" by applying additional fees when you're using your leased line in ways they didn't want you to

I will gladly pay for your ISP to make your Internet shit.

if the problem is small government, how does changing a big government policy fix it?
tip: it doesn't

>>you will be capped on "misc" data (torrenting, large file deposit sites, unsanctioned streaming services), and provided various "sponsored" services where the data is exempt from cap
This, it's like people can't take a simple look at how it works in the mobile plan business today

that is not all
they can traffic shape like they did in the past with netflix and youtube(slow down the service for the users to extort moneys from the companys)

>fuck everyone who tries to run a business
Confirmed for aspie sucking the welfare teat. Everyone ignore this human garbage.

Because the government is shit at everything it does at every level because of the third party payer problem, so get the the fuck out of the internet entirely, like it almost was before net neutrality, then get your local government to stop sucking Comcast's dick.

>So instead of waiting hours or days for your 100 GB steam game to download, it will take minutes,
Sup Forums in a nutshell

>he thinks this is a business issue

You're a retard. When you make a web service, you're secondary to the internet connection that gives access to said service. No one can use your service without the internet, and guess who controlls access to that: the isp. If you want direct access to your services, make your own isp.

removing net neutrality does not increase competition
competition's issue is at the local level

please present an argument for why repealing NN is a good idea for the consumer
again, it can not and will not increase competition in any way, due to the problem being at the local level

>please present an argument for why repealing NN is a good idea for the consumer

NN didn't increase competition either. In fact, it stiffened it due to government regulations.

yes it is actually

No, it's an issue at both levels.

>In fact, it stiffened it
it did not
provided local laws are clean of ISP lobbying, it is as easy to spend $3000/month to get a Tier-1 provider's connection and redistribute it as a TIer-3 provider
a single person is able to do this, one person is able to entirely, easily, run the business, with no "big government" red tape, it is all the small government, and net neutrality is not the issue

why is net neutrality's repeal good for the consumer?
answer

>In fact, it stiffened it due to government regulations.
What regulations stifled competition?

>it did not

>Section 5(a)(2) of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Act authorizes the FTC to “prevent persons, partnerships, or corporations, except . . . common carriers subject to the Acts to regulate commerce . . . from using unfair methods of competition in or affecting commerce and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce.”

>the Ninth Circuit issued a decision that exempts non-common carrier data services from U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) jurisdiction, merely because they are offered by a company that has common carrier status.

>Common carriers and non-common carriers offered by common carriers are both exempted from FTC oversight

Price controls, which is what net neutrality boils down to being, are doing what they always do and reducing industry investment in infrastructure. Wait long enough with that going on and the internet will be fucking Venezuela you stupid nigger.

>What will actually most likely happen when net neutrality is repealed?
nothing. because it wont happen.
there is literally no reason whatsoever for repealing these laws, other than greedy kike ISPs trying to line their pockets even deeper. The courts will fling out FCCs proposed changes as 'consultation' was a fucking joke, pajeet will be tried and found guilty of bribery, corruption and smelling of stale curry, be deported to Bangladesh where he will spend the remainder of his miserable fucking existence as a hands-on toilet cleaner executive in a Microsoft call center. The heads of Verizon and Comcast will commit public hari-kari in an outburst of shame over their decades-long abuse of Burgers, their duopoly broken up and taken over by a charitable foundation run by the ghost of Al Gore, the remaining bits dragged through streets to be spat on and have rotting fruit tossed at it, and everyone shall live happily ever after, safe once again in the warm, welcoming and comforting but simultaneously firm bosom of Net Neutrality.

$1.99 per shitpost.

answer the question

Where does AT&T come into play?

...

>nothing. because it wont happen.
It will happen. The 2015 NN was an Obama/ Democrat platform. The Republicans hold the majority. It's going away.

That isn't Net Neutrality and only impacts businesses. It doesn't prevent ISPs from throttling non commercial web services or protocols.

I already did.

that isn't the case though

reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/7etu6x/iama_guy_who_setup_a_lowlatency_rural_wireless/

>AT&T
They snuck out the back door in the confusion. Theres always one gets away with it, everytime.

would be easy to repeat it then eh, you repeat everything else like a parrot

I wish you were president.

Thats because you have no idea what the 2015 Net Neutrality act was really for.

It wont. we wont let it. pajeet broke the law. he'll pay.
thank you.. i'd like to play more golf as well, need to work for a living tho.

>It wont. we wont let it. pajeet broke the law. he'll pay.
Just like you wouldnt let Trump win? That was fun to watch.

I want to believe.

It was because the FCC had subjectively enforced ISPs under both Title I and Title II in the past, so the courts forced the FCC to pick one or the other. They picked Title II because that's what actually allowed them to enforce Net Neutrality in the past. Ajit Pai is trying to reverse that decision because he literally worked for Verizon in the past and is a gigantic, corrupt, shill. Now stop strawmanning.

Not much at first, just to let everyone get annoyed for nothing. And then the ISPs are going to start charging the content providers as well as the consumers. At that point content providers will probably set up deals with some ISPs and the customers of other ISPs are going to get slower speeds for the same services. Eventually it'll be probably like TV subscription. Low traffic sites probably won't be affected but reaching out to customers for smaller companies that rely on high speed connection will be much worse.

Summary:
- Sharing stupid ideas: no change
- Starting a new let's say a streaming service: will be next to impossible
- Effects on average customer: not much if you are ok with whatever deals your ISP has with content providers
- Effects on tech savvy customer: they no longer give significant bandwidth to torrents probably

Someone really should leak the ISPs business plan after NN repeal.