Ajit Appreciation Thread

>NN is BTFO
>ISPs charge bloated sites and unsustainable streaming services like YouTube and Netflix more
>Small efficient sites thrive
>SaaSS botnets on suicide watch
>Offline decentralized software and content takes off
>DRM is killed
>5G networking brings new competition to a monopolized market
>Big streaming and ad networks scared
Ajit Pai is arguably doing the most work for creating a free and open internet.

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comcast_Corp._v._FCC
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

>t. P. Ajit

So let me get this straight: an ISP goes to Youtube and says "Pay Denbts" and the site either pays or gets throttled? I guess that means Youtube kikes can't make as much money.

>>ISPs charge bloated sites and unsustainable streaming services like YouTube and Netflix more
>>Small efficient sites thrive
For Google and Netflix a fraction of a fraction more of what they earn is nothing, at the end of the day, "small sites" will find it harder to stay in the "monthly plans".

Well I would assume it's not just what sites use a lot of data per user but overall. If you have 90% of people on your ISP using Jewtube, you'll charge that before charging for that one dude that really loves Nyaa.

Actual retard shill trying to use Sup Forums language to mask the fact that they're destroying one of the single greatest things that has happened to humanity.
>IPSs decide that they need more money for their dumb pipes.
>Giants like Youtube and Netflix while likely charged proportionally more are still able to pay.
>These sites pass the difference to the consumer.
>Small sites can't pay and die off.
>ISPs profit.
>Consumers lose.
The greed here is astonishing.

>lets cut off our legs for no good reason
>at least we won't get cancer there them anymore
i want a lot of those things, but not like this.

What is this "pay their fair share" meme? If a customer pays for a 100Mbps line then why does it make a difference how they use that line? If the ISP oversubscribes their services then is that not the problem of the ISP? The customer is merely using bandwidth they pay for. It's up to the ISP to ensure that they have the infrastructure to support that, God knows they get enough gibsmedats from the Government to build it.

yeah OP has to be the most retarded shill i've seen yet. lil' Sup Forumstards aren't old enough to remember when ISP corporations actually did try and succeeded (for a time) at throttling/controlling at their discretion. but hey, LE FREE MARKET

Xxxxddd this good Indian man xddddd good joke like an egg

I appreciate Pai for removing Americans front the internet.

Yes. YouTube operates at a loss, and its user base is looking for viable alternatives. NN means YouTube doesn't have to pay more for using up a large percentage of bandwidth than a site using next to none.
ISPs are terrible but they're not stupid. ISPs would charge based on the amount of bandwidth used, not just throttling everything they can until people pay.

This. Every free market retard I've ever met is some sheltered millennial from the suburbs who parrots the meme because they realized they had to pay taxes when they got their first Starbucks paycheck. The free market is a fairy tale that ignores everything that actually happens in the real world.

Exactly they're not stupid, that's why they're going to charge just enough to keep these companies struggling for as long as possible.

>this is what shills actually believe

Still doesn't invalidate the point which I was making, small companies are going to have more pressure to fail from ISPs vs none at all

>small sites can't pass the difference to consumers just like youtube/netflix

imbecile

Here to celebrate the 18th annual "End of the internet"

I don't understand these NN idiots.

>hurr your isp will charge you per site

Literally just making shit up. Why wait until NN is gone when they can simply just charge you more right now? What exactly is NN doing to prevent your ISP from charging you more money for using the internet?

Redditors have no common sense.

>he thinks he can access nyaa after NN goes through
gotta pay for the full internet user and dont forget the ptp surcharge

>internet is perfectly fine for decades without NN
>NN happens for all of a year, first year in history with a decline in broadband infrastructure investment
>NN goes away, web is now back to the way it used to be for decades
>"le internet is le dead!!!!! alert le reddit!!!!"

these fuckin' virgins, I swear

10 millions nigglets starve to death every year thanks to the free market

but, hur it regulates itself

Why would an ISP bother charging more for sites that don't exceed a certain threshold of their bandwidth? It would be incredibly inefficient to create a whitelist system for certain sites and services that pay a ransom instead of creating a few different plans to charge different rates of bandwidth use. Whitelisting would only works for sponsored content and not everyone that pays.

>nobody starved before markets

You have to be 18 to post here

>ISPs charge bloated sites and unsustainable streaming services like YouTube and Netflix more

>You pay power by the kilowatt-hour
>but if you use that power for a shitposting machine you have to pay us more

Literally what you're advocating. Neck yourself.

Couldn't companies now just pay isps to throttle traffic to their competition?

False equivalence. The internet is not a utility.

Lmao

An intelligent person would realize that the correct analogy would be "you pay per kilowatt hour, so you have to pay based on how much of it you use, and we have to be able to prioritize electricity generation and transmission at certain times for certain circumstances"

How can someone as stupid as you even figure out a computer long enough to post here?

the point was markets aren't benevolent or even fair, they would screw the majority of people for the sole seek of profit.

let the free market "regulate" the internet and there's a 100% chance it will create inequalities and unfair practices.

Yes, it is.

guys i got bingo

yeah in other words, we'll proritize people who are eager to pay $50 per kilowatt.hour to heat their swimming pool and cut power to poor people who use it for their basic needs.

How is it not a utility? Power, water, data. 3 necessities of modern life.

And that prioritization only kicks in when there's not enough power to go around. They don't start dimming your lights for the lulz.

There is more than enough bandwidth to go around.

The value of the market is rooted in benevolence or fairness, because intentions don't equal results. A government can be benevolent (though it often is not, and I'm not sure why you assume it is benevolent, which you do is you support NN) and still be completely incompetent. The value of the market is that its decentralized nature is the only way to coordinate economic activity on a large scale.

And by the way, people tend to not to starve where the market is working. No capitalist free market country has ever experience a famine. People starve in places like Zimbabwe where misguided government polices damage market function.

Some anti-NN guys claim something changed and hence NN got introduced to keep the net the way it was.
Any idea what this was supposed to be?

So they claim that there is a difference between the preNN and the post NN net.

pro-NN not anti, typo

It's just the current paradigm of networking technologies.

>>ISPs charge bloated sites and unsustainable streaming services like YouTube and Netflix more
Smaller ISP's are already pointing out that the bandwidth complaints that the big ISP's are claiming, are complete bullshit. Traffic is traffic. You pay for a monthly subscription, you should get the data and speeds you paid for. Would you buy a car if you had to pay more to travel at any rate over 65 mph? Of course not! Listen to yourselves, you sound like fucking weasles.

>The value of the market is rooted in benevolence or fairness

that's the lie of capitalism. markets are influenced by the seek of maximum profit and the greed of investors. there's nothing benevolent or fair in capitalism.

the only difference with capitalism is people die in remote countries instead of your doorstep. but it fucks most people on a global scale.

And that of course assumes that the overwhelming majority of people have the brain cells to vote responsibly with their dollar. I bet the cognitive dissonance of that statement really gets to you, but this is the internet so I'm sure you'll type up some bullshit to defend your fairy tale market even if it means being a massive hypocrite.

Fuck that poo in the loo pajeet shitskin currynigger

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comcast_Corp._v._FCC

oh. so pro NN people are just communists.

I imagine it was at&t trying to throttle websites. It's also a good insurance to stop providers from jewing you out the ass when it's next to impossible for new isps to jump up.

kek

People tend not to starve where there is modern agricultural practices and an efficient distribution system. Under market systems though, enough food has been produced to feed 10 billion people, yet there's only 7 billion people on the planet, 1 billion people go hungry and people still have to deal with food insecurity. Production is fine, distribution is not. Markets are narrowly useful.

Isn't there some horrible stack of regulations in america that basically strangles the service provider market and ensures it's impossible to break into? Maybe remove those regulations that exist purely to suck off the big companies in conjunction with the NN repeal and things will be different?

Yes, anyone that's for the consumers/people is a communist. Everyone that's for corporations is a capitalist.

What do we call people that are against their own interests though?

Fpbp

Trumpledytes

>Racists ITT unironically believe this brilliant immigrant's son did anything wrong

There aren't that many desu.

Anybone could buy up the right of ways from Verizon/Att and build their fiber network. Too bad it costs a ton to lay fiber and also you'll get competition from cable companies.

Typo. It was supposed to say "not rooted in". Context should have been fairly obvious but I suppose that's asking for too much brainpower from an anti-capitalist.

regulation is not communism

basic needs and common services such as health care, education, access to water, electricity, transport infrastructures, and the internet need to be regulated so that everyone can have access to them.

it's immoral to let your health care system in the hands of to greedy investors and let people die without access to medicine.

the same way it's immoral to let investors dictate their rules when it comes to free access to information, this includes the internet.

Imagine all the unused wiring to homes and businesses that opt into one ISP subscription instead of a bunch of other providers that manage to break into the market. ISPs are a natural monopoly.

>surface area
>population density
>municipal monopolies
I don't know if 5G is a meme or what, but it's unironically the only way most of the US will ever get high speed internet without moving into a major urban population center, which most of them simply cannot do due to the immense cost of living therein.

But those smaller isps can't always provide for everyone in every region.

>it's immoral to...
Spook.

Yeah that's cuz you are retarded and don't understand the most basic principles of economics

No just the retarded ones

Capitalism is a system based on praxeology and not an understanding of any modern economic theory.

If ISPs do throttle customers internet, customers will just switch ISPs to one without throttling. Ridding these regulations will drive the competition to have lower prices and faster internet.

>Comcast throttles
>ATT throttles
>left with no ISP

Thanks pajeet

Left might be filled with soyboys, appltards, and niggers, but republitards are just straight up brain dead morons.

Reddit says there's no competition even though there is, at least 2 options through wired.

They don't ever want to count mobile ISP's for some reason.

thousands of people have cancelled netflix because they raised the price by 1 dollar.

If they try to pass on any costs from ISP's. they will be killed.

There was no NN before 2015 and Obamas version of NN was weak and still allowed corruption and backroom deals.

Getting rid of it is a good thing.

Nothing is stopping someone like Richard Branson or Elon Musk from starting an ISP.

Hell, microsoft was toying with the idea of building a wireless 5G network that uses the television broadcast system.

>when they can simply just charge you more right now?
They can't. All data is equal under net neutrality.

people dont count wireless because it is more expensive, slower, higher latency, data caps, and already has bullshit caused by no NN including certain services being prioritized and certain ones not counting against your data cap

go back to /r/the_donald kiddo

literally nothing is stopping them from making those cable style bundles. they can change their ToS and block sites that don't comply.

Because retarded local governments give monopolies to ISPS and said ISPS don't share them. Why rent out your lines when you have a government funded monopoly?

>it is more expensive

no it's not, that's why every single poorfag has a cellphone

>slower

LTE can easily hit 20mbits on average

>data caps

Not on 0 rated websites, and many wireless are doing "unlimited" with some exceptions

>higher latency

nobody cares stupid gaymer. try against redditor

>a decade from I might have another option to choose from and it might not be complete shit. maybe
thanks p. ajit

It's ironic that the people calling everything communism is always euros with universal healthcare etc

The leftist tears are delicious.

Google tried it with more money than either of them and have given up on it because of how impossible it is to bargain with companies that have monopolies.

They gave up because they couldn't compete with cable companies. Most people are good with $30/m 50/5 mbit speeds. They don't want to pay $70 for internet.

If Google were serios about building a network they could easily buyout a company like Frontier which will go bankrupt soon which already has a Fiber network and plenty of rights of way to build out even more fiber.

And the few people that are left can't fucking buy anything better.

Nobody in this goddamn state will sell me anything better than 5 meg upload. The tech is there, the bandwidth is there, they just refuse to sell it.

But hey, the Free Market is better :D

>Not on 0 rated websites
thanks for proving my point you tool

back to t_d

Maybe something should be done about the corruption instead of just complaining on the internet about netflix.

You know what google did with the network they built?

The let ISP's rent it out in exchange for a discount.

Free market decided your shitty place is not worth investing in.

>tfw you support things that are objectively bad for everyone because it's also opposed by a political party I dislike

And how will keeping NN help you in this situation?

>Comcast throttles
>ATT throttles
>move to Europe or Asia for a few years
I've been looking for an excuse to see the world. thanks Ajit!

If you have proof that a ISP has been paying off government officials to create monopolies then report that shit because its against the law.

NN does nothing to prevent 0 rating.

Back to re.ddit.

Stay mad.

Are you retarded or just pretending?

Stay retarded Sup Forums

What do you seriously think the 2015 legislation stopped them? Yes this shit happened before, and the isps were taken to task by the FTC. The 2015 legislation is just politics capitalizing on the meme of net neutrality as it was popularized during the SOPA fiasco.

ISP's are private companies and you are the one who agrees to their terms in order to use their services.

They can do whatever the fuck they want with the infrastructure they build and pay for.

Internet isnt a right its a privilege, quit complaining and make your own ISP and network if its so important to you. i'm sure you will get a lot of customers.

>t. mactoddler

I will have you know i own and use 3 lenovo thinkpads.

People who think ISPs aren't in the right to charge high-bandwidth services like netflix don't understand how provisioning works. These networks aren't designed to provide every single customer with their full speed all at the same time.

Then maybe they should stop advertising and selling speeds they can't provide. It's not like streaming video is an uncommon use case or its bandwidth needs unknown.

I support getting rid of NN simply to fuck over netflix.

They cause so much congestion on DSL nodes at peak times.

That's fine. They can offer on-peak and off-peak speeds and prices. They just can't pick and choose specifically who gets the fast lanes. They can do the first thing under title II, they just don't.

If most people don't realize they're paying for provisional networks then it's the company's fault and they should be sued for not making it clear.