If the net is kill, what will we use?
I know that a lot of Sup Forums will jump ship and goto tor, but what about zero net or free net?
If Zeronet works the way I think it does, everyone has a little bit of the site so if there's 50 people, that means there's 50 pieces of the site lingering around. So it's sorta like a torrent right? Please correct me
bump
oregano is better
Don't bother, you fucking cunt.
Your shithole is doomed.
>If the net is kill, what will we use?
>Zeronet
Nah man. Only Netzero will work. Dial-up.
You are clearly too retarded to be here. Tor and p2p traffic will be blocked or throttled.
I was told at one point that was the whole point of Tor was to get around security or something like that.
Dialup to tor.
I'm gonna go outside and play some sports with the guys, maybe go hiking or go on a bike ride.
>he doesn't know what a tor bridge is
Is it worth it tho?
>he thinks he will be allowed to connect to an encrypted tunnel that the ISP can't MITM
I will though
No, you won't. And if too many people start pushing the issue, ISPs are going to adopt a "Tor is a ToS violation, service cancelled" position toward it. They don't have any government oversight anymore to stop them from implementing blanket policy changes like that.
The whole point of locking shit behind premium packages is that everything that isn't explicitly allowed will be throttled. You can't circumvent that.
Your ISP may not see that the traffic is TOR, but it sure as fuck knows it is not included in your Netflix premium data package for just $4.99!
>If the net is kill
It's not
>ISPs will offer packages that only allow whitelisted sites
You're a moron.
Amerilards can just wait till 5G gets big but until then you're cucked by Comcast
>only allow whitelisted sites
Didn't say that. They will throttle everything except whitelisted sites.
Quit being fucking hysterical, there was no net neutrality before 2015. Free speech has been infringed on the internet more frequently under net neutrality regulations (though not by the ISPs and admittedly not as result of net neutrality rules, see The Daily Stormer's web host terminating them as an example) than it ever was in a pre-net neutrality world.
they could ban hate sites. I mean there is going to be a ton of pressure put on them to block access to extremist sites "for the kids"
Federal Communications Commission 445 12th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554.
Everything is throttled to shit now. I don't see a problem with consumers being allowed to pay for faster or slower speeds for the sites they use.
Daily reminder net neutrality doesn't stop web hosts from just booting you off the internet at their leisure.
en.wikipedia.org
These companies don't give a fuck about your free speech, they only care about not having to pony up to ISPs for their disproportionate usage of their infrastructure.
I pay a price for faster internet speed, up and down. To spend additional fees on top of that for websites that my ISP doesn't support or is not supported while they throttle it down by is flat out fucking wrong.
Useful summary to cut through the fake news fud.
Netflix has been comping a lot of Koolaid.
tl;dr if you can't be arsed to read it, stop fucking whining.
>they closed down my site
>so in order to protect myself from that happening again I'm going to give the ISPs the ability to effectively do the same thing
Say you pay for 100/10. You'll get 100/10 for everything but if you want 300/30 just for Netflix, it'll only cost $5 extra. I see no problem with this.
Inversely, they could offer 300/30 for everything, but give you a discount if you allow them to throttle Netflix to 100/10.
You've got it fucking wrong, my dude. Net neutrality was made a thing because providers were starting to push what they could do because there wasn't any precedent for or against doing shit like throttling Netflix or killing BitTorrent connections. There is no going "back" to how it was before, and anyone telling you that is a short-sighted retard. They've been let off the leash and the legal ambiguity is gone.
Also fuck off with the "muh free speech" shit. For all the shit SJWs got for their safe spaces, you morons on the other side of the fence are so blind you can't even tell you're just as stupid and rabid for you're own and are willing to justify whatever the fuck it takes to keep them intact. You thought wanting more than one gender was bad? Sure hope those librul tears keep you going when your "team" has robbed you of everything else.
>expecting statists to stop whining, ever
The only time they stop is when the all powerful state they create eventually kills them
Nothing is going to happen. We dont need net neutrality laws, we have the first amendment.
We especially dont need mislabeled FCC regulations that dont even protect consumers at all.
censorship is best
I mean very well done
>they could ban hate sites. I mean there is going to be a ton of pressure put on them to block access to extremist sites "for the kids"
This is something that was going to happen under Title II. Can't happen now.
My team? I'm a raging le 56% degenerate married to a Jew, I just don't think that hosting services should be booting people for posting nazi frogs on their poorly written blog.
I'm just not buying this hysteria, I've never lived anywhere that doesn't have at least 3-5 options for an ISP and I'm not aware of any case where all the ISPs got together to actively block a website's traffic from the internet. (I was a Verizon customer when they blocked Sup Forums momentarily, which was some serious bullshit but I've since left and they've since quit being fucking autistic)
Yeah it can. ISP just says the site violates their TOS. I mean technically the agreement with my ISP says they can terminate service for pornography or hate speech.
I have 100/100. Up and down. I don't need nor do I want increased speed for Netflix or any other websites.
Also, even if they were to offer me 300/150 lets say but throttle down XYZ websites, it feels as if they are twisting my arm.
Barring me from viewing websites that could be seen as "technically illegal", websites that enter the grey area, and that determination was done by the head of an ISP is not right.
I really dont get what is happening and it seems like everyone is calling each other retarded brainlets on both sides so I'm just confused on what to believe
That's so incredibly fucked up that your ISP can terminate your service for viewing pornography.
Nobody is talking about banning websites, m8. If you don't want increased speeds for certain services, then you don't buy a package that has it. I don't see the problem with giving discounts for allowing an ISP to throttle certain services.
Really instead of net neutrality there should be mandated encrypted web as well as encrypted DNS queries.
Fuck off with your FCC shit, Sup Forums
net neutrality prevented ISP's from muddling around with what you want to view, i.e. any websites that could be seen as distasteful or illegal or even entered the grey area of illegal.
removing this opened the ability for ISP's to better innovate how the internet is used by offering premium prices for websites that you want to view or frequently view.
Though if some websites were unfairly blocked then it would be a violation of the Sherman Act; I dont suppose you have enough money to battle this in court, though, do you?
Terminating Net Neutrality will result in ISP's freedom to bar you from viewing specific sites they deem to be illegal or distasteful.
Even if blocking you from viewing those sites is unfair, and is protected by law, you would need to battle it in court.
You'll be draining your account over and over fighting tooth and nail on what you think with someone else who now wears the big boy pants.
Reminder that unless cartels are legalized no company will risked being immediately undermined by another who refuses to change format.
how much of crypto is in the US and how will this impact on the prices?
Unless they literally hate money they will never enforce this.
It's already been able to terminate your account based on using their services to view illegal or unauthorized sites.
Where so many people frequently view pornography I would assume that they don't, but its still fucked up that they could is all.
If you were caught.
Whats the difference?
They will. You need to look at this from a publicity standpoint.
>(ISP) blocks disgusting fetish site corrupting young adults
>(ISP) helps the software industry by cracking down on pirates
>(ISP) protects it's users from dangerous and harmful websites by blocking them automatically
Look at this from the retard perspective. Normal people will see this and think "Hey cool" rather than "Oh no muh freedoms"
In this case you don't even have an attempt to view XYZ sites and it's determined at their discretion.
Unless the sites you are viewing currently like how to build bombs, CP, etc then theres a very small chance that they will enforce it without first giving a written warning.
And now those sites can be blocked unless you VPN around them. In both cases, you don't have meaningful access to the sites.
Lol good job america way to get cucked by pai. Fucking goddamn fucking idiots. Fuck I hate your shithole of a country, your fucking bought and paid for politicians, and your population's incredible ignorance and stupidity. You fucking retarded pieces of shit. It's bad enough you fucking morona vote a fuckibg criminal, tax dodging, fucking clown into office(fucking repeatedly) but now you have to go and fuck the internet for the whole fucking world. Gpd I hate your shithovel country with it's fucking miles of emptiness and antimeth and suicide billboards, your fucking towns of nothing but churches and fastfood places fuck you all. You all deserve to get bent over and tag teamed by both those fucking goofs trump and pai one by fucking one. I can't wait till the fucking Chinese conquer your country and rape and pillage you all to the fucking ground.
But, they're not cracking down on the websites, they're terminating your account, how is that helping others?
>fuck up internet for the whole world
Stop believing reddit propaganda, retard. It's only US ISPs.
>>fuck up internet for the whole world
>Stop believing reddit propaganda, retard. It's only US ISPs.
How much of the web is hosted in America? A fucking lot. You really think those sites being fucked.with isn't goong to fuck people in other countries? You people really are fucking retarded. This stupidity is why I fucking hate you all.
I must be unclear, the point I am trying to illustrate is that it shouldn't be left up to the ISP to determine what you can and cannot view, though they can terminate your account if you are caught. It's a way for other people to restrict the information that you have access to which I feel is wrong.
The ISP can choose to do that, under Title II they can be forced.
Jesus, just relax. It's not a big deal. Worst case scenario you're gonna have to pay 5 bucks to watch Netflix as fast as usual. You need to stop this fear stuff.
100% more fucked.
TEARS FOR THE TEAR GOD
>SALT FOR THE SALT THRONE
>cost of doing business increases in America
>websites host on European servers instead
Big whoop. Cry moar, shitskin.
nahh, that's best case scenario, 5$? try 100$ if people actually buy into it. Nothing prevents ISP's from capping their request for additional money.
We went from having cable with all the trimmings to basic cable and paying extra for the things that we want. Nothing stops ISP's from bundling either for a higher price.
>Jesus, just relax. It's not a big deal. Worst case scenario you're gonna have to pay 5 bucks to watch Netflix as fast as usual. You need to stop this fear stuff.
I run a business online using a platform hosted in america. This is going to directly affect my source of.income. this is going to affect the amount of food I am able to eat. This is going to affect my ability to pay for.my home. Fuck you. You fucking ignorant stupid hillbilly fucks. You fucking useless fucking people.
The only way to get any meaningful change is to increase competition between ISPs. Repealing NN is a start, but more has to be done. NN didn't change the landscape on censorship. The method will change but the result will be the same.
Except cable stations have a pricing model that relies on subsidies from people who subscribe to cable providers. The internet is fundamentally different.
Pajeet, my friend. There are other countries that will gladly host your mangled WordPress site.
What about the millions of people that don't use meme websites like you? Stop being selfish.
That will cost the consumer dearly.
Nothing prevents ISP's from bundling throttled websites. You'd be paying extra in the long run for things you don't want or care for simply to try and get a better price that's going to cost you more than just vanilla.
It was an analogy. Not to be taken literally.
eat my ass, i pay top dollar for my memes peasant.
Nothing is stopping them except for market forces. Ultimately, throttling websites will result in savings for the customers who don't use the websites, and it allows for a significant performance boost for those who do. But again, we don't need to look at theoreticals, we can simply look at the pricing models ISPs used before NN in 2014.
It's a flawed analogy that fundamentally distorts the issue.
are any of the major crypto trading sites affected by this? this will have major monetary repercussions if crypto hubs are under pajeet banhammer
Thanks for posting this. I knew I shouldn't have done that bs email your local officials.
Why would it matter if you can access coinbase at 50mbps instead of 100mbps?
your false flagging is really bad tbqh
fufk u bitch I have no flag
You know that they're currently challenging in courts the FTC's authority to regulate ISPs? And it's very possible they're going to win, so any point about the FTC stopping shit is silly.
Dumb statement.
ISP's didn't do any of that during the 90's and 00's.
Just take a look at Europe, how they have supposed net neutrality but their internet is censored, way more than the US. Is there even any censorship here?
Court cases are always ongoing. It's absurd to make decisions based on how a case might pan out. This is especially true when such major cases take years to work their way up and down the courts.
But why remove this regulation when the only other possible one is being challenged and likely won't be enforceable until resolution?
>likely
It's neither likely nor reasonable to assume the FTC will lose the case. It's even more unreasonable to assume Congress would allow ISPs to act without oversight by either the FTC or FCC.
I'd rather not leave this shit up in the air. I don't trust Congress to act in the best interests of the people. And there's no reason to remove FCC classification in the first place. Give me one example of where it's stopping an ISP from actually providing a better service.
It's stopping ISPs from providing faster speeds to non-Netflix customers. Those who want to use Netflix could pay a small fee to boost their speed from a throttled amount.
Its also stopping cell carriers from offering unlimited data, provided you allow them to throttle video resolution to 720p or standard definition. These video streaming services consume the vast majority of bandwidth, it's rather absurd the rest of us have to subsidize their Jewish propaganda viewing habit.
>Thinking this will stop us
Dude, you should know that the gov doesn't even follow it's own laws 1/2 the time unless it benifits them
but how would this work user?
Another reason why I hate living in this country. People here are fucking idiots. I've watched my country do some stupid ass shit but this takes the banana
So people shouldn't be able to use the bandwidth bought and sold to them by the ISP?
No. I'm saying that Netflix users consume something like 60% of the nation's bandwidth. Their usage of bandwidth means that either ISPs have to offer slower speeds to everyone, or they have to charge more for the same speeds. The Netflix users are imposing an externality onto the rest of the market. It's very odd that everyone wants ISPs to be treated as utilities, but they don't want the consumption-based price model used by every utility.
>It's stopping ISPs from providing faster speeds to non-Netflix customers. Those who want to use Netflix could pay a small fee to boost their speed from a throttled amount.
That doesn't matter, they're all paying the same price for the service. It's not stopping these ISPs from providing anything, they just don't want to invest in more modern networks. It's why consumer-based fiber is nowhere even though there's plenty of business fiber everywhere.
People not streaming Netflix or other high-bandwidth services aren't going to see any advantages to higher speed. They aren't seeing traffic throttled. They don't need higher speed for their sorts of use cases and they make up a much smaller portion of the market.
Netflix users actually use closer to 40% of the nation's bandwidth.* I just checked again. The rest of my argument is unchanged.
But that isn't an NN issue. That is an issue of ISPs overselling capacity. They have been doing this for quite a while and when popular streaming services came around it but them in the ass.
You can already put safety locks on anything, the publicity would be less than what you think, we don't live in the hardcore christian theocracy people imagine the past as, even people in the bible belt are a bunch of pervs, this would be good for like, mormons, thats it.
Yes, people who use Netflix pay the same cost as someone who doesn't. Such a flat rate model clearly imposes an externality on the rest of the market.
The fiber issue is completely different as its related to the quasi-monopoly the government has created in most markets. The very same government regulators you're arguing in favor of now.
>getting rid of net neutrality is the worst thing i've seen this country do
I hope for your sake that you're underage
I doubt anyone anticipated the surge of on demand movies. The solution to over selling capacity is to increase prices. Would you rather everyone subsidize Netflix viewers, or just the people who actually watch it?
Everyone should pay for my choices. Period.
5Mb/s is needed to stream HD on Netflix. If I am already paying for 50Mb why the hell should I pay more?
Your mom already pays for your internet bill. I'm not sure how many others need to pay for your hentai addiction. Clean your room, too.
You'd pay more because you are consuming more of the ISPs bandwidth. Just as you pay more if you consume more of the water company's ability to process water.
