THE FREAKING FCC

THE FREAKING FCC

Other urls found in this thread:

dailydot.com/layer8/net-neutrality-violations-history/
arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/07/verizons-throttling-of-video-should-be-investigated-by-fcc-petition-says/
cnet.com/news/telco-agrees-to-stop-blocking-voip-calls/
engadget.com/2016/12/02/fcc-accuses-atandt-and-verizon-of-violating-net-neutrality/
freepress.net/blog/2017/04/25/net-neutrality-violations-brief-history
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

is trying to kill Net Neutrality again

Can't take a hint!

>Trying

...

They will make u take a tinkle when u wanna take a piss

>people still say this like it's a bad thing

It is.

I'd like to hear your argument against NN

How?

>ISPs control what information and content you have access to

What could go wrong

>ISP cuts off what you can view
>"Wow this ISP sucks"
>Another ISP capitalizes on this and makes their service accessible to content you don't get on the first on
>"I'm gonna switch providers"
>First ISP loses a customer and profit, the other one gains
The problem solves itself

>Another ISP
not in america

>implying this is possible in burgerland

That's not how ISPs work. You act as if there isn't a monopoly, and that some small cheap ISP can just show up and take everyone in.

ISPs have already been trying to get around Net Neutrality. Take away the rules stopping them, and they'll go hogwild.

Also, you know, the odds of Sup Forums lasting long without NN are pretty slim, at best.

Throughout much of the US, you have a choice of just 1 ISP.

>Another ISP

ISPs have essentially carved the US up into territories

Title Two is the only thing keeping them playing nice with each other

isps are basically a monopoly in america you dingus, there's no competition whatsoever

all killing net neutrality does is give them free rein to fuck the consumer over any way they please because there's already no other choice

also

>the odds of Sup Forums lasting long without NN are pretty slim, at best.

I'm all for NN being kill in that case.

w h o o p s
>implying a small isp can just pop up and beat out a massive mainstay corporation like it's nothing

and correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't part of the worry here that ISPs can potentially broker deals with big sites like FB and Netflix to give them better connections than their competitors

Comcast is going to strangle the ever-loving fuck out of Netflix

>bw the worst ISP
>be the most popular
How do they do it

They could, but now the big worry is about ISPs like Comcast slowing down competing services. With Netflix, for example, instead of Comcast cutting a deal with Netflix, they'll just throttle any connection going to Netflix so people will move to Hulu.

Again, monopolies.
If you want internet service in the US, chances are it's either them or nothing.

...

What are some of your favorite websites?

Say goodbye to Sup Forums. Because I doubt they'd pay extravagant fees to IP's.

I guess we aren't really here forever.

>not realizing your only options will be to either get fucked in the ass by Comcast or fucked in the ass by AT&T

The Internet did just fine before NN. The idea that ISPs will start limiting access to websites just to make money is completely baseless, it never happened, and there is no logical reason to think it will.

Considering you're the one arguing that they're needs to be regulation you should be the one justifying it, not the other way around.
>There's a monopoly
No, there isn't, there are hundreds of ISPs in the US, and multiple different types of ISPs, and the areas you'll find without access to multiple are few and far between. The vast majority of people in the US have the option of switching providers, even the ones outside of big cities. But, if you live in a big city you'll likely have even more options, and considering most of the population lives in large cities, ISPs have the largest amount of competition in the locations most of their potential customers are.

The government however, does have a monopoly, because when they control the internet you don't get to pick another one. Just look at China, India, or even recently, Spain, blocking websites of separatist supporters.
Where is the evidence that they will have to? Not sure about (two)-chan because I admit I don't know Jap laws, but Sup Forums, cripple chan, and many other imageboards, even ones hosting illegal content were all created in a pre US Net Neutrality world.

>The idea that ISPs will start limiting access to websites just to make money is completely baseless, it never happened

It's happened both before NN and while it was a law.

>Where is the evidence that they will have to?
When IP's start taking money for preferential website treatment, it's inevitable. Or at the very least, you aren't going to see increased waiting periods for posting.

are*
fuck I need to proofread better.

Citation needed
>When IP's start taking money for preferential website treatment
Citation needed

i hope you like paying for the deluxe shitposting package wich includes 50 extra shitposts per month
you also need to pay extra for every board you want access to other than Sup Forums, pay to be able to open the threads (for each thread you open), pay to upload pictures and embed videos

>Y-you don't know!
Whatever you say bucko. Let's just strip away all protective regulations, since nothing bad can ever happen! There's no proof, after all! Companies wouldn't exploit consumers! That doesn't happen!

so you have no evidence, then?

No evidence to contradict your lack of evidence? How does that put you in an advantageous position?

>I-i don't need to prove my statements, I can just relentlessly fearmonger on the internet

>Let's just strip away all protective regulations
K

And they'll make you call fellatio a "trouser-friendly kiss".

>"Provide evidence of nothing happening"
>"I don't have to prove a positive you have to prove a negative"
Wew fuckign lad..

>tfw corporate shills don't even need to go on Sup Forums because people here do it for free

>tfw state propagandist don't even need to go on Sup Forums because people here do it for free

Not trying unfortunately.

Get ready for 70% of your favorite sites including this one to be 1997 fast.

...

dailydot.com/layer8/net-neutrality-violations-history/

arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/07/verizons-throttling-of-video-should-be-investigated-by-fcc-petition-says/

cnet.com/news/telco-agrees-to-stop-blocking-voip-calls/

engadget.com/2016/12/02/fcc-accuses-atandt-and-verizon-of-violating-net-neutrality/

Last one is kind of an interesting way ISPs have gotten around NN, but still a violation, all the same. There's more, too. You can easily google this shit for yourself.

You'd have known this a long time ago if you ever browsed Sup Forums

Brace for obligatory "I WAS ONLY PRETENDING" reply.

Oh you're a libertarian/ancap. Suddenly your religious devotion to the free market and retardation make a lot of sense.

Not him, but here’s your citations.

freepress.net/blog/2017/04/25/net-neutrality-violations-brief-history

I don’t know why user didn’t just use google, but there you go.

People on this board love to cry shill anytime someone disagrees with them, but here we have an actual Shill just spouting a company line.

learn to spot the difference Sup Forums

You're hilarious.

Bet this retard strolled right in from Sup Forums
Anons need to stop letting businesses/political demos spoon feed them opinions; regulations aren't always a fucking boogeyman.

Things might not instantly go to shit if NN is repealed, but good things will slowly get worse. And it will be all the more bitter because faggots like you will let it happen.

I didn’t see him claiming a pedo should represent Alabama.

Which is the strangest thing about this. You’d think their pro-pedo stance would have them open to an equal bandwidth internet.

Most people on the internet have no real opinion, they just go with the opposite of common sense to be contrarian and special, to be some enlightened superior man lamenting the fact everywhere is full of plebs.

Honestly, passive fags like him who think it's a good thing are less of a factor than FCC chairmen pocketing money from ISP's so they can slice up that internet pie for more profit.

MILLIONS of people commented on their open forum and it still passed, because Ajit wants that sweet sweet bribery.

I’m still confused why there so determined to do something this stupid and why no one can stop it

Money

Because ISP's want more money from less work.

Money, user. It all comes down to money. ISP's know they can make more of it by tearing down the rules, so they keep trying.

Yup. Been nice knowing you, Sup Forums! See you in eight or twelve years.

So is it going to happen? My PC is my only connection to the outside world, due to my medical conditions.

If Sup Forums goes down because of a lack of NN it ain't comin back up again

lmao i left america just in time

The vote itself takes place in December, but the future looks pretty grim.

1) Obama did it (meaning it happened when he was in office) so it must be bad and his 30% “I believe him over Jesus” will applaud it.
2) Kickbacks. Nixon did the same moves back in the 60’s, favoring some industries while blocking others based on political donations. One of the reasons he had to step down is recordings of him saying they had to support an illegal corporate merger for donations that came out during the Watergate investigations, and Trump repeats Nixon without caring about the results.

One or both of those two reasons and a lack of consequences so long as he gets out of the country before liberals retake the House and Senate are why he does everything.

>Sup Forums dies
It'd be for the best, desu.

Hey shill, what are you doing down here? You miss ?

You still have to explain that away.

>Shills are STILL defending NN dying
I would say when will retards learn to stop being so fucking retarded, but they wouldn't be shills if they had an ounce of intelligence

So how can we stop it?

This world gets darker every day.

Simply put, any website that pays what is essentially legal protection money gets fast internet, everyone else gets throttled so it’ll load super slow and be buggy.

For big companies its not such a problem, for small ones and personal blogs they will be fucked. They won’t be able to get or handle high traffic, which cuts into their income.

Essentially its the Wallmart/CostCo/Amazonification of the entire internet. Unless it ends in .ru, .ca, .uk, or something similar.

That person is very clearly for NN, dude.

So I'm fucked. I can't use discord anymore, or Twitch, or Steam, huh? I lose all my friends?

Try rereading that, user.

It was not complimentary to the current administration nor its policies. Quite the opposite.

I can’t be the shill if I’m talking shit about him, now can I?

Anyone else think this is gonna cause more shooters who were too focused on the internet before?

NOW THE FCC WON'T LET ME BE

Why do they keep trying to kill net neutrality?

Impeach Trump then Pence and hope Paul Ryan can be pressured by tech giants, or vote Democrat in 2020.

So basically its not coming back for at least 3 years, and its grim on if even that will be enough time.

There's nothing we can do. People already did all they could by telling the FCC that repealing Net Neutrality was a bad thing, but they're still going through with the vote anyway. It all comes down to what happens on December 14, and that's in the government's hands.

We will get to see the full plan tomorrow, so at least we'll know what type of rope we're being hanged on.

Can we tear down the FCC?

>Spain, blocking websites of separatist supporters
You got me until that little gem right there.

That image is hilariously appropriate as of half an hour ago.

OR LET ME BE ME, SO LET ME SEE
THEY TRY TO SHUT ME DOWN ON NET NEUTRALITY

It depends. In all honesty, Steam will probably be fine. Twitch is owned by Amazon, so it's big enough to weather whatever shit US ISPs try to pull.

Things you use might get more expensive, like Netflix, Discord might add new things to Nitro, but it's only worst case scenario where you'll see things like cable bundled internet.

It still will be really bad though.

It is a bad thing. Not even just for having to pay for some websites or websites having to pay. Sup Forums will be outright cut off by most isps out of moral concerns.

>put Paul Ryan in power
>Vote for Democrats
You're not convincing me to join your crusade user.

Silly user you're a double shill; pretending to be one of us while subtly shilling on the side.

That or May is stuck on stupid

Depends on if those sites pay what Don Comcast expects, and shows respect to The ISP Family.

The price may change.

My internet's already bundled with my cable.

My understanding is america is essentially one isp per region or something.

Reminder, the vote to allow ISPs sell your private information was a straight party vote with Republicans for and Democrats against.

Why do ISPs keep trying to shill cable?

Worth it. Democrats are a bigger threat on more important fronts than this shit. Voting for Democrats is a vote for socialism and limits on speech.

Oh dang, are they throwing the lolipoppers in jail?

Sorry, cable bundled internet was a shitty way of phrasing it. I mean the meme people post of paying for specific bundles of websites. Pay x amount for 50 social media sites, etc.

As an European, is there anything I can do?

House more refugees.

>limits on speech
Meanwhile, they were the ones who voted to keep NN. You know the thing that's allowing us to still use this site?

Thats pretty much your only choice, Bannonite politicians are blanket anti economic regulation and pro social regulation.

Your only choice is a side that can win something, so Libertarians and Greens are out. So you can gamble on establishment GOP or bite the bullet and vote Dem.

This is why only having two parties is a problem. You have to either be liberal or conservative on everything, you can’t be lib ec/con soc or a con ec/lib soc without having to pick whether you care more about economic or social policies in general.

Donald Trump campaigned on the First Amendment being too protective, and his administration tried to put someone in jail for laughing at Jeff Sessions.