Net neutrality didn't even really exist until 2009, and back then the internet wasn't blocked or extra feed and shit...

net neutrality didn't even really exist until 2009, and back then the internet wasn't blocked or extra feed and shit. How is this much different? ISPs aren't government property. They're businesses and repealing the laws may be better for the future so then when net neutrality does of if it gets reinstated, the internet would be a different, more complex animal.

Other urls found in this thread:

washingtonexaminer.com/chairman-ajit-pai-is-draining-the-fcc-swamp/article/2622480
youtu.be/U04MRiGMFqw
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

preach it

i dont see a problem with it. while the internet is a free place, internet service has never been free. therefore net neutrality doesnt fall under free speech.

they're going to now that people aren't paying for cable. why do you think they are even asking for it? asshole

The problem isent the loss of neutrality itself, its the fact that now the government has the ability to block any site they want. And with trump, that is a fucking nightmare.

>ISPs aren't government property
but they use government property to run their business

Because they've already tried to charge extra for stuff like facetime and netflix. They were blocked by net neutrality laws and infact THAT'S WHY THEY MADE IN THE FIRST PLACE.

They'll also only allow fast connections to sites that pay them money.

You think Sup Forums is going to pay ISPs money or even be offered the chance? Have fun trying to browse your favourite image board with dial-up speeds buddy.

It doesn't affect me though, and I doubt it will because I live in a country where the decision isn't left up to just five people.

It's funny how you guys are always calling liberals cucks and yet here you are willing being cucked by trump and the republicans.

Preach it. The Amerilards are retarded.

they had that ability before. title 2 regulations were opt-in opt-out. there are no regulatory statutes being given to the government to shut down any website they want. this is a common misunderstanding, but it is still entirely up to the individual ISPs, not the government. that has not changed at any point in the last 15 years

>t. i dont understand title 2 regulations

anyone remember when verizon and at&t both blocked this site...

oh you don't? Damn underage b&'s not knowing shit as always.

Because you have net neutrality in the U.K?

Nope

Try not to be purposefully dumb. Do you think companies like Comcast lobbied with millions to get rid of this so things could go on normally?

I don’t love the UK, you retard. Try again

File: GOOD WHY HELLO RUSSIA SEE U AGIN WHY HELLO RUSSIA WHY HELLO RUSSIA WHY HELLO RUSSIA CCEEC- WHY HELLO RUSSIA WHY HELLO RUSSIA SEE U AGIN internet GOOD WHY HELLO RUSSIA SEE U AGIN wasn't GOOD WHY HELLO RUSSIA SEE U AGIN blocked GOOD WHY HELLO RUSSIA SEE U AGIN or GOOD WHY HELLO RUSSIA SEE U AGIN extra GOOD WHY HELLO RUSSIA SEE U AGIN feed GOOD WHY HELLO RUSSIA SEE U AGIN and GOOD WHY HELLO RUSSIA SEE U AGIN shit. GOOD WHY HELLO RUSSIA SEE U AGIN How GOOD WHY HELLO RUSSIA SEE U AGIN is GOOD WHY HELLO RUSSIA SEE U AGIN this GOOD WHY HELLO RUSSIA SEE U AGIN much GOOD WHY HELLO RUSSIA SEE U AGIN different? GOOD WHY HELLO RUSSIA SEE U AGIN ISPs GOOD WHY HELLO RUSSIA SEE U AGIN aren't GOOD WHY HELLO RUSSIA SEE U AGIN government GOOD WHY HELLO RUSSIA SEE U AGIN property. GOOD WHY HELLO RUSSIA SEE U AGIN They're GOOD WHY HELLO RUSSIA SEE U AGIN businesses GOOD WHY HELLO RUSSIA SEE U AGIN and GOOD WHY HELLO RUSSIA SEE U AGIN repealing GOOD WHY HELLO RUSSIA SEE U AGIN the GOOD WHY HELLO RUSSIA SEE U AGIN laws GOOD WHY HELLO RUSSIA SEE U

Which country do you love?

washingtonexaminer.com/chairman-ajit-pai-is-draining-the-fcc-swamp/article/2622480

>>.753868774
Your newfag is blaringly showing

It would make an interesting case to argue that being online has become necessary for participation in the political process and must now be provided at no cost throughout the U.S. This would likely result in ISPs becoming utilities and being paid on a rate base by the FCC. Advancement in network tech would halt, and service would slowly degrade to a consistently substandard level. I guess that would make it the new standard, but anyway. We’d also still be paying for it in a worse way—through income taxes and with no choice as to provider.

Everyone does.

yeah, and people that have to drive on roads don't cry about traffic laws being a free market violation, so why should isps get to frame their use of public property as such

I’m not defending ISPs. I’m just pointing out how closed-minded and unwilling to be rational you are.

ISP's either buy the land rights or rent them from the owner, why do you think it takes years to have pipes layed in busy neighborhoods?

Until ISPs begin splitting package deals for different regulated and approved sites and apps, blocking those no longer protected. Back then people didnt realize the capacity for the internet for commercialism until now.

UrAreGay in south america

You're not totally wrong except that many locations have ONLY ONE provider now, thus no choice. Even if there are two providers, it is reasonable to expect that price collusion exists, same as if there are only two gas stations in a given town vs. 20 gas stations in a town.

The shitty reality is that ISP's are more similar to monopoly utility providers and I believe they should be regulated as such. I'd love to see legitimate competition and then kill off N.N. but that day isn't here now

back then bandwidth rates were low as fuck for the majority, and thus things like netflix streaming couldn't exist, as it relied on pisspoor quality i.e compression, so they only sent out DVDs for their customers. blockbuster still existed back then.
now there's tonnes of bandwidth for everyone, so the conglomerates aren't really capable of either clogging up the internet with all their traffic
problem is, when someone with a massive botnet starts using it to fuck over companies, things like netnuetrality will prevent these sort of attacks from forcing companies to be overcharged for some malicious cunts actions, whereas without it, they're taxed and forced to pay for some hackers attack on their network which can/will lead to overconsumption

but really i haven't read any of the bills, so the above is probably just 99% bullshit and irrelevant to what netneutrality actually is, who cares anyway

well you didn't do a very good job of pointing it out. how am I being close-minded?

youtu.be/U04MRiGMFqw

and businesses are gods?

being this much of a shill for private property

You have no fucking clue what the fuck you're talking about.

nah, they don't pay for all that shit themselves

they use infrastructure owned by the government

the only reason they're repealing these laws is to punish those who have the sense to utilize the internet as a way to profit.

Cable Companies and phone companies are hurt by the levels of communication that the internet provides virtually for free.

Cable tv has been suffering hard, and is almost dead but this is going to be a windfall for them. Instead of bowing out with grace to the next logical progression in society, these greedy kikes just want to keep their influence on the "whiny millenials killing muh business"

This is going to keep their greedy asses alive at the cost of natural progression.

Even the retarded can see that. Pahjeet Pai knows that, and he doesn't give a fuck.

Anyone that supports it has a vested interest in sustaining their failing shit business.