So the way I see it, this net neutrality shit is nothing but picking between 2 choices:

So the way I see it, this net neutrality shit is nothing but picking between 2 choices:

1. The Internet is free or extremely cheap for all, including poos, NEET losers, poorfag communists/socialists who don't believe in money, underage, black and brown people. Basically Sup Forums and lefty/pol/.

2. The Internet requires additional costs with certain packages that are too much for the groups mentioned above, but barely noticeable for the average Sup Forums fag who already overspends so much money on technology, or a person with a job.

So basically, it's an Internet Hygiene tax.
You pay a little more to see a massive drop in users with the skin color of excrement, with the age under 18, with the virgin loser ideals of socialism/communism, and Sup Forums virgin losers.

Have i observed correctly?

Other urls found in this thread:

weev.livejournal.com/410763.html
funnyjunk.com/channel/FJNN/Dn 1 dec particle accelerators fcc and rats/dLduLqY/12#12
arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/04/one-big-reason-we-lack-internet-competition-starting-an-isp-is-really-hard/
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Fucking nothing is going to happen, after thursday the internet will move on to the next big outrage

>I want to see only others who are very similar to myself, and others who are not like me should go elsewhere
>btw, is it not funny how some touchy-feely hypersensitive people want to live in a "safe space", lel. Cannot handle different opinions, lel! grow a backbone, you weaklings!
Her breasts are much bigger than her head, and seem to be longer than her forearms. This is anatomically impossible, no?

comcast already has a page devoted to how they are going to nickel and dime waiting.

Comcast isn't the only ISP in existance plus the FTC will stop them if they do anything anti-consumer.

No, Net Neutrality is going to be Kike Wars with ISP's jewing out Kikebook and Goyflix

A safe space does't require money but government intervention.
When you pay for a space for those who have money and jobs which excludes poverty ridden people and trash, that's called a luxury space.
So your attempt at correlation is incorrect since i don't need to whine for a privilege, i can just buy it while you can't afford it.

Weev offers an interesting insite on net neutrality, what do you guys thinks?
weev.livejournal.com/410763.html

A safe space is a safe space, my friend. Where you are free from those whose harmful opinions can be dangerous to your worldview.

I am not free from others who have the money to pay for it as well though? Merely free from those who are the absolute bottom of the barrel.
Which is why there is a difference between a monetary service and government intervention.
You need to polish your arguing a bit.

DESU I thought it's about traffic prioritization, but whatever.
>muh poorfags
We already have shitty slow Internet and faster Internet.

Like, generally, if you want your Internet channel or even a SERVER (be it a webserver or something else) be on a priority, you'll have to pay extra. If net neutrality is revoked, that is.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

>shit infrastructure
>"b-because all those poor/black people!"
>shit healthcare system
>"b-because all those poor/black people!"
>shit public transport
>"b-because all those poor/black people!"
>shit internet
>"b-because all those poor/black people!"

America!

>He mocks americans for generalizations while making himself a broad generalization of americans
impressive

So how is healthcare and public transport in the USA?

Obamacare was genuinely one of the worst attempts at universal healthcare possible and I'll give you that public transportation isn't the best. But it varies from city to city, some cities have the money for really good transporation.

Healthcare is not a problem for any employed person, and public transit is fine in metropolitan areas where it's feasible to have public transit. Obviously on a national level, public transit isn't very good, but that's because the country is so big and most areas are sparsely inhabited, but in major cities, while not being as advanced as Tokyo or Beijing, it is still a viable means of transportation.

the courts already said they cant do anything when its title 1, there are no new laws to allow them to do anything when under title 1, wheeler already went to court, lost and the judge told him he needed to put them under title 2 for any of his don't be a complete bastard rules to apply.

and what are you going to di in an area where you have comcast, its them or fucking dialup.

its a bunch of idiots being outraged trying to keep a law to try prevent things that might happen which the law they are trying to keep says can happen

funnyjunk.com/channel/FJNN/Dn 1 dec particle accelerators fcc and rats/dLduLqY/12#12

The new york city subway is the largest transit system in the world and 7th busiest behind moscow, tokyo, seoul, and three other chinese cities.

Biggest but not as advanced. China's trains are ridiculous.

Isn't there a greater reliance on public transportation in china and japan?

1) I paid to view content from netflix, netflix paid to have content sent to me, comcast decided to artificially limit netflix till they paid a tax for using the bandwidth they bought in the first place.

2) we already have a monopoly, so why deregulate them when it costs billions to even start up, not establish, just fucking start up? we are not going to get new players fucking ever

3) they took 400 billion dollars that was suppose to run fiber to fucking everyone and say on it. they did fucking nothing when the original plan was by 2005 to have a 45 up and down line to bumfuck nowheres outhouse.

the entirety of this is horse shit
"The government will be evil and charge more"
At this point I don't fucking care, I want my thumb in comcast's eye and I want them to fucking feel it.

public transport is a joke, and health care is largely a state by state thing.

If I worked, I would be paying all my income for health care, but because I am unable, the state picks up the energy of the bill for everything. Obamacare was a republican idea to force people to buy health insurance, so that should tell you everything good that did.

yea, they are 'off the rails'

japan yes, but that's also on the fact owning a car is such a pain in the dick it's unfeasible even when you aren't in a big city.

literally the judge told wheeler he had to take it to title 2 because everything the isps were doing was legal under title 1 and he only had authority to stop them under title 2

> So basically, it's an Internet Hygiene tax.
Sup Forums will be banned from interwebz, only wealthy moderated Reddit users will be able to post.

God you people need to read some fucking economics.

The core problem with the telecoms, and the only reason they can consider charging more per content (actively making their service worse) is because they have no competition. This is because they are monopolies in the realest sense of the term: They keep their competition out, via the government. The FCC and various federal, state, and local laws their armies of lawyers lobby for and subsequently write are used to kill competitors quickly through litigation. Ironically, this current horrid monopoly situation is exactly as bad as the hypothetical “natural monopoly” situation idiots claim would happen in a free market for cable telecommunications.

Thus, because they have no competitive pressure, Net Neutrality law results in two things, which we have seen exactly happen over the past couple of years: They raise prices, and/or introduce data caps.

The only solution is to stop NN entirely, and deconstruct the cronyist framework the telecoms use to kill competition. Dismantle the FCC, dismantle their lobbied hegemony at state and local levels, and repeal all subsidies. When a new competitor can lay cable (more efficiently, I might add, since decades of no competition have made the telecom beasts horribly inefficient), and the beasts can do NOTHING to stop it, they’ll quickly start renting out their extra bandwidth, improving their service, cutting fat, TREATING CONTENT NEUTRALLY, etc.

Principally, customers need the ability to tell a telecom to fuck off, and LEAVE for a competitor. This is currently not possible in many regions.

It's not a generalization. It's literally how America is run. If Congress keeps calling them entitlement programs, then there obviously for the poor.

You're both wrong. When I set up my web server I already pay for bandwidth out. It's not like my provider is giving me extra bandwidth because everyone wants to come there.

Getting rid of net neutrality means that they can charge you more for visiting certain types of web sites or using certain services. It's a content issue not a bandwidth issue.

>competition will save us if and when it kicks in
OK boss.

Exactly, you already pay.
And the way I see it, you'll pay more. Like, for QoS and other bullshit.
I guess, if you set up some tiny forum it won't matter though.

Of course it will. Save that it’ll never kick in so long as morons are advocating for NN rather than de-entrenchment.

Are you implying competition and the ability for a customer to take their business elsewhere somehow DOESN’T drastically improve the quality, efficiency, price, and overall value of products and services?

kek all the amerikanski's raving on how no net neutrality will provide them good internetz
full damage control lad
in portugal (which despite the popular mobile data image, HAS net neutrality) you can get cheap 250mb/s upload+download fiber + tv + phone for 20 bucks lol

Where’s your gigabit? Why not $10/month? Why not $5? Why doesn’t it include wireless cell service? How fast can you call for maintenance? How easy is it to deal with customer service?

ISPs have always been greedy assholes, even when they are flowing in cash.
At this point it's belief talk.

tits

They’ve had legal entrenchment for decades, of course they’d be assholes, customers have no choice but to give them the cash they’re raking in. Implying that somehow their behavior is consistent with free market competition is belief talk. Every other industry that doesn’t have massive protection rackets erected within it by the giant corporate players has seen incredible innovations in addition to impovements in efficiency, price, quality, etc.

Consumer electronics is prime among them. This board wouldn’t exist if there were only one domestic supplier of computers, blessed by the government and regulated by the Electronics Agency, providing an oh-so-reasonable price for a box computer that can do exactly what I need it to. Who needs Nvidia or AMD? They were redundant anyways.

>Is [x] perfect? If it is just "very good", then it is not perfect, which the same thing as being trash

the New York City subway system is a piece of shit that runs on analog technology from a century ago. the tunnels are literally at the brink of collapse and despite that they continue to run it 24 hours a day every day so there's not enough time to repair it. combine that with ridiculous union wages, an absurd pension system, a refusal to charge more for fares, and spending billions of dollars on fucking free wifi the subway is a fucking joke whose only virtue is that it hasn't collapsed under its own weight yet. not that it hasn't come close.

The crappier and more horrible the people on the internet are the better. Beauty being born out of an ocean of crap is what defines the internet and makes it great.
Limiting the crap will also limit anything being born out of it and in essence kill the internet.

Perfect would be free access to instant downloads and uploads of infinite size, wirelessly. I’m making an obvious point about the improvements in quality, efficiency, quantity, price, and just overall value that competition gives.

If we acutally had a free telecom market, I can guarantee, thanks to numerous historical demnstrations of the power of the free flow of capital, that our telecom market would put your “neutral” options in the fucking dust.

You seem to forget that these glorious ideas of no net neutrality and wonderful internet prices are only in countries that have MANY ISPs available on the same cable line.

That's not how it is in America. If you have Comcast... you can only have Comcast. There aren't 65 different service providers to choose from that use the same cable line. There are 1.

I have already made this argument, read my fucking posts you mongoloid.

Here, let me baby (You) by outlining who I am.

3. Don't be a murricunt

1/3

Reddit sure seems to be propagating purely accurate and unbiased info to keep that ole fearmongering machine just a chuggin along. They couldn't possibly be making **** up as they go, and botting the ever living **** out of the results.

This reminds me of the time when everyone was blaming the republicans on the Privacy bill, and a couple certain users here decided to make the same kind of post saying people and corporations would be able to buy peoples private history because of the "Evil Conservatives". Even made a post about it /channel/politics/Lets+talk+internet/... .

Tell me how has that worked out again?

Ahhhhh that's riiiiiight, you cant actually buy peoples private history as there is still existing laws to prevent that. It's almost as if people were lying in order to keep up the fear and outrage over a subject they knew people wouldn't actually research into and learn about just to keep up the partisan ********.

Gee golly whiz. Why does that seem so familiar to me now?

Could it be because people like on reddit just did the same ******* thing now?

2/3
Nah. Cause they must be telling the truth now right? About how companies will throttle your data without these rules? Even though the current rules already permit that like with Verizon and AT&T archive.fo/ReBoS archive.fo/BRAkb ?

Ah but who cares if they throttle right? The real concern is prioritization. Just like how under the current rules, Comcast is allowed to give priority treatment to Netflix archive.fo/ZBiwi

Ah ****, what the **** am I saying? People wanting to keep these rules dont think thats the real important part. They tell us the REAL important part, is making sure ISP's can't "Bundle" websites like channels.

You know, like how the Obama FCC made clear was already legal to do so under the current rules and in fact would allow them to make themselves exempt. But then they would have to face the FTC.

3/3
"If a broadband provider nonetheless were to choose to exercise editorial discretion—for instance, by picking a limited set of websites to carry and offering that service as a curated internet experience—it might then qualify as a First Amendment speaker. But the Order itself excludes such providers from the rules. The Order defines broadband internet access service as a “mass-market retail service”—i.e., a service that is “marketed and sold on a standardized basis”—that “provides the capability to transmit data to and receive data from all or substantially all Internet endpoints.” 2015 Open Internet Order, 30 FCC Rcd. at 5745–46 ¶ 336 & n.879. That definition, by its terms, includes only those broadband providers that hold themselves out as neutral, indiscriminate conduits. Providers that may opt to exercise editorial discretion—for instance, by offering access only to a limited segment of websites specifically catered to certain content—would not offer a standardized service that can reach “substantially all” endpoints. The rules therefore would not apply to such providers, as the FCC has
affirmed. See FCC Br. 81, 146 n.53."
Page 114
archive.fo/wt1ZZ

So yeah, lets just keep bitching about losing a system that actually allows the things we bitch about wanting to avoid.

Personally, Ill take the system that actually did something. Not the current one that does nothing. And after seeing the 2nd proposal that passed, I'm excited for the future of the Net.

TY for the infographics reddit. I'll stick to reading.

funnyjunk.com/channel/FJNN/Dn 1 dec particle accelerators fcc and rats/dLduLqY/12#12

i can't believe this gay thread made falcon reply something
Fuck man, you know as much as me that reasoning with closed-minded persons are a waste of time

>1) I paid to view content from netflix, netflix paid to have content sent to me, comcast decided to artificially limit netflix till they paid a tax for using the bandwidth they bought in the first place.
But neither of you pay for the fact that netflix uses up a huge percentage of the bandwidth. There's a fixed amount available unless an ISP, now stay with me here, invests their own money in building infrastructure.

Charging a flat fee for everyone is retarded. If you use more, you should pay more.

Should your water or electricity bill be a flat fee every month?

>2) we already have a monopoly, so why deregulate them when it costs billions to even start up, not establish, just fucking start up? we are not going to get new players fucking ever

You deregulate the sector so it fosters competition.

arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/04/one-big-reason-we-lack-internet-competition-starting-an-isp-is-really-hard/

But you're just spouting what you read off buzzfeed, so fuck me, right?

>3) they took 400 billion dollars that was suppose to run fiber to fucking everyone and say on it. they did fucking nothing when the original plan was by 2005 to have a 45 up and down line to bumfuck nowheres outhouse.

This may come as a surprise to you, but 12 years have passed since 2005. Management and financial strategies have surely changed since then. They don't have the luxury of limitless tax dollars.

tl;dr get fucked and actually think about what you say instead of regurgitating propaganda.