PAJEET PAI BTFO

We're just one vote away in the Senate from overturning the FFC's decision to repeat NN.
Sup Forumstards on suicide watch. First big daddy Trump turns out to be a complete shill for Israel and now his plan to fuck over the very people who got him elected is failing AHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAH

...

>Implying any sort of meaningful discussion about NN can occur in Sup Forums.
Look, if I could post this elsewhere I would my guy.

>We're just one vote away
So currently losing?

Yes, currently losing by one vote. Not exactly much...

Why are you celebrating losing? How does the majority of the senate supporting ajit pai make him "btfo"?
If you were winning that would maybe be a cause for celebration, but are you really so delusional that you think losing is a good thing because you might one day not be losing?

Anti NN niggers getting BTFO, first, their corporate overlords promised not to throttle and then they take back that promise and START THROTTLING LMAOING @ANTINNNIGGERS

>Implying that when Trump didn't rise in the polls people didn't get excited. The point is, things, in which, actually work to benefit the average American actually occur in Washington, so just as people celebrated Trump rising in the poll, I celebrate a bill receiving nearly enough support to pass.

>Trump turns out to be a complete shill for Israel
OY VEY! CAN YOU SEEEEE

>Oy Vey teach me your ways Scholomo.

Verizon throtlling Netflix isn't anything new. Verizon does it everytime they want netflix to pay up, and verizon is doing it again, because they are butt hurt that Netflix made a special deal with tmobile.

I hate how it's a matter of r vs d

I'm a republican, but I want this overturned too

Can someone explain to me what no NN means?
Let's assume I'm not old enough to remember anything before 2014 in the United States. What was the world like without Net Neutrality?
and additionally
if nothing has happened yet ~1 month in why is everyone so pro NN?

Still has to go through the House AND Trump's desk
Your move, faggot

again this bullshit, sage

>he thinks one vote in the senate is not a huge deal

Not only are you technologically illiterate (made obvious by your support of net neutrality), but on top of that you are politically illiterate as well. Truly a reddit brainlet.

NN = All data is equal, ISPs can't block you from, charge you to access or throttle speeds for certain websites
No NN = pic related

You're a legit brainlet if you don't think this won't lead to gradual, systemic change


Of fucking course ISPs aren't going to move to actions that will piss people off immediately. It takes time to plan and set new policy in action, definitely more than 2 or even 8 months

there is still people pushing that bullshit propaganda? lmao, truly desperate or a wannabe troll

this is why I don't believe you guys
whenever I ask a legitimate question I get yelled at and
>SLIPPERY SLOPE
did they ever do that before or is that a new thing? Because if that's so then the only thing I can think of preventing them from doing it is a law.
Did some other regulatory law expire which created the need for NN?
Lay it down for me.
oh yeah? then tell me what will happen you fuckhead

My post formatted weird
I was yelling at that other fuck head, not you.

>What was the world like without Net Neutrality
It was the same as it is now.

Assuming that a handful of sites would be all that's left of the Internet after some time without NN always seemed like an exaggeration to me. Maybe I'm a brainlet though.
> inb4 shill
I'd prefer Title II stay in place.

Net Neutrality is bad and is going to impede progress, you stupid dipshits.

>Some networking innovation is going to be invented that makes networks faster
>Because some networks will be faster than others while this is slowly implemented, it'll be forbidden because it breaks Net Neutrality
>Everybody ends up waiting years and years for it because Net Neutrality inevitably came to bite them in the butt for it.

Don't be fucking stupid, this happens 100% of the time that you give the government power over something.

I'd prefer to not be arbitrarily gouged on a per site/group of sites basis by ISPs just because they want more money though. There should at least be safeguards against that.

I'm no fan of ISPs either, but i'll take corporate fuckery over government fuckery any day of the week.

>Being this fucking retarded.
Dumbass nigger, NN has nothing to do with speeds and NN always existed and in fact, still does. If NN existed before what changed? NN has nothing to do with internet speeds, that's why.

Except there is no government fuckery, all NN is, is the statement that you can't throttle one set of packets arbitrarily over another. That's it, literally it. There's nothing in it with regards to speed, infrastructure or anything but just that.

Net Neutrality means no throttling based on content, moron. It has nothing to do with aggregate capacity.

So the NNfags are back to do some turd rustling, too bad NN will never come back so long as Trump is president.

Except that isn't what Pai shot down a while back retard, he shot down Title 2, which is a massive fucking piece of legislation that has buildout requirements and other bureaucratic horseshit.

You realize you *can* be for net neutrality without the rest of all that crap, right?

If that were true the big internet companies would all be pushing against net neutrality because it would mean they could easily shut out competition. They don't. They push for NN because it is in their interest to throw as much data on the network without being charged for it. Think about it. The services you as a consumer care about the most are low bandwidth stuff like email, instant messaging, online banking, reading news etc. Even porn is low bandwidth compared to Netflix.
Meanwhile Netflix and Youtube use up 50% the bandwidth put in place by your ISP. Even if you don't pay for Netflix and never use Netflix, half the money you give to your ISP is for Netflix.

NN is a battle between ISPs and big internet corporations on who pays the bandwidth bill.
Netflix would not be profitable if they actually had to pay for all the bandwidth.

> net neutrality is bad
> you can be for nn without the rest of title ii
Are you the same guy?

>2018
>there's still people that want to regulate internet with a federal law thought for ancient-as-fuck landlines

Except you can't, because the FCC doesn't have the authority to regulate non-Title II carriers in that way.

Sure I can. I can recognize that I really don't want ancient telecom laws applied to the internet, and I can go to the FTC for any actual fuckery.

There's no law that dictates what ISP's charge, user. There's a reason metered billing isn't the norm right now, and it has nothing to do with this law.

Why not with definitive NN legislation that prohibits blocking, throttling, and paid prioritization?

>2018
>People still making non-arguments

...

... That's out point, it has nothing to do with this law. What this law states is that you need to treat all traffic equally.

I'd definitely be okay with actual NN legislation. Pai was right to vote down this Title 2 stupidity in the meantime.

Accepting that law would be like accepting aids to cure your cancer. I'd like to be cancer free *and* not HIV positive.

DELETE THIS

You can boogeyman Title 2 all you fucking want, but you still don't have an argument.

>implying you can have a meaningful discussion about a nothingburger anywhere

Its an argument. Title II is way too overkill/restrictive/outdated to be applied to internet alone.

>NN ISPs fuck you over because there's government subsidized monopolies.
>No NN Redditors are mad and ISPs fuck you over because there's government subsidized monopolies

>a kike shill
>that the kikes hate
Wait, how does that work?

Small ISPs have closed because they couldn't afford the costs of title 2 compliance you ignorant cock socket.

At the end of the day, this matter is closed until at least 2024, so you'd best get used to it :^)

OK, but you still haven't provided any reasons as to why it is "X buzzword here"

Net neutrality is a buzzword for nothingburger. There are no arguments here only reddit ass pain.

>granting the government control over ISPs
Net Neutrality is used to sell the idea of the internet as a common carrier which would make it easier for the government to shut down things they don't want on the internet.

>ISP's have closed because of Title 2
[Ciatation needed]
Yep, because the kikes really hate his recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, please continue to be a good goy.

I see, thanks

Kikes in USA hate Trump, what are you talking about?
Are jews jewing themselves?

Look it up yourself lazy nigger, not my job to do homework for you.

so does Net neutrality as a law have an official definition because it seems here that everyone is giving it it's own stupid interpretation.
Link?

>Net neutrality is the principle that Internet service providers must treat all data on the Internet the same, and not discriminate or charge differently by user, content, website, platform, application, type of attached equipment, or method of communication.[4] For instance, under these principles, internet service providers are unable to intentionally block, slow down or charge money for specific websites and online content.
I mean I know you're just acting like a retard for the (You's) but come on now.
I gotta love these non-arguments.

The government already shuts down things they don't want on the internet. Net neutrality is a good name for it I suppose. It does nothing.

Why was Sup Forums pro NN until Trump took office?

You don't want to listen. That's your issue.
>ISPs flourished in the time of Title II

Republicans are the shill party. It has always has been this way since Reagan. Clinton was also a shill, but the establishment Republican party are bought and sold.

This post has made more sense to me than anything iv read about NN over the past year. Thank you so much user

>What is the burden of proof
Thanks for exposing yourself as a retard. Net neutrality is the principle that Internet service providers must treat all data on the Internet the same, and not discriminate or charge differently by user, content, website, platform, application, type of attached equipment, or method of communication.[4] For instance, under these principles, internet service providers are unable to intentionally block, slow down or charge money for specific websites and online content.
There's something called courts you know?

Because Sup Forums

This isn't your high school speech and debate team, child. He's not required to go looking for something you could easily google if you wanted to learn more about it.

>It's not a buzzword because wikipedia has an article on it.
I mean I know you're just acting like a retard for the (You's) but come on now.

Read what I said, take a break, comprehend it then come back please.
You literally aren't providing anything to listen to, you fucking nigger.

>I still don't have an argument.

>There's something called courts you know?
Yeah that's the government you know? The government shuts things down whenever it wants. Separation of powers is a dog and pony show.

>Net neutrality is the principle that Internet service providers must treat all data on the Internet the same,

So it never existed? Because this has never happened.

>non-arguments
How is government control of a service not important?

>The Verge called eight smaller internet providers to find out whether they’d been impacted by net neutrality, and the answers were mixed. Multiple respondents, when asked if Title II was hurting them, gave an unqualified “no.” Mark Jen, the chief technical officer of a small internet provider in California named Common, which was founded last year by a group of former Square employees, said that complying with net neutrality doesn’t require any work.

“The default configuration of all of the [networking] equipment is to [follow net neutrality],” Jen says. “While net neutrality sounds like rules and regulations, it’s actually just saying everybody has to run stuff in the default mode, which is as fast as possible and great for everybody.”
Tell me more?

There are no arguments over a nothingburger. You faggots said Sup Forums would be shut down if net neutrality was repealed. Here we are.

Oh look, the verge willfully conflating "Title 2" with "Net Neutrality"

Let me say it nice and big for you because you're apparently too much of a fucking ignorant sheep to get it on your own:

NET NEUTRALITY AND TITLE 2 ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS!

So it sounds like a good idea.
I don't know how they could spin this. I hope they wont.

The argument can be applied to literally anything, we have courts for a reason, if the government were to attempt to unjustly ban a website, they'd be tried in court, that's the point.

Wow, it's almost like democrats are corrupt as fuck and support a corrupt bill because the DNC tells them to. They're all slave to the DNC's commands with no room for independent thought.

>What this law states is that you need to treat all traffic equally.
By nature of how the internet works, it's impossible to treat data equally. Simple networking 101 teaches you that treating data equally is what leads to crashes and network downtimes.

>Net neutrality is the principle that Internet service providers must treat all data on the Internet the same,
>The default configuration of all of the [networking] equipment is to [follow net neutrality],”

Yeah good luck running a packet switching network where all the packets get routed to the same address.

The rules of NN are still being applied, the FCC's new rule doesn't come into play for 60 days after the vote you fucking brainlet. Nor did anyone state Sup Forums would be banned the day of the repeal.

Fuck off back to Plebbit you pot-smoking betamale.
We've already discussed why Nigger Neutrality is a shit idea that only benefits Netlfix and Jewgle (companies you probably enable because you're gay and not straight).

It's simplified explanation that anyone without any prior knowledge can grasp.
You can't explain what NN is better than this picture so you can go fuck yourself.

You NNlosers need to face the fact that NN is gone for good, and literally nothing will bring it back. We won, and we'll keep winning.

Imagine being this retarded.
Which is exactly why the ISP's everywhere else across the world don't have this issue.

>Read what I said, take a break, comprehend it then come back please.
No, your fucker. You will answer to me.
What's the deal with Trump and the Kikes? How the fuck does he can be a kike shill if the kikes also hate him?
If you aren't a retard that answer is easy to write.

>You will answer to me.

Get a load of this soyboy

Go be a nigger somewhere else and stop samefagging, we can clearly see that there's only been 31 unique posters and 80 posts. >All these non arguments

Again, read what I said you dumb fucking nigger.

Not an answer.

Verizon supports NN.

You know there is still 22 State legal petition?
if you just remove something doesn't mean it was lawful, only time will show if you have won or not

Google is campaigning for it is why. Useful idiots.

>The rules of NN are still being applied
By who?
>Nor did anyone state Sup Forums would be banned the day of the repeal.
Oy vey we never came here and said that. We're not even here right now! This is all your imagination goyim!

Your own definition of net neutrality is something that breaks the internet but I'm retarded.

(You)
>Yep, because the kikes really hate his recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, please continue to be a good goy.

Let me put this in terms you'll understand

JEWUSLAM IS DA CAPITAL OF JEWLAND
TRUMP WECOGNIZE IS
JEW HAPPY
TRUMP NO WECOGNIZE
JEW NO HAPPY

You get it?

>Oy vey goyim, let me lie and project about others on the internet

Look negro, you got a source to back up your claim that "NN" breaks the internet? If not fuck off, the rest of the developed world has it, you need an example? Canada, call it a day and stop pretending to know anything about networking.

>Net neutrality will save us from censorship and make the internet a better place.

>Look goyim Google supports it!

>It does nothing to address Google's abusive practices. It does nothing to address Google's censorship. It does nothing to address Google's monopoly. It does nothing but benefit youtube's bottom line.

Yeah great plan.

>impersonating a mod
ShariaBlue Plbbbitors are pathetic.

Back to all and every single one of you motherfuckers

What is this negroid even talking about?

>you got a source
Your own definition dumb ass. If all traffic is treated the same then it gets sent to the same place. Routing packets by destination address and a routing table is not consistent with net neutrality.

>It does nothing but state you can't throttle another service arbitrarily
Fixed it for you, but since non-arguments are fun lemme do the same.
>No Net Neutrality will save us from censorship and make the internet a better place
>Look Goyim Time Warner (owner of CNN) supports it

>It does nothing to address CNN's abusive policies. It does nothing to address CNN's spreading of fake news. It does nothing to address Time Warner's near monopoly in certain area's in US. It does nothing but benefit their bottom line.

Yea, great plan.