What would you do to this man? describe in the greatest detail

what would you do to this man? describe in the greatest detail.

Other urls found in this thread:

transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2017/db1122/DOC-347927A1.pdf
gizmodo.com/fcc-chair-says-twitter-and-youtubes-political-biases-ar-1820813796
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

livestream his death online

nothing. i'm not an insane liberal faggot.

Nothing, did you even read the pdf?
transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2017/db1122/DOC-347927A1.pdf

See page 86
Section 145
Most of the examples of net neutrality violations discussed in the Title II Order could
have been investigated as antitrust violations. Madison River Communications blocked access to VoIP to
foreclose competition to its telephony business; an antitrust case would have focused on whether the
company was engaged in anticompetitive foreclosure to preserve any monopoly power it may have had
over telephony. Whether one regards Comcast’s behavior toward BitTorrent as blocking or throttling,522
it could have been pursued either as an antitrust or consumer protection case. The Commission noted that
BitTorrent’s service allowed users to view video that they might otherwise have to purchase through
Comcast’s Video on Demand service523—a claim that would be considered an anticompetitive foreclosure claim under antitrust.524 Comcast also failed to disclose this network management practice and initially
denied that it was engaged in any throttling525—potentially unfair or deceptive acts or practices. If an ISP
that also sells video services degrades the speed or quality of competing “Over the Top” video services
(such as Netflix),526 that conduct could be challenged as anticompetitive foreclosure.

buy him a beer

Thank him for destroying helping destroy America and let him know how great I thought his video was were he responded to tweats. Maybe we would even go out to have a beer or something. Great guy!

This. And give him the cabinet level position of his choice after the re-election.

There is a lot of shit in that pdf that keeps up with the times.
>ISP's must be transparent on throttling
>ISP's can't throttle anything that competes.

I seriously think every single person on earth can't read because there is nothing in the pdf I posted that says ISPs can lock everything behind a paywall. In fact it'll be worse for them because things will be handled on a per case basis based on consumer complaints.

yeah you are just an idiot who doesn't even know wtf is going on...

I'd go to his house and tell him how much I don't like what he's doing. 4868

vote for him in 2020, if he runs

free market + piss off libs

> free market
already was a free market, you stupid communist piece of shit

"free"
sure love my choices. comcast or comcast

It's gonna be a shitload more free now. "Net neutrality" isn't neutral at all and it's bad for consumers. Put down the bong and read a book.

hi shills

Burn down his house and make it a Christmas tradition just like the Gävle goat.

shake his hand, talk about the role of the FCC, stuff like that. I heard him give a talk at AEI once, super smart dude

Coordinated Internet shills are a psychological invention of the far left. They don't exist in real life.

hi shills

net neutrality needs to die so liberals stop controlling the internet
the death of NN is just the beginning of the great conservative intellectual resurrection

i like trump
trump likes him
i like him

Hi Gill

varit delaktig i traditionen en gång. Rolig kväll

strap him to a chair and force him to create a furry/goaste thread and he cant leave until it reaches 150 images, if he cant reach it he has to start over

Are people this retarded?

Im not reading all of that. sum it up

I don't support Net Neutrality because the last thing the internet needs is government regulations.

Simple as that.

The cycle of thoughtless and willful subjugation

>conservative
>intellectual
pick one and only one

Here is a very short list of a few things that ISPs tried to regulate the internet on their own, which net neutrality exists to prevent:
2005 – North Carolina ISP Madison River Communications blocked VoIP service Vonage.
2005 – Comcast blocked or severely delayed traffic using the BitTorrent file-sharing protocol. (The company even had the guts to deny this for months until evidence was presented by the Associated Press.)
2007 – AT&T censored Pearl Jam because lead singer criticized President Bush.
2007 to 2009 – AT&T forced Apple to block Skype because it didn’t like the competition.
2009 – Google Voice app faced similar issues from ISPs, including AT&T on iPhone.
2010 – Windstream Communications, a DSL provider, started hijacking search results made using Google toolbar. It consistently redirected users to Windstream’s own search engine and results.
2011 – MetroPCS, one of the top-five wireless carriers at the time, announced plans to block streaming services over its 4G network from everyone except YouTube.
2011 to 2013 – AT&T, T-Mobile and Verizon blocked Google Wallet in favor of Isis, a mobile payment system in which all three had shares. Verizon even asked Google to not include its payment app in its Nexus devices.
2012 – AT&T blocked FaceTime; again because the company didn’t like the competition.
2012 – Verizon started blocking people from using tethering apps on their phones that enabled consumers to avoid the company’s $20 tethering fee.
2014 – AT&T announced a new “sponsored data” scheme, offering content creators a way to buy their way around the data caps that AT&T imposes on its subscribers.
2014 – Netflix started paying Verizon and Comcast to “improve streaming service for consumers.”
2014 – T-Mobile was accused of using data caps to manipulate online competition.

The tiny handful of NN violations prior to the law passing in 2015 were easily handled either between the parties or by the FTC.

I'm sure the new corporate regulations from Comcast will go by great, especially if you want tiered internet packages like TV.
Bundle now to save, only $20 extra for Netflix, Hulu, and Youtube.
I also see you're using P2P, so lets throttle that down to 5 kb/s.
Oh, you dont like our policies? Well too fucking bad because you literally have no other options for internet due to our monopoly in your area.

Haters going hate

Insert fiberglass insulation down his anus.

You guys are the biggest bores on the fucking planet. Youre worse than the SJWs. At least I can laugh at the sheer delusion and histrionics and triggers. You right wingers are like Ed Gein, just weird and stupid and theres nothing funny about it. Hope you die soon

>why have regulations when you can lock yourself in multiple class action lawsuits for years on end only to receive pitiable compensation by the time the ISP's team of lawyers give up because the original issue is forgotten or no longer relevant?

And how does that monopoly come to be?

Government favoritism, via regulations designed to make it impossible for startups to gain traction and direct subsidies to a chosen few.

No corporate monopoly ever formed independently of government intervention.

Have drink with him, probably. Have a few jokes and maybe go out to dinner. Seems pretty handsome/10.

Give him the stink eye when passing by on the street

Sure, all these giant telecoms are spending millions of dollars lobbying to hurt heir own business and give us little guys a break. Fucking idiot.

Umad conservbitches? XD

because there's been a very noticeable downtick in investment in ISPs and infrastructure since NN passed and because a hyper-vigilant consumer base will instantly punish any ISP that starts throttling anything

So, the solution to a supposedly government-invented monopoly is to invest all of the power into the monopoly itself and just let them do their thing. Brilliant plan.

ISPs are effective monopolies for the same reasons that electric and water companies are. Nobody is going to shell out the wads of cash required to build a separate, parallel set of cables or pipes right on top of the ones built by the monopoly; that's completely futile. Any "competition" they have from smaller service providers have to PAY THEM for use of their lines. It's a monopoly, they own it all.

When governments invent monopolies, it's because an existing corporation has flexed its lobbying muscles to influence the government (case in point being THIS EXACT ISSUE) in their favor. They are not interested in a free market; they have nothing to gain from competition; they are interested in dominating the market and holding onto the monopoly. Why would verizon, comcast, et al. be behind repealing NN if it enabled competitors to cut in on their market share?

Hey. Facebook banning nazis for hate speech a much bigger actual threat to an open Internet than broadband providers. It’s not like anyone with can just start their own website. Unlike creating an ISP. All that takes is a handful of million dollars. Chump change really.

Try again, shill and/or brainless propaganda sponge. ISPs' investment has been on the same steady upward trend right through the 2015 ruling

I'd suck his dick

Buy him a drink, pat him on the back.

Exactly, and net neutrality literally takes favoritism out of the equation.
Say net neutrality gets repealed, and Comcast wants to charge Netflix extra for their service, they would turn more profit per year, meaning more expansion/investment meaning that small statups would be unable to compete.
Taking away net neutrality just brings more money to the big conglomerates that already control the market.
You forget that the Pai is now just a puppet from Verizon, that obviously benefit heavily from abolishing net neutrality.

Oh look, it's another thread on the same subject!

Cool, I'm glad net neutrality stopped those things.

Oh wait.

No, that's not my solution. It's yours. Government is the ultimate monopoly, and unlike any corporation, it can compel you with lethal force to buy what it sells.

I don't trust AT&T or Cox either, but if someone is going to be in charge of my internet options, I'd prefer it to not be an entity that already is entitled to my money.

But the laws attempted to prevent them. Now when accused of blocking or slowing down sites they can just say "so?". You’re argument is akin to saying "well murder being illegal doesn’t stop murder".

I dont think you understand the situation.
The government made a regulation that no one, including the government, can restrict or block access to the internet.
With a new FCC head from Verizon, they want to take this away and remove the freedom of the internet.
This is akin to the government wanting to remove the first amendment, and you saying you support that because the government shouldn't be in charge of freedom of speech, that companies should...

You're ignoring the argument.

First off, it's not a matter of not trusting. ATT, Cumcast, and all the other major ISPs have shown, on every occasion, to blatantly ripoff and undercut the consumer. They do not care about you whatsoever. They will do anything to get as much money from you as possible, this is a fact.

Second, net neutrality does not give the government a monopoly on the internet. Nobody is 100% certain on what will happen after NN is killed off, but what we do know is that the ISPs have been lobbying for years to have it repealed. This means they have something to gain, and I don't think it takes a fucking rocket scientist to figure out what that is.

So basically you have two options right now; support NN and hope that the internet at least stays how it is now, or destroy it and pray that the ISPs don't ruin everything. I know which one I support.

Net neutrality that classifies all ISP's as a utility instead of a service didn't go into effect until 2015.
This also doesnt show that these companies received fines for this.

>I'd prefer it to not be an entity that already is entitled to my money.
You don't seem to understand the concept of "monopoly." Either they are entitled to your money or you don't have access to the internet. More than 50% of people in the US have exactly one choice for internet, and the majority of the other 50% only have the ability to choose between two or three supergiants like verizon, comcast, AT&T who will abuse whatever is not protected by NN if it enables them to squeeze a few more pennies into their assholes.

Gee, thanks, for the alternative facts. Get over it. You lost. Trump won.

Also yfw this is the actual argument he used. gizmodo.com/fcc-chair-says-twitter-and-youtubes-political-biases-ar-1820813796

...

>literal retardation

Oh I understand it better than you think. These companies are monopolies BECAUSE OF the very government seeking this new layer of control over them. Obviously I don't want anyone throttling my internet. My point is NN has more ramifications and motivations to it than keeping internet speed paywalls at bay. Bet on it.

When has any government ever done anything other than try to increase its own power over us?

>When has any government ever done anything other than try to increase its own power over us?
Would you like to have a go at having no government at all and see how you get along? Try Somalia, you'll love it, I promise.

When you grow out of your edgy ayn rand phase you'll realize that full-blown laissez-faire capitalism is just as retarded as full-blown communism. The difference is merely which side of the cliff you're jumping off of.