Yet another Net Neutrallity thread

They broke the Internet
Why should I pay more to fix it?

>All these normies reeing over their internet
Sweet sweet music. I hope youtube and twitch and all your other retarded streaming sites get throttled.

this. i fucking hate all the normie redditers that shill for giant companies. how fucking dumb do you have to be to not be able to understand that they only reason why companies care is because it will cost them money.

>Must be bad because a lot of companies want it
>No actual reasoning necessary
Oh well... Let's see what this crowd does when they have to pay extra for access to Sup Forums, infowars and breitbart...

ill pay for access for amazon and route all my traffic through aws like i already do

Amerimutts are getting fucked in the ass, and the best part is that some people are defending those who fuck them in the ass.

Best timeline, amerimutts are truly braindead.

>route all my traffic through aws
You're literally throttling yourself lmao

>implying he has internet over 25mbps
Funny man

sure thing muhammad

Well have fun having that either get throttled or become more expensive when ISPs demand Amazon pay them for non-throttled access to their customers (including you) and pass the cost onto their customers (including you).

Dear God, someone could create the /GNN/.

What the hell does that stand for?

To unify all NN threads.

I'm for that idea
but you're still a faggot

you understand, that normie sites won't get throttled, right?
Facebook, Amazon will be able to pay these fees.
*chans, forums, irc operators etc. won't be able.
If it doesn't generate a massive profit, it will not get on fastlane (= will be throttled), you dumb fuck.

the only ones paying extra money will be google, netflix and other shitty monopolistic edge services

Say goodbye to Sup Forums faggot
We can barely afford to keep the website online without being charged for banwidth

Gnu Net Neutrality?

Why should I listen to a retard from reddit who posts low quality jpegs?

General Net Neutrality. But your idea is good too.

Instead, band free speech by law, they will ban by the pocket.

What the hell is Reddit?

No joke
That's how Muslims won
By taxing other religions

>Being this naive
Seriously? Because these are the companies who can relatively easily actually afford to pay extra. Everyone else, including chans and the smaller news sties like InfoWars and Breitbart, are the ones who are going to get shafted by this. The only sites you're going to get un-throttled are these big ones and the ones owned by the same companies as the ISPs, which are just about all mainstream media ones.

This is great if you get your content from mainstream media companies like ABC, HBO and Turner Broadcasting (CNN), terrible if you use anything even slightly "indie".

>i want the government to control internet access and not private businesses
??? ???

>*chans, forums, irc operators etc.
>implying you need 80mbps internet to load 2mb images on mostly text based services

You do for re-captcha dumbass

can amazon just make the super isp that kills all isps already, amazon is kinda based so i doubt they would fuck us over.

>muslims won
Dude, they create a welfare "liberal" empire by loot every country in MENA and in the first recession they fuckup and turn fundamentalism society to be a weak prey to Mongols.

good

Those images are even smaller than 2mb, works fast even when I'm using shitty 3G at work.

>implying you need 80mbps internet to load 2mb images on mostly text based services
WHAT KIND SHIT I AM REEDING?
The basic thing of end NN is the servers pay the cost of traffic to the clients. Sup Forums will pay for your traffic as you.

My connection is 65Mb/s
and I still get re-captcha errors from shitty wifi

My home internet is 20mbps down and I never get any errors.
My mistake thought NN only applies to consumers.

>It becomes almost unbearable to post on Sup Forums unless you actually want to post here
>No more mobilefags, no more normalfags, no more activismfags
>Most of the worthless boards get shut down
>Sup Forums gets made great again

>We can barely afford to keep the website online without being charged for banwidth
>He actually believes hiroshimoots lies
Sup Forums is actually a pretty low-bandwidth site, and has almost 0 storage cost.

>Sup Forums gets throttled to hell because it cant pay up
>All the redditscum and normies leave
>It's back to 2007 times
Thank god, now fuck off.

Site stores threads archived for a few days and moot used to have terrible funding issues for years until he got decent ad revenue and Sup Forums passes implemented

>The sites that have incredibly low bandwidth usage are the ones that are going to get shafted
The only reason ISPs want to be able to throttle is because of ultra-high bandwidth sites, like jewtube, facebook, imgur, hulu, netflix, etc.
They couldn't give less of a shit about small sites with low traffic.

I really hope all of these worse case scenarios come true because all of them are great.
>americans won't be able to post
Fantastic.
>americans will have pay to post here
Just thinking about possibility of shitposters having to pay to shitpost is already great.
>americans will get connection like Australians
Also fantastic.
>everyone posting here will get connection like Australians
Literally think twice before you post.
>Hiro will have to move servers somewhere else
Unlikely but something good might come out of this like.
>Hiro will have to shut this place down
A sweet release.
So where is the problem again?

Nice try fag, I'll still post here even if net neutrality dies.

>Site stores threads archived for a few days
Which is basically nothing, with I suppose the exception of /gif/ and /wsg/, but even those are pretty tiny. I'd be willing to bet you could operate Sup Forums and all its backups off of a 4TB drive.

>moot used to have terrible funding issues for years
Yeah back when traffic was so low his arrangement with J-List didn't pay out enough, and he was still able to keep it running pretty much all the time.

all in their heads

>Unlikely but something good might come out of this like.
Say any country had strong free speech laws like USA?

What's all the fuss about? I don't get it. Is it only applied to America? What are the consequences really? I don't get it

>let's give corporate Jews unlimited power to control what we get to do online
>there's no possible way this could ever disrupt the uprising of right-wing movements on the internet
Sup Forums is shooting themselves in the foot with this cuck logic. You think (((they))) won't ever use their traffic shaping powers against you? You trust kikes that much? Get real

It has the potential to effect a lot more than just the US. ISPs elsewhere are watching with interest.

has anyone made a bingo yet for the bot replies about "Sup Forums will improve because there will be less x" and "i can't wait, it will take me off my internet addiction" and et all?

The fact that net neutrality rules are controversial on Sup Forums is proof that Sup Forums has succumbed to the cancer. Sup Forums was never any good, but it's just embarrassing to watch posters twisting themselves into a pretzel to defend the god emperor in the final weeks before their image board becomes subject to the whims of fucking Comcast.

I think most are trolls, or at least I hope
But seen /k/, Sup Forums, and Sup Forums support getting rid of net neutrality

Sup Forums is better than succumb to reddit scare tactics

>b-but muh blocking

We already have proof of tech companies cendoring and Reddit didn't care.

>muh comcast

I don't have Comcast and neither do most other people.

hello

reddo

Switching search engines is a hell of a lot easier than finding a new ISP, you moron. Insert whatever regional monopoly for Comcast if you that helps your autism.

Wrong.

Literally only only 1 or 2 useful search engines.

Literally only 2 mobile operating systems and app stores.

I can use Verizon/ATT/Tmo/Sprint, along with any Telco, if I don't like Comcast. Also I can move to another city and get a better ISP.

There are hundreds of ISP's around the world. There are only 2 search engines and usable app stores. Who has more power to filter content?

>Literally only only 1 or 2 useful search engines.
You get what you deserve, Sup Forums. We had talked about decentralized search engines and you call it of jewish botnet. We talked about searx and capacity create your own instance. You call it bullshit.

>Literally only 2 mobile operating systems and app stores.
>what was f-droid
>what was tizen
>what was Sailfish OS
>what was ubuntu phone
>what was firefoxOS
Don't call it a grave. It is the future you choose.

Fucking this. Sup Forums tried to warn Sup Forums about the botnet and they didn't listen. Now they see no problem in endangering p2p networks and decentralization entirely, which would have been the only real way to escape the botnet chokehold that Google and social media cancer have over the flow of information online. They'd rather whine constantly about Google controlling them instead of actually contributing to networks where they can't be censored or controlled. They're responding to corporate censorship by begging for more corporate control over how they're able to exchange information on the internet... they're hopelessly retarded

Those are exactly the sites that are NOT gonna get throttled you idiot. They'll throttle other obscure shit, because not many people will notice.

>Anybody who disagrees with me is part of the Sup Forums boogeyman
You're a fucking retard.

that would be one of the happier days of my life

>*chans
>mostly text-based

And also IRC is not just for text conversations. You can send and recieve files too (DCC).

>>americans will have pay to post here
>Just thinking about possibility of shitposters having to pay to shitpost is already great.
What makes you think that the shitposters to non-shitposters ratio is higher among Americans?

>The things they already throttle because they're the main cause of "network congestion" won't be the ones they throttle
>They're going to throttle all the small obscure websites that use virtually 0 bandwidth
Do you listen to yourself?

They will be legally allowed to throttle those "obscure websites that use virtually 0 bandwidth", so what makes you think they won't?

Because they didn't before 2015 and won't after 2017.

>I don't know what the FTC does

>they didn't do it before so that means they never will
Not him but that's kind of a shit argument. It's in all of these cable companies' best interest for the internet to be safe and normie-friendly. If you don't think that smaller, "politically incorrect" sites could ever be endangered by lack of neutrality, then you are extremely optimistic. What incentive will Comcast have to allow disruptive and controversial content on their networks?

Seeing how Comcast is not the only ISP out there, people will just use another service.

that's not how the internet works you dumb fuck

That isn't an option for most people, who only have access to one cable provider. Maybe if we actually had a free market for ISPs, then this point would be valid. But they use local government lobbying on a systemic scale to protect their regional monopolies and to keep the market unfree. Until that problem is solved, we need net neutrality

How did a pajeet poo in the loo currynigger get into a position to FUCK our internet so badly, and how do we fix it?

Explain how it's wrong, then.

>fix it

Sup Forums and other sites is not part of "comcast's network"

LMFAO cry harder white man. The future isn't yours.

Okay, autist. Data from those sites passes through their network whenever their users connect to those sites. Taking away net neutrality gives them the legal right to stop that from happening, which equates to censorship.

>That isn't an option for most people, who only have access to one cable provider.

[citation needed]

Also you forget that wireless carriers are also ISP's. But do go ahead and tell me what % of people only have cable as a lone ISP provider.

no, it doesn't give them that right at all. learn what the FTC is responsible for kid

>Seeing how Comcast is not the only ISP out there, people will just use another service.

LOL yes, because in the US there is sooo much option. If you have two ISPs to choose from then you are lucky. Comcast, AT&T, Verizon have monopoly in practice.

The area highlighted in green are the ones served by only a single cable provider

Wireless internet is wildly more expensive. That's not an argument. That's like saying you don't need a post office because you can just deliver letters yourself.

hate to break it to you kids but the only people left will be the autistic shitposters that cling to their absurd opinion crusades for years

You can't spell Pajit without Ajit.

AT&T sued the FTC for trying to regulate throttling and they won. The court ruled in 2014 that the FTC can't do shit because AT&T has common carrier services (phone lines), and under common carrier exemptions a business is exempt from FTC oversight, even for those services which are not common carriers, like internet. No chance of the FTC ever regulating any of the bigger telecoms.

it's funny, sites like reddit that are full of pro-Net Neutrality folks will be able to survive due to their popularity, and sites like Sup Forums that are full of meme spouting contrarian Sup Forumstard shills are of course going to be exactly the kind of sites that will rapidly die out completely without neutrality

And cable is not the only option for internet you mongoloid.

>Wireless internet is wildly more expensive.

No it's not and they completely debunk your "monopoly" myth.

I miss the old days when people didn't actually believe crazy nazi conspiracy theories and just thought they were funny.

that's the thing, they are not common carriers, so Title II regulations do not apply. therefore, this will fall back under the jurisdiction of the FTC and AT&T's earlier lawsuit will be for naught

>the kind of sites that will rapidly die out completely without neutrality
imagine being so fucking retarded that you actually believe this

AT&T operates a common carrier service (phone lines), and so all of their services are exempt from FTC oversight. This lawsuit and the ruling happened in 2014 before the FCC even reclassified internet services under title II. Reversing the FCC’s 2015 reclassification will not have any effect.

that's the whole point, they are removing it from Title II regulation. nothing will change, go shill elsewhere

Work on your reading comprehension, mongoloid. Big telecoms still have other services besides internet (TELEPHONE LINES) that WILL STILL BE CLASSIFIED UNDER TITLE II, meaning that the FTC can't regulate ANY of their services, even those which aren't common carrier services. That's what the 2014 AT&T vs. FTC ruling found.

This. Throttle literally everything. I want to hear the distant howls of subhuman SWPL scum while I hike innawoods.

...

Reminder that the Netflix using up all the bandwidth meme argument applies to torrents, DDL, Steam, etc too. Don't let shills exploit your Netflix/streaming hatred, Sup Forums.

nobody cares

>imagine being so fucking retarded that you actually believe this
imagine being so fucking retarded you actually believe ISPs will not throttle the shit out of sites that use a very high amount of bandwidth relative to their popularity and income / ability to pay up

Imagine being so fucking retarded that you think ISPs jobs aren't to deliver access to the internet, including services that use lots of bandwidth

good

Guns jammed dumb ass
It has a stovepipe

That's odd, I haven't noticed anything ruining the internet after NN passed a couple years ago.

>"it'll be okay guys the FTC will still regulate big telecoms!"
>actually they can't and here's why
>"LOL nobody cares anyway!"
some desperate shilling going on today

imagine believing that oversaturation of a network due to high bandwidth is the same as deliberately malicious throttling