Honestly im suprised no one has killed Ajit Paice of shit yet

honestly im suprised no one has killed Ajit Paice of shit yet
anyway
whats your thoughts on ajit pai and net nutrality?

Other urls found in this thread:

google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/fredcampbell/2017/05/03/the-truth-about-net-neutrality-the-left-and-google/amp/
apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-151A1.pdf),
networkcomputing.com/wireless/google-fiber-utility-poles-fcc/1690242238
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

This is what the confederates wanted to prevent

I think every reason they have for repealing it is a conflated lie with no basis. If the ISPs are talking about how they will still follow net neutrality laws once it's gone, 1. Why are you getting rid of it then and 2. Why are you paying so many congressmen to repeal it?

The fact that anyone can't see the a shit pile just talks on circles and never actually explains why repealing it would cause economic growth, or how title 2 is "heavy-handed", is just the proof I need that at least 51% of Americans are mindless, gutless sheep who will do nothing to stop their government from fucking them over.

This is a sign. Our politicians have become truly corrupt and we, the people, have lost all power over what they do. The logical next step is to vote these people out and stop paying for our service plans. I'm sure once these numbnuts who sit on Facebook for 95% of their lives are now restricted from it, they'll care a bit more. Unfortunately they should've cared much earlier.

Couldn't care less, amerimutts get what they deserves

Its going to affect other countries as well bud

Its basically being repealed so the ISPs won't have to worry about rates being set by the govt. Trumps bending the govt over for a big fat corporate cock ramming

This is the scary part actually, I can't do anything about this because its not on my battlefield, but by the time it comes to me, it will be too late. Quite a problem we got on our hands.

>the internet is a basic human right
Holy fuck kill yourself

except confederates voted for the orange retard who is too stupid to understand what net neutrality is and doesn't give a fuck about it.


Daily reminder that this is happening on trump's watch and he is not doing anything to stop it.
Obama stopped this shit when he could, trump isn't doing anything.

Keep thinking that, amerifag. No one is as dumb as American politicians

Remind me again why I should care? And I am American btw.

You can leave this thread now mr. Brabeck.

Sure you can. If you have American friends, make sure they contact their Congress person and tell them if they vote to repeal it, they won't receive your friends vote.

Another thing you can do is to start early in your country to make sure yoyr government isn't secretly calling in similar repeals. If more people in America gave a shit, and gave a shit much earlier, this never would have been an issue. The government works for the people, not the other way around. You're the boss of your public officials.

I disagree that the people aren't doing anything about it. Most people don't know about it, or really understand what it is. It's not getting any MAN coverage, so anyone who doesn't sit on Jewtube or Sup Forums all day had no fucking clue what it is. As far as the people not trying to check the government, there was a petition with over 22 million signatures, and it was completely ignored by the FCC. We haven't stopped trying, they stopped listening.

he would just be replaced by his kike over lords if he dies, i think we all know what a better solution is

Except all those American websites you use won't be there anymore due to active discrimination and loss of advertisers from lack of traffic edgelord. Including all your porn sites and this shitty place you faggot. You will have to find a new place to shitpost cunt.

>dumb
Actually, they're not dumb at all. If you look at their recent "contributors" you'll see that many of them have been bought off for as little as $6,000 by ISPs. If you think other first world countries won't follow the US on this, you're very naive.

It isn't really too hard to find out where he lives. If you just search "Ajit V Pai Virginia" his address pops up on the first page

the internet is not a human right, the standard of living that allows one to have a comfortable enough existence to afford a comcast bill is. stfu faggot

4868 Old Dominion Drive, Arlington

I acknowledged this in my last paragraph. But 3 out 3 people I've tried to discuss this issue with irl are completely uninterested. Even when I tell then it'll affect Facebook, Google, jewtube etc.

Can you blame them though? The masses only use websites like facebook, google, amazon, etc. These companies can afford to keep ISPs off their back. The fringe people like us that use Sup Forums and other sites get fucked over, therefore, only us and the other fringe users give a shot at this point.

>mfw internet based companies moves to canada instead when nn gets repealed hurting us economy

google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/fredcampbell/2017/05/03/the-truth-about-net-neutrality-the-left-and-google/amp/

Except it won't affect them much. They can afford to keep ISP from raping their bandwidth.

Yes, the internet back then was a democracy before ajit pai, and we're being plundered and squeezed dry. No.. What does democracy or internet freedom mean for those FCC hyenas? They don’t care at all! They are only interested in one thing! Are you willing to be plundered? people of the internet? Yes or no? Are you stupid enough to keep quiet about the process of net neutrality being repealed? Yes or no? And when the FCC are stupid enough to think that selling out and hurting the people is good but when the people declare "You're not going to censor us any longer neither through actual censorship, pricing the internet, or throttling" then that is bad.. In reality, money is what rules in this country. They talk about how this will mean more freedom, when infact what they're doing will have limitations brought from providers. And the providers in any case are the main influence for these decisions. The providers will block out public opinion exposing them for this. The FCC and their sugar "daddies" don't have any differences at all, we've seen it all before. By repealing net neutrality, the FCC must believe that they're providing a safer more open internet for the people. One with more "freedom". But the exact opposite is the case. To the FCC, the people are by no means the main focus of attention. What really matters to them, is the existence of the fact that they have enough power to make it better for people who can gain from it being repealed. Capitalists, business owners, share-owners, the corporations, they are the ones who will support it because they know that it won’t just stop with america. Other countries are influenced by what we do. Sooner or later if we let this pass net neutrality will be extinct everywhere, leaving us slaves underneath the censorship of corporation. They don't want us to have freedom, they want to suppress us, they can even influence you into having their mindset if they'd like, but we will not capitulate!

Nobody gives a shit.
Fuck off back to /r/whatever-reddit-board-you-came-from

this is why I don't believe Verizon and Comcast will turn internet into cable TV 2.0. They may want to do it and block/throttle 99% of it for ransom but they won't because it will hurt the US economy. The EU, Canada, India and even China will be so grateful if that happens.

So what kind of douchebaggery do they want to pull of instead? Small data caps for open internet, then pay for package? Throttling competitors? Who knows?

Good luck americans and be careful of who you vote for next time.

They're more likely to continue to extort companies into paying for their services to receive fair speeds, since consumers would likely revolt.

Comcast had been forcing Netflix into paying for better speeds after throttling their traffic. Unfortunately, this causes Netflix to become more expensive for the consumer and takes away the ability for them to innovate (see: They've been using the billions they've been making to create more content)

we didn't vote ashit pie into office though
and the majority of people didn't even vote for Trump

Why did it have to be between Trump and Hillary, huh??? Like we just said fuck it, lets pick the lesser of two evils instead of actually picking a good candidate. I hate my fellow countrymen...

I'm stealing this, wundervoller meme

oh shit finally someone found out its just a rephrased hitler speech

yes the decision sucked.wouldn't want to be in your position. Trump is incompetent AF, though. He is a plaything for corporations. Clinton seems weak as well.

We had our chance during the primaries, and everyone blew it.

Juden! also popped in my head at the right time as i was reading

The Soros is strong in this one

Everyone who supports net neutrality is a cuck who just wants everything for free and thinks the government is infallible

Go ahead explain what net neutrality is for us buddy.

>everything i dislike is Soros

>t.verizion

you are. you dont even know how the internet works idiot

This, absolutely, except for the fact that user probably doesn't have any friends at all.

But you see, a human can turn protein, fat, and carbohydrates into piles of shit. It's much more economic to choose the human.

>Internet is fine for 30 years before the 2015 "net neutrality" rules
>Internet gets kinda censor-ish from 2015 to 2017, but still pretty much the same
>George Soros pouring millions into maintaining the "net neutrality" rules
>MFW the BIGGEST supporter of net neutrality was Google. Google wanted the internet declared a public utility to get access to utility poles for their fiber network without paying like everyone else

OMG UR GONNA HAV TO PAY FOR EVERY VIDYA AN TWEET NOW CUZ EVEN THO THEY DIDN DO IT BEFORE THEY GON DO IT NAO!!!!!!!!!

Follow the money. It's Google being Google, not massive tiered access despite competition that prevents it.

...you people actually support government controlling your internet instead of the free market, users and competition?

We already pay for the internet

it's like buying a car and they only give you parts and then asking for more for assembly

I paid, I want my internet

Irony

Again, for 30 years, it was fine. Google lobbied the FCC to make the internet a public utility and to regulate it like... wait for it... cable television... which HAS tiered access. Did you really think this through?

Except when there is no free market and no competition.
>muh gubmint

> competition

That's why 33% of Americans have 1 ISP and another 33% have two market sharing ISPs.

But I bet you'll say nothing about getting rid of the legislation that blocks access to the telecom market to prevent any competition from happening in the first place.

Also you make no note of the numerous corporate infringements on the Internet pre-2015 that resulted in the title 2 protections in the first place, such as Comcast throttling competing services and the faked outages and email redirects for critical sites and users.

I paid for the internet, along with all the other customers

I want what I paid form not micro transactions

lol, nope

>let's create a free market and promote competition with more government regulation and control

Hmm ...

...

Bullshit
Even if you only have ONE cable internet supplier, you have the options of satellite internet, DSL, cellular internet (multiple carriers), etc.

I got tired of Time Warner (i.e. Rectum Internet), so I dropped them, tethered off my phone for a couple months, then had Fios installed. There are options. This isn't 1977 with Bell Telephone.

You mean the DNC fucked itself up it's own asshole by alienating every independent in the country?

wut

And again, this is how it was for 30 years before the Obama "net neutrality" rules. Making the internet regulated like a cable TV company? Golly, They HAVE tiered access and you're all for this happening, yet... don't want it happening?

Whew, dude

you may have nice trips

but you don't know how to internet

Oddly enough, this is an example where government control (prohibiting anti-competitive practices) would increase competition. If you automatically think "government intervention means less competition" then you're a simpleton and should probably look into the last century or so of anti-trust victories.

...

Daily reminder that Shareblue is paying people to post this shit against the FCC nigger and repealing the Title II rules here, Reddit, Tumblr, Twitter, and in the comment section of every news article. Just like "Correct The Record" did.

id support the internet being a utility. you literally cannot live without dealing with the internet in one form or the other every single day. would be more useful than shit like a fucking boarder wall or whatever republicucks want to waste tax dollars on now

>local governments establish telecom duopoly through licensing and access restrictions
>MUH MARKET FAILURE! MORE REGULATION IS NEEDED!
>federal government prevents ISPs from charging cash cows like Netflix and Google more for internet access, putting an unproportionate burden on the consumer and thereby artificially inflating the price of Internet
>MUH MARKET FAILURE! MORE REGULATION IS NEEDED!
>federal government nationalizes telecom industry in yet another illegal and unconstitutional expansion of power, condemning Internet in the United States to be Venezuela-tier for the next century
>mfw

Spoken like a reddit fag
LEAVE NORMIE

Except cable isn't regulated as a public utility under title 2, it's almost completely deregulated by the 1984 communications act amendment. In fact, that deregulation is why cable was able to move into the tiered access system in the first place.

Man it feels good to actually be educated.

Trump likes this and Ajit, so they will go along with NN being repealed to avoid the cognitive dissonance of siding with shit.

He understands, he just doesn't care
The only thing trump truly cares for is trump, and net neutrality has no influence over him

...because massive government regulation ALWAYS brings down prices, right? Like when the government cockblocked UPS, FedEx, DHS and other private package delivery services from directly competing from the post office? Don't remember that? Look it up. They lost the fight and now all those carriers are cheaper than the post office and do the same thing. And, for the record, the post office is SO inefficient, they need tax dollar subsidies to keep their doors open. FedEx and the rest are cheaper and turn a profit.

see

So... you want the internet to be exactly like it was before 2015. Got it.

>without net neutrality, internet companies will charge more for certain services like netflix

no net neutrality for cell phone companies, yet not a single one has done this. big government cucks taking over Sup Forums

The core issue is that your run of the mill conservative in America doesn't give a fuck about net neutrality because they are already banned/censored more on the big platforms, particularly Facebook, Twitter, and Google services, so what would it matter if the ISPs start doing it too? Similarly you have situations like Christopher Cantwell who has been banned from everything including PayPal. He had a felony assault charge in Virginia which hasn't even gone to court yet, but he was banned from pretty much everything anyway in a clearly politically motivated move by the companies.

I believe the long play here is to let the ISPs stomp some balls and then garner public support for chaining ISPs and large social network services (which have effectively replaced much of the former public space for dialogue among citizens) to the 1st ammendment. Similar to how the bank or your phone company can't cut you off just because they don't like your opinions. Essentially to get support for real net neutrality we have to turn the mirror on the left.

Those companies banned Cantwell because they didn't want to get a reputation of "supporting Nazis" so legislation preventing them from even doing that would be ideal as morons could no longer blame them for it just like you can't blame the telephone company for being responsible for some guy phoning in a death threat to you.

Actually, Soros organizations are the ones that are making the most noise about net neutrality so it must be good to be opposite of them. I'm not interested in the new world order that obummer tried to take us to

The net neutrality rules weren't required until ISPs began suing the FCC and began violating net neutrality principles. "Net neutrality" was officially the FCC's position in 2005 (apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-151A1.pdf), but since it became inshrined into law ISP's have fought it every year. They were winning, too, which is why the FCC, under Obama, decided to impose stronger rules that would be more difficult for ISPs to overturn.

Should you be charged according to bandwidth, or according to which websites you're using? If you think that you should only be charged according to bandwidth and that ISPs shouldn't be able to block your access to their competitors, then congrats! You're in favor of strong net neutrality regulations. If you think that ISPs should be able to restrict your ability to access websites and that you should have to pay more when accessing their competitors, then you're a douche and fuck you.

Let's follow the money. Crazy idea, I know. Who's pouring money into supporting "net neutrality" rules: Free Press, Public Knowledge and Media Matters, huge grant-giving foundations like the Ford, Soros and Knight foundations. Look them up. See who they are and other things they do.

Except in many areas, you can't get satellite internet because service technicians won't come to that area or can't obtain a license to work in that area.

Many don't have the data capacity to tether their phones in rural areas either.

Source: Lived in a rural area with no access to the above.

How the fuck is allowing ISPs to charge more if you attempt to access their competitors going to drive down prices? You're fixated on the ideology of "goberment = higher prices" while not looking at this situation specifically. Net neutrality allows the small guys to compete with everyone else, and it prevents ISPs from smothering competition.

Why don't you actually answer that question? How on earth are the net neutrality rules that have been in full force since 2005 (Obama's "regulations" merely created a way of enforcing positions the FCC had already taken, and that ISPs were already subject to) leading to increased prices? What is the fucking mechanism here? Jesus Christ.

Net neutrality doesn't allow for competition, it prevents ISPs from fucking you because there IS NO COMPETITION.

If there WAS competition, we could talk about removing it (still a bad idea), but net neutrality is needed as it stands.

Again, the internet was fine for 30 years before net neutrality and will be fine without it. Crying over "COULD DO THIS" or "COULD DO THAT" is retarded. Your cell carrier could charge you $20/megabyte of data, but they don't. Because there's competition. If a company pulls that shit, another company will swoop in and offer better, cheaper services. This is how the economy works.

Who is pouring money into challenging net neutrality rules? ISPs, you schmuck, because they want to stifle competition and to charge more based on your viewing habits. And, because you're a paranoid shit who's prone to believing conspiracy theories, you think that somehow George Soros is funding the net neutrality argument, even though it's been the official position of the FCC for the past decade (before Soros became engaged in US politics, by the way), and has always been practiced. Goddamn, you're a stupid little cunt aren't you?

It allows for competition between websites and media platforms, I wasn't referring to competition between ISPs (except when they're trying to promote their own products).

Google wants to be a major ISP, but doesn't want to pay for utility pole access like everyone else. So, they get the FCC to declare the internet as a public utility. Google poured the most money into lobbying for net neutrality. It's that simple.

You're fucking stupid, there's only 4 big telecoms controlling different corners of the country and they all agree cohesively to offer the same prices. They're too big to fall so there's no reason to get an edge on competition.

You fucking idiot, net neutrality has been the default position for the past 30 years. The FCC made it the official position over a decade ago. ISPs have been attacking it, either by ignoring the FCC's rules or challenging them in court. The decision to enshrine net neutrality rules into law two years ago was a result of the ISPs assault on net neutrality, not "overreach" or increased government regulation.

>whats your thoughts on ajit pai
He was sent in as the boogeyman to see just how much they can get away with.
>and net nutrality?
Runs the risk of becoming a cliché, at which point it will mean whatever you want it to mean. Note that this has already happened to words like "democracy" and "Republican Party".

Net neutrality was originally about prioritizing packet data transmission... so Hulu could not pay off an ISP to give their packets priority over Netflix and similar situations. Which wasn't really a big thing... and when it did happen occasionally, the FTC came down on the ISP with an iron hammer. Because that was already illegal.

Now, the big dollars have convinced the kiddies that they will suddenly have to pay for tiered access. Because reasons.

This shows that you have no fucking clue what you're talking about. Your example (a cell phone carrier charging $20/megabyte of data) does not apply to this conversation at all.

At fucking all. Go read something, you shit.

Yes, of course. Just let the government make all your big decisions. Just believe the people supporting net neutrality. They're billionaires, so they must know things. Baaaaaaaaa.

yes it does mongoloid, they don't charge you more or less depending on what platform/website you use that data. kill yourself

It isn't that they don't want to "pay for utility pole access" but that the current ISPs under previous rules (when they didn't have Title II classification) could prevent other companies from accessing existing infrastructure. Google would still have to pay for access to the poles, but ISPs basically cannot say "no." Again, net neutrality and Title II classification increases competition, and the current ISPs don't want that.

networkcomputing.com/wireless/google-fiber-utility-poles-fcc/1690242238

Stop trolling, nobody is falling for it Telecom shill.

The people had little chance in the primaries. Those were more rigged than was the general election. The GOP offered a dozen different versions of Chucky's dumber brother while the Dems were dead-set on installing a Depends-wearing arms dealer.

...

Should internet service providers be able to do the following:

1) Charge you 3x as much for using a competing website, like Netflix, over their own shitty video streaming service
2) Charge small businesses extra for any traffic to their websites, and if the businesses don't pay, people are not allowed to access the sites
3) Restrict which websites you can view, with preference going to either businesses who coughed up the money or the ISP's preferred platform
4) Deny competing ISPs access to public or private infrastructure in order to choke out any possible competition

None of these scenarios are good, none of them increase competition or lead to better services or values for US citizens, and these are the only changes that would occur if the past three decades of adherence to net neutrality principles are tossed out.

You didn't specify they would "charge you more or less depending on what platform/website you use that data," and under net neutrality rules that would have been forbidden anyway.

They will be able to do that in the future.

doesn't apply to cell phone companies retard

So instead we have a Depends-wearing hotel manager (Trump is older than Hillary, btw).

and it wasn't my post, just pointing it out

...