Major yet underreported net neutrality happenings

Austin Peterson
Austin Peterson

apparently there is a major incomming shitstorm that has flown completely under the radar related to net neutrality. I'm not sure if we are for or against this, if it is good or bad, but startpage.com seems to want to bring it to attention. if you don't know what startpage is, it's a more private search engine for those that don't trust fuckfuckblow

https://www.battleforthenet.com/ (this is the website that is linked on the startpage website)

I really thought you should all know. Yes, I did control-f the catalog and hit Zero results on this specific piece of news, so don't become angry with me.

I sincerely hope this helps to raise awareness of important happenings, where previously there was a complete lack of information.

All urls found in this thread:
https://www.battleforthenet.com/
https://archive.fo/MLQIl)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Communications_Commission#Wireline_policy
https://www.dslreports.com/shownews/25-Of-Your-Bill-Actually-Goes-To-Bandwidth-113131
https://archive.is/7Kq9T
http://www.stuartcheshire.org/rants/InfoHighway.html
https://www.pcworld.com/article/153123/sprint_cogent_dispute.html
https://www.fcc.gov/document/chairman-pai-proposes-restore-internet-freedom
Aiden Adams
Aiden Adams

Net neutrality is the biggest scam since global warming. Enjoy your net monopoly and enjoy paying Obamacare prices for it.

Thomas Hernandez
Thomas Hernandez

from your perspective, what do you understand net neutrality to be? considering that you dislike it, what is the alternative? what is the opposite? why is startpage telling people that the opposite way, that internet monopoly's will have MORE power and do more evil shit to their customers?

Noah Phillips
Noah Phillips

Like the first poster said, though not with the same meaning, it's similar to environmentalism. The leftists back it, so the right has to condemn it, even though it used to be something they supported too.

Cameron Clark
Cameron Clark

that doesn't make any sense. being a trump supporter, I want to know- Is net neutrality good for the internet if you love freedom?

yes or no?

Ryder Carter
Ryder Carter

Is net neutrality good for the internet if you love freedom?
The original idea of it was good. The version that was forced in a bill and baked by the "I fucking love science" crowd was not. They don't even understand what it is but they love to "stick it to the man" even while they're begin fucked over. You can not argue with them because they do not listen to reason. To them net neutrality is begin able to access facekike and jewgle services. They do not care about independent websites, p2p traffic, or anything of a technical nature. They will however go on long winded rants about technical things in an attempt to look like an expert to prove they were "always down" even though they hadn't heard to the concept before 2 CYE.

Juan Torres
Juan Torres

holy shit, your description of them made me cringe really really hard. Is it still worth passing it? is it at the very least harmless, or should i say... Neutral?

Julian Diaz
Julian Diaz

Net neutrality is the movement to have internet service be treated as a utility, i.e. a ploy by certain tech giant companies for the government to officially recognize their monopoly over the industry and be allowed to do what the fuck ever with their service without fear of competition. I don't know what you think it is but I can assure you it's a lie.

Wyatt Garcia
Wyatt Garcia

but I thought that the entire point of net neutrality was to stop the monopolies. it even says this in the link.

Alexander Ross
Alexander Ross

The entire point of communism is to stop tyranny, and of Diet Coke to not make you fat, but look what happens.

David Lopez
David Lopez

No one even knows what net neutrality means anymore. You included. It's now a game between two factions of Jews and you don't even know which side you're rooting for.

Try following the money. Who the fuck is "battleforthenet" and where did this suddenly come from? It says they're primarily run by "fightforthefuture". Who the fuck are they? The earliest they showed up on archive.org (https://archive.fo/MLQIl) was the SEIU union running it as a shill site for Dean in 2004:


This website is paid for by SEIU COPE with voluntary contributions from SEIU members and their families and is not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.

SEIU Committee on Political Education
1313 L Street NW, Washington, DC 20005
202.898.3200 election2004@seiu.org

So you're listening to paid shills trying to raise a personal army. Does this site even give a fuck about what they're shilling or are they just getting grant money from groups like Open Society Foundations? Who knows. They've been almost completely silent since 2004 and just started up again in the 2011-2012 cycle to switch to shilling NN. So they're likely just some rabble-rousing organization for elections to get you to become a hillshill, like a white version of black lives matter.

Jace Harris
Jace Harris

pretty good examples, I'm learning.
why does net neutrality become the evil it seeks to destroy?

Evan Moore
Evan Moore

I'll try to enlighten you on the subject; Originally the idea was to take the power over the resource (bandwidth) away from the ISPs and put it under direct control of the Government. It would have worked similar to the power grid where the people have ownership of the resource and if not enough of it was available in one location some would be diverted from another plant that had a surplus of it. It's would have been a nation wide co-op.

Now the problem with this is the Government as it stands can not be trusted. So, like they've done with power they've allowed certain companies to exist with an open monopoly because if the Government takes over completely people cry about socialism/communism. These are valid fears because again, the Government can't be trusted. However, the large media companies/ISPs can not be trusted either. So neither is good for this because both want to profit off of it beyond what is required to run the network. This is why they data mine in addition to just wanting to watch where you go, what you do, and who you interact with.

The only solution is a fresh start, open revolution, guns and blood. But people are content, have food, and are sedated on various drugs. So don't count on that in your life time.

Nolan Smith
Nolan Smith

shit, now why is something so vague and poorly understood by even the very people who are running the whole thing, even the concept of what it means being shown or shilled as a good thing on startpage.com? startpage has good intentions but not their strong suite? or are they in on it too? how would they even know?

Dominic Rivera
Dominic Rivera

the world has revolved, flat as it may be. the impossible happened. trump was elected. I wouldn't and couldn't count on many things in my life time until I realized that time itself was fake and nothing through God was impossible.

Camden Foster
Camden Foster

trump was elected
The President isn't a king and doesn't have the power of one. You won't get anywhere if you continue to have hope in a system that is broken. We're so far from what the founding fathers intended that it isn't even the same system of Government anymore.

Juan Martin
Juan Martin

The President isn't a king and doesn't have the power of one. You won't get anywhere if you continue to have hope in a system that is broken. We're so far from what the founding fathers intended that it isn't even the same system of Government anymore.
I don't disagree with anything you said. I'm still happy that it drives everyone who is evil crazy.

Juan Sullivan
Juan Sullivan

Because in order to change society for the better, you need
the will to do good for those around you
the skill to put together a plan that will carry out your goal
the charisma to convince the people around you to enact your plan

People with 1 and 3 won't know what the fuck they're doing and their plan will fail (Scandinavia, Germany)
People with 2 and 3 cannot be trusted to work for the common good and their plans might end up with nightmarish consequences (Big Brother, Stalin)
People with 1 and 2 but not 3 will just sit in their basement and let their ideas get corrupted by the other two people (Marx, me)
Until we get another Hitler we're doomed to suffer under whatever ungodly forces rule us at the given moment.

Wyatt Young
Wyatt Young

hey, that's literally just like the tri-force from zelda. courage, wisdom, power.

Nolan Perry
Nolan Perry

doesn't have the power of one
No, but he can command troops and force any interpretation he wants regarding an existing law using executive orders.

Jacob Myers
Jacob Myers

No, but he can command troops and force any interpretation he wants regarding an existing law using executive orders.
Which are just ignored or put on hold until the next compliant puppet enters the position.

Easton Gutierrez
Easton Gutierrez

Which are just ignored or put on hold
What the fuck are you talking about? Trump has already signed 51 executive orders. Obama signed 276 executive orders and George W. signed 291.

Levi Smith
Levi Smith

shit thread

Carson Diaz
Carson Diaz

Diet Coke is a bad example, you can drink it all day and never get fat, as it has almost no calories. It's your overall diet and caloric intake, along with energy expenditure that matters. It's not the drink's fault some people gorge themselves but hypocritically order a diet coke to try and make up for it. The drink isn't forcing them to do that, and neither do all who drink it get fat.
Better example: PATRIOT act. It sounds like something you want to vote for, based on the name alone (just like "net neutrality"), and any politician who goes against it may end up looking bad, if the MSM can spin it to his detriment. Maybe the names are a way to force some weak-willed politicians to vote the way they want.
The way they (intentionally?) muddy the waters is interesting too. This creates great confusion and hampers discussion amongst the people. Maybe this is one of their alternative methods, because they don't always want to use the same method and become too obvious. Another of their methods is to keep everything super-secret like they did with TPP. How can you discuss and potentially protest something that you don't have any details about? In the case of TPP it was leaked by someone, else we wouldn't know anything until it was in effect.

Nathaniel Bailey
Nathaniel Bailey

Net Neutrality' is an oxymoron. As network engineer knows, networks crash if every packet of data is treated equally. Net neutrality is nothing but a government power grab.

all the innovation of the last 40+ years happen precisely because government wasn't calling the shots in the computer industry our telecommunications. The reason you can call cross country from pennies instead of dollars per minute is precisely because we got government out of the business of "keeping protections" for our telecommunications.

Net neutrality seems like 'common sense' to most of the population who have no idea how a digital network operates. Digital networks work precisely because data packets are treated with different priorities. A mission critical app cannot be treated the same was a static webpage, which cannot be prioritized over a stored video, which cannot be prioritized over a streaming video, if you want it all of it to work.

All the innovation in network technology and distributed computing from we have benefited over the last several decades, needed not one iota of input for the government, thank you very much.
It's a government power grab

Levi Wood
Levi Wood

Government power grab to do what? The government is run by the very same corporations who are opposing net neutrality. The government is run by the very same corporations who are opposing net neutrality. I appreciate that you're arguing for traffic shaping, which I'm aware is a very real thing, but there is a huge gap between maintaining a neutral Quality of Service, and allowing an ISP to prioritize their partner's content. I believe the basis of why traffic shaping currently exists is because certain content needs to get there in time or else the experience isn't acceptable. Removing the regulations basically just makes that a weapon that ISPs can use to decide who can run a successful site and who cannot.

Samuel Allen
Samuel Allen

Pai and the cable companies want a more flexible system and lighter regulation, where

internet service providers volunteer to protect net neutrality.

They argue that the rules are hampering investment.

Pai said he hoped to “return to the light-touch regulatory framework that served our nation so well during the Clinton administration, Bush administration, and the first six years of the Obama administration.”

The light touch of the Clinton administration,(they think this is still the net of the 90's)

Julian Roberts
Julian Roberts

Pai and the cable companies want a more flexible system and lighter regulation, where internet service providers volunteer to protect net neutrality.

Jacob Gray
Jacob Gray

executive orders matter
in a cuck system where a faggot judge in some far away state can simply block them
The greatest trick the jew ever pulled in modern times was making people think voting in Trump actually mattered. Look at who he surrounds himself with. Are thing better than they would have been under Hillary? Yes. Did much change? No. Every president submits to the way of things as soon as he's taken into the meeting shortly after begin elected. They all promise you the world and then turn around and work against your interests.
but muh wall
Works just as well at keeping you IN
but muh travel bans
I still see shit skins flooding the country
but muh health insurance
Enjoy paying your fine because once laws are in place they're never taken out of the book, just modified to make them more bearable
but muh JFK files
We knew most of it already and the release was heavily redacted

The fact that he signs orders at all shows he's fine coasting for 8 years. If he'd been what he said he was we'd have major change in progress by now instead of the trend of saying a lot and doing little to nothing. The only benefit is watching idiots foam at the mouth because they think he's Hitler. Now call me a shill from /leftypol/ and continue to blindly trust him like an idiot. If he were really looking out for your interests he'd been making changes to the political process so people didn't need billions to have a shot at winning.

James Harris
James Harris

The government is run by... corporations
Fuck off retard.

Lucas Rivera
Lucas Rivera

There could be many reasons, but I don't trust them to begin with. They aren't honest about risks to their service. I work in networking and I'm well aware from having had to add 'lawful intercept' to VoIP applications that the government isn't sent away with its dick in its hands these days because you didn't write a fucking apache log. It's the same bullshit pitch you get from VPN providers.
Of course, StartPage would be obligated to comply with legal demands for information from proper government authorities, but because we have no personal information on file, there would be no data to deliver.

Mason Clark
Mason Clark

Net Neutrality is a giant red herring.
Everyone discusses it so it's a very effective distraction from the real issue: monopolies by ISPs.
Both sides of the argument focus on one point or the other e.g. some focus on the technical (no QoS is dumb), some focus on consumer rights (degrading competing services not part of Media/ISP conglomerate), some focus on weird shit (hurr durr government has to make websites give all sides equal time hurr).

If there was true competition between lots of ISPs, the net neutrality 'issue' would disappear.
If we all had choice, real choice of various ISPs immediately within our areas, the issue disappears because no single ISP
would dare touch basic networking principles
because clients would flock to competitors.
Similarly, all those jewish scams about 'free' downloads not counting to your 20GB limit when using your companies media shit (contour, go90, etc.) would be moot. Again, if there was
real & numerous choice of ISPs
no one would even give a limiting ISP the time of day. Just switch to another.

There should be some legislation, but not legislation on this bullshit called 'net neutrality'. There should be some regular ol-fashioned trust busting, with prohibitions on ISPs owning media companies and owning infrastructure.

Net neutrality is bullshit and a red herring.

Gabriel Perry
Gabriel Perry

It's now a game between two factions of Jews
(uses archive)
Ignore this ignorant bigot

Ayden Scott
Ayden Scott

It's the private company's road,let the market set the toll(we need more than 1 road though)
Private companies laid down all the coaxial, fiber optic, and twisted pair, the routers and DNS servers. The government's internet was strictly between military contractors and the DoD. That was its original purpose, to provide email, Telnet, etc., between the gov and contractors.
All the innovation of the last 40+ years happen precisely because government wasn't calling the shots in the computer industry our telecommunications.

Jordan Turner
Jordan Turner

'lawful intercept' to VoIP applications

all encrypted VoIP will be verboten

Eli Nguyen
Eli Nguyen

I agree.
However, unregulated markets tend to drift toward oligopolies/cartels/other non-capitalistic markets.
Right now my company needs to find a 2ndary ISP for one of our call centers because Level3 decided to suck Century Link dick and now we don't really have redundant connections.
Defacto ISP monopolies in an area are a negative for many businesses looking to expand

Daniel Anderson
Daniel Anderson

net neutrality is irrelevant in a world where nearly everybody will be using cellullar networks to access the internet

Alexander Hernandez
Alexander Hernandez

Oh yeah, that reminds me of an ATT tech who visited. He was an old cabler back in the day.
Essentially ATTs magnificent vision for the future is to stick cell boxes in every pole and ignoring fiber and cabling forever.
Hope you like lag

Thomas Wilson
Thomas Wilson

Private companies laid down all the coaxial, fiber optic, and twisted pair, the routers and DNS servers

How many Different ISPs can use these pathways in one area?

Robert Garcia
Robert Garcia

I don't like cellular internet but it's already reality that normalfags do the bulk of their internet use over heavily shaped and prioritized cellular networks.

Aaron Allen
Aaron Allen

The problem again remains the larger ISP monopolies.
At least with cell networks, the larger companies must sell to smaller ones, which helps keep some competition.
Watch, as the legacy ISPs magically declare themselves immune to such rules when they start relying more on wireless.

Chase Carter
Chase Carter

If there were enough ISPs, you'd see a race to increase data limits, to increase speed, to advertise how they don't track, etc.
In cellular world, it's sort of happening I guess, but again, that's due to regulation that keeps competition alive.

Related question:
How to best get rid of cuck politicians who outlawed municipal/co-op ISPs?
Shoot, hang, or Scaphism?

Ryder Kelly
Ryder Kelly

Why not just intern them and watch them melt when denied access to the aborted fetuses that were keeping them alive?

Colton Miller
Colton Miller

It would be cringy if it was true. Too bad it isn't. Take a look at what they actually say on the site instead of taking the words of at face value:
Cable companies are famous for high prices and poor service. Several rank as the most hated companies in America. Now, they're lobbying the FCC and Congress to end net neutrality. Why? It's simple: if they win the power to slow sites down, they can bully any site into paying millions to escape the "slow lane." This would amount to a tax on every sector of the American economy. Every site would cost more, since they'd all have to pay big cable. Worse, it would extinguish the startups and independent voices who can't afford to pay. If we lose net neutrality, the Internet will never be the same.
It looks to me like they're on the same page.
everyone who disagrees with me is uninformed and says what I say they say
[[citation needed]]
Isn't it obvious that CEOs have an incentive in making a profit however they can? If they can afford to pay off politicians to do their bidding, then they can have things cheaper than they would be otherwise. Who cares about "free markets" and "rights" when you have a legal obligation to fill up shareholder pockets? Plus, there's plenty of evidence for it - look at how much money is spent on elections in the USA, corporate-funded lobbying groups like ALEC, etc. It's a simple, uncomplicated hypothesis with evidence to back it up. What more do you want?
Now compare this to the practice of selecting random people, enclosing their names in (((echoes))), and making baseless speculations about conspiracies based on collective racial resentment (even though most Jews, especially those in high up positions, are secular).
Which seems more reasonable?
Agreed, but we have to be realistic and consider our options. Teddy Roosevelt-style trustbusting isn't going to happen - too much corporate money for a candidate like that to be even get close to a podium with a large audience. Net neutrality could happen, but it's a bandaid on a flesh wound and will fester in no time (see: FDR and LBJ social services dismantled in no time by Carter and Reagan and Clinton, but huge overhead remains).
Let the worst come and use that as a springboard to shill meshnets.
1. one corporate sector grabs a bigger piece of the pie, angering the others
2. populists (us) argue for meshnets in presentations in public areas (give speeches at libraries, town halls, etc - just make as much noise as possible), talk about prices going up
3. corporations pour down money to enlarge grassroots by adding astroturf (see: Tea Party) because they have common interests with better PR
4. corporate money pours into projects like Netsukuku, making them a reality
5. ???
6. Free software has temporarily advanced and will take decades at least to recommercialize (Linux, Wikipedia, etc) if we're careful
Do this enough times in enough sectors (at a rate faster than libre hardware and software can be sanitized and reintegrated into the system), and everything will be based on free association and free access in due time.
Alternatively, this could (likely) backfire because Google and Facebook will partner up with ISPs to get faster connections to their sites at the expense of smaller ones which can't pay the prices for the fast lane. If there's a conflict between them, they'll have their lawyers talk it out and the chokehold will self-reinforce. If this happens, people won't care because they won't realize the changes until they look for something outside the walled garden. The way to avoid this is to form contacts beforehand so that your solution is proposed first. Once an initiative has bureaucratic momentum, it can be hard to stop.
What we really need is a good way to break echo chambers and expose people to links outside of the machine-learning-curated links from the big sites, because the biggest boon to FLOSS is having lots of people tell each other about it and enlarge the community. Everything costs a lot of money now, though, and FLOSS doesn't make money.

Angel Long
Angel Long

Do you think it's worth learning lisp if solely to write a bot that spits out responses to this bot-written drivel?

Easton Stewart
Easton Stewart

I disagree with user, therefore he's a bot

Caleb Smith
Caleb Smith

welcome to FUD

William Rogers
William Rogers

<lobbying is not real
<revolving door isn't real

Parker Russell
Parker Russell

because clients would flock to competitors
mass marketing says hello

Brayden Powell
Brayden Powell

he thinks global warming AND net neutrality are scams

Christopher Allen
Christopher Allen

ATTs magnificent vision for the future is to stick cell boxes in every pole

fry yor 2yr old's neurons

Camden Harris
Camden Harris

Fuck fiber. PTP laser comms is where it's at.

Parker Walker
Parker Walker

FYI
Marsha Blackburn (R) TN was the one pushing Net Neutrality - Now she is running for Bob Corker's seat in the senate

Carter Ward
Carter Ward

Rebel Forces occupy Hoth
Gubbimint gets hold of internet
Shuts down Internet
No comms between Hoth and Fleet parked in space
Rebel Forces Stranded on Hoth alone

Jaxon Bell
Jaxon Bell

The original idea of it was good. The version that was forced in a bill and baked by the "I fucking love science" crowd was not. They don't even understand what it is but they love to "stick it to the man" even while they're begin fucked over.
This and checked.
Former NN = cool
Today's NN = lame

Former NN = hackers unite, developers unite, there's even a cool logo, the rules were simple, open ports/services, treat data equally, improve infrastructure
<They cannot provide us cheaper high quality internet. improve the entire infrastructure so anyone will enjoy premium services and that way "premium services" will be reasonable to pay. It's fucking 21st century c'mon, we know how "it" werks.
Today's NN = alphabet unite + big transnational ISP connive + guberment officials who don't even know any technicality with network stuff? approve that shit! the rules were complicated. panders to normies who like alphabet services, massive logs, closed ports/services, (((cheaper))) internet for millenials, (((premium lane))) with closed ports no one could even fucking afford aside from alphabet-tards who are reeling in money, and yeah fucking shit consumer-grade routers - bad for the entrepreneurs, the developers (threat to alphabet) good for the existing (((market))) (also win-win the fact that entrepreneurs can't even compete despite the fact that anyone can make facebook clone or youtube clone anyday).
<ISP: we can't provide higher quality internet so at least have these retarded and heavily firewalled addon plans* which are cheap and limiting because the (((majority))) only uses (((facebook))) and (((snapchat))) on their smartphones anyway. We can't improve the entire infrastructure so screw those who consume premium (the hacker/tech/dev societies and the former NN groups) are "(((le))) bad boogieman" who's stealing all your data (((although it's just electricity and load balancing in a nutshell))). Fucc da premium users! Agreed (reddit)

Nolan Diaz
Nolan Diaz

No one knows what it is anymore yet they're all passionate about it. It's essentially part of a new progressive religion.

Jack Clark
Jack Clark

I can't wait for NN to die in the US so you come back crying about how mean your ISP is being about not letting you visit Holla Forums and the only website with non sub-dial up modem speeds is Facebook.

Evan Murphy
Evan Murphy

Old networking guy here. Original NN was to address the power of last-mile ISPs to use DPI to pick winners and losers on the internet. E.g., they could detect AIM vs MSN traffic and charge one company to fuck the other. The opposition plan was to ban DPI (ironically, the first such plan came from the people who had designed that aspect of PRISM, although I know no one is going to believe that).
ISPs realized they were on shaky ground and came up with a few backup plans. One was to try and defend some pocket of DPI as 'reasonable network management' which while being total bullshit would still give them enough control to be kingmakers (e.g., obliterating your bittorrent traffic at the behe$t of the MPAA was called 'reasonable network management'). This is what they got with the Obama plan which was why it was an absolutely worthless do-nothing plan. However, by that time they didn't need that loophole as they had already put plan B into action.
Plan B was to put caps on bandwidth high enough you'd not squeal at the time ('reasonable network management' again, networking's 'common sense'), not increase them, and as you started to feel the pinch offer you certain sites that would not count against your cap. Of course, they were having these sites pay them for this increased access to you. Aaand they're kingmakers again. But this time, without using sketchy DPI that has a lot of legal risks, only using traditional peering and metering, and so being out of legal danger. If you start thinking how you could make things like this pay-your-way scheme illegal you'll realize how it's almost hopeless as there are plenty of similar legal structures you could cast it to. BT was the first to put this into practice (so brazenly I have no idea how they got nearly no pushback) at which point NN was obsolete.
So with NN obsolete, what is NN even about today? Nothing. But a nothing people are passionate about either way which is a politician's favorite kind of nothing as it can influence you without pissing off the people who sign their (real) paychecks.

Ayden Long
Ayden Long

In the mid 90's, there were at least half a dozen dialup ISPs in my area that I could subscribe to. Granted they used the existing copper from the phone company. But yeah, mom & pop ISPs were a thing, whereas now it's all huge conglomerates like Time Warner. I would gladly go back to dialup and old Internet (pre-Web 2.0) and simpler hardware tbh.

John Johnson
John Johnson

No.
Net neutrality is and has always been large telephony providers being required by the FCC to allow smaller companies to use their lines without hindrance or deference. That's all it is.

Nathaniel Ward
Nathaniel Ward

I was working with the group dealing with this at the time and I've given you the inside view of what it was. The FCC didn't come into the picture until many years later. But it doesn't matter anymore, it's whatever you want it to be.

Isaac Rivera
Isaac Rivera

FUD all around with your post.
Net neutrality was a deal by the FCC to force major telephony companies to carry long distance services from other carriers. It then was extended to data services once computer networking became an important commercial deal in the 70's.
Telling me you're a fucking 70 year old man, and that you worked on it in the backrooms and shit.
FUD.

Jordan Bennett
Jordan Bennett

DPI is just as worse as capping.
capping is reasonable the fact that more people who bingewatch netflix or marathon youtube exist today. It's the premium users that are btfo'd by this NN crap. Back then it was easy to acquire ports to set up own mail server and even torrent anything. In some places torrents are good as dead and poisoned. Most routers that come today are just consoles that wouldn't even show the supposedly local CPE when the main router fucks up. It's just insane. Fuck the internet.

NN is obamanet-fcc reddit
hownew.ru?

Logan Kelly
Logan Kelly

Net neutrality was a deal made 30 years before the term net neutrality
Ok.

John Cook
John Cook

In the 1960s, the FCC began allowing other long-distance companies, namely MCI, to offer specialized services. In the 1970s, the FCC allowed other companies to expand offerings to the public.[41] A lawsuit in 1982 led by the Justice Department after AT&T underpriced other companies, resulted in the Breakup of the Bell System from AT&T. Beginning in 1984, the FCC implemented a new goal that all long-distance companies had equal access to the local phone companies' customers.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Communications_Commission#Wireline_policy

Jason Jenkins
Jason Jenkins

[[citation needed]]
This isn't wikipedia faggot. I'm not arguing for no traffic shaping because it's needed for the network to even function but if you're denying the leddit crowd didn't jump on the NN bandwagon because it was something pushed by Obama you're simply deluded. Normalfags didn't even know what NN was until that moment in time where the pre-web 2.0 community had been talking about it since the early 90s and probably before then (but I wasn't around for that).

I'm not going to spend an hour searching the web for sources to prove them because I don't have advanced autism. If you were there you'd know.

Kevin Bailey
Kevin Bailey

Still serving that FUD?

Blake Sanders
Blake Sanders

It's a bit of a clusterfuck really as we do actually require DPI at some level and will continue to do so because of mistakes made with IPv6. The same group was dealing with ratification of the IPv6 standard so I got a little insight on that although I wasn't very involved.
For flow-based QoS we need some sort of flow identifier. You might be familiar with Linux's conntrack tuple which is basically a flow identifier. E.g., src/dst/proto/sport/dport. See that sport/dport? Requires knowledge of the transport protocol - it's 'deep'. People are most familiar with this re NAT but it's necessary for lots of advanced things. The problem with this is it's something that has to be derived via DPI from the packet and only works with protocols everyone knows how to do it to. In practice, this completely fucked anything that wasn't UDP or TCP and guaranteed we'd never see publicly deployed alternative protocols on IPv4 (for various reasons, UDP encapsulation isn't viable).
So, for IPv6 the idea was to add a flow label to the packet which could be a hash of such a tuple, removing the need for DPI, the impossible task of having to upgrade the whole internet to deploy a new protocol, and also allowing for (optional) flow QoS with IPSEC traffic. But then things went haywire. At the time, people involved in the process were envisioning a very different internet than you have today, one shaped by multicast. The MBONE was a big research focus and folks wanted to be able to deploy it globally (I got to do video conferencing over Internet2 over multicast with global advertisement and it was fucking amazing, by the way) although it was nowhere near ready come time of IPv6 ratification. So that was a big factor in people's minds that led to the 128 bit addressing space, to ensure space for multicast. But that put the squeeze on everything else and the flow label took a big hit. So big that it couldn't scale to the number of connections we now deal with - the hash isn't unique enough. Today it's a practically useless 20 bits in the IPv6 header that people debate what to do with and we're still doing DPI on IPv6 traffic to get a tuple and we've thus probably fucked the next 100 years with only supporting UDP or TCP. Sorry.
Btw, eventually what I hope (pray?) will happen is we'll agree to use some of the ridiculous waste in the addressing space now that multicast is hopelessly dead as a pseudo flow label. E.g., route a /48 to a single machine and create new connections with the conntrack tuple hash used to fill those bits and just ignore the flow label.

Nathaniel Flores
Nathaniel Flores

if I call something FUD it'll go away

Matthew Howard
Matthew Howard

(((shitpage)))

Ryan Cox
Ryan Cox

I've decided this thing is the same as that other thing 30 years later
respect my headcannon, shitlord
Impressive display of autism, user.

Anthony King
Anthony King

I'd also like to add that the pushing of NN hype of leddit is highly suspect considering they are one of the companies that would benefit the most by not having to pay for their bandwidth. They are the same as youtube and netflix in this regard. But if you're for the normalfag web 3.0 I suppose you'd call someone simply pointing it out to be spreading FUD. If you're so interested why don't you go over to jewgle and search for posts about the subject on reddit by date and see when discussion of it exploded over there. Those faggots had it plastered on the front page for weeks and the drones latched on it to and spread it from there. There are so many ELI5 threads on the subject that a megathread was made about it.

Are you sure you weren't one of those that heard about it at that time? You argue just like one. Which basically boils down to no argument because all you're going to do is tell me I'm for big media because I don't support a bill that supports big media with a fancy name that tricks you into thinking Obama was looking out for the common man.

Josiah Powell
Josiah Powell

If it looks like shit and smells like shit, I am going to call it shit.
Reflecting is a powerful tool; is it not?
The FCC doesn't see any difference between voice and data transmissions because they are right: there is no difference between voice and data transmissions. They go over the same lines. What is different now is that we are using huge cables of fiberoptics instead of huge cables of twisted-pair.
Net neutrality is nothing about bandwidth. It's only about the telecom companies having no power to restrict service of or defer service for a third-party provider. That's it. It doesn't apply to consumers of telephony services.
Why doesn't net neutrality apply to wireless providers? Why is roaming a thing and why does it still exist? Why do you pay thousands of Dollars a year for your shitty mobile phone service and on top of that pay thousands of Dollars per year for your shitty cable and satellite television, telephone, and internet when it's all the same dumb 0's and 1's being sent to your device and rendered as floppy titties on your screen?
Netflix, Facebook, Google: Those are all customers of the telecom's. They aren't telecom's. They are fucking internet consumers like you are or I am. They are trying to trick the pedant, pissant consumer like you and I into believing they are telecom's and not pedant, pissant consumers themselves.
No. Fuck them. They need to split into a new company if they think they are providing internet connectivity as a backbone service instead of serving content as a targeted service.

All you faggots can take your ad hominems, ad populums, appeals to emotion, and other pathetic arguments and shove them straight up your bloody gaping assholes because you are being fucked hard by whoever pays you for this shilling.

Nathan Long
Nathan Long

The leftists back it, so the right has to condemn it
being this simple minded

Jack Bailey
Jack Bailey

Netflix, Facebook, Google: Those are all customers of the telecom's. They aren't telecom's
im-fucking-plying Google has no pull over telecommunications

Elijah Walker
Elijah Walker

DPI is necessary
shaping is necessary
What a colossal load of horseshit. Better idea:
Eliminate monthly fees, "minutes", charging for text messages, and other nonsense, charge strictly on data (per kilobyte or whatever) instead, legally cap profits at 200% of actual costs. Such a billing structure would also encourage timeshifting activity such as Netflix and Youtube preloading videos throughout the day, rather than streaming in realtime.

Incidentally, the actual price of data? Barely pennies per gigabyte:
https://www.dslreports.com/shownews/25-Of-Your-Bill-Actually-Goes-To-Bandwidth-113131

implying telecoms aren't trying to screw them over as hard as possible anyway

Wyatt Stewart
Wyatt Stewart

legally capping profits
Fucking kike.

Isaac Richardson
Isaac Richardson

allowing 97% profit margins on ISPs
https://archive.is/7Kq9T
Good goy!

Isaiah Cook
Isaiah Cook

If it looks like shit and smells like shit, I am going to call it shit.
Still no argument and the second reply missed the entire point of the post. Congrats, you're even more retarded that I once suspected.

Tyler Reyes
Tyler Reyes

DPI isn't necessary
I explained why it is still necessary and what went wrong. Good luck ever finding anyone else on any site that can give you a perspective like that.
shaping is necessary
It is absolutely necessary. Proper QoS (or, nearly any QoS) is not possible without shaping and you can't effectively shape an over-provisioned line. The huge boom in the MPLS space was almost entirely due to people using it for IPSEC + VoIP rather than out of a need for VLANs.

Luis Sanders
Luis Sanders

Satan's posting disinfo again. If you believe anything this tool said, please check yourself out of Holla Forums and never return. Anyone who believes that net neutrality is a barrier to entry for new ISPs in the market is some right-wing retard who is too busy listening and believing some Republican idiot who bitched about regulations being evil anti-free market shit to actually ask the basic question of "which specific regulations are we talking about and what exactly would they do". The basic point of net neutrality is to continue regulating the internet as a public utility and deny ISPs the ability to filter content or demand sites to pay them money for faster internet access. If anything net neutrality preserves the free market by denying ISPs the ability to tax and block whatever digital content they don't like, like maybe internet streaming services if they decide that they'd rather force people to use their own cable TV.

I liked net neutrality better before it was cool
now it sucks bro
Go be a hipster elsewhere you stupid shit. This is politics and we care about the actual fucking policies, not your bullshit whining that congressmen aren't big enough tech geeks in their speeches to make you happy. The basic issue with net neutrality is that if ISPs aren't regulated as utilities they can basically tell websites "sorry we downgraded your website to the low traffic lane, now pay us cash if you want anyone to ever stream a video or whatever the fuck on your site." To a point it also permits internet censorship

This. Read this fucking post if you haven't already.

I don't need sources faggot.
Obama democrats like it.
That means you should hate it.
And this is where uninformed overly opinionated political nutters come from. Go back to /cuckchan/index.html where you belong with the rest of the smug low IQ shitters. I liked /pol/ better before it took in you retards.

Brayden Lewis
Brayden Lewis

you're even more retarded that I once suspected.
more retarded that I once
retarded that I
You didn't proofread your work.

Angel Mitchell
Angel Mitchell

I didn't imply anything. You inferred it, asshat. Net Neutrality isn't about the provider-consumer relationship; it's only about the provider-competitor relationship. Read a book or something and pull that dick out of your bloody gaping asshole, you've been fucked enough shill.

Henry Jenkins
Henry Jenkins

You're not even a not, you're just stupid.

Angel Hill
Angel Hill

shit I just got called out for being an idiot
comebacks are an acceptable response, right?
Nope. Either provide some facts or fuck off.

Polite sage.

Jacob Williams
Jacob Williams

I hate kikes
b-but muh free market

Lincoln Morris
Lincoln Morris

(((internet.org)))
IPv6 botnetized
http/3 botnet
alphabet inc. launching their respective ISPs
"network neutrality", pic related turned into: "gov't protecc old ISP from alphabet service providers' ability to overthrow old ISPs anytime" + "protecc alphabet service providers from potential (((market))) / disruptive innovators by throttling everything" + "protecc (((national security))) by collecting metadata from the alphabet and the ISP around the (((globe)))"
binge-watching normies consume lots of bandwith although everything is (((cached))) on local servers from (((ISPs))) around the (((globe)))
QoS and DPI and (((DPI)))
TPP
"""" (((INTERNET IS FREE? WHY NOT COMMODIFY IT!)))"""" -t. noseknows

Let me guess, the internet will forever stay at speeds less 1Gigabit for normal consumer with: intel ME-tier botnet spynet(c) and overcrowded low QoS Network Normietrality (NN)
What is lost:
exponential computational power of cloud computing thanks to evolving technology
capabilities to re-implement internet thanks to the (((global))) (((FCC))) massively banhammering independent mesh network because the government needs approval of those wireless radio spec
growth potential of blockchain and network computing
crypto anything
Fuck this shit. Did the eastern cabals lost against the western cabals already?

Dominic Edwards
Dominic Edwards

Why don't you just start a petition for a national internet provider? The government builds your roads, and it should also build your digital roads (or buy up existing ones). Stop blaming companies for behaving like companies.

Maybe check out how Finland does it and relay it to your congressmen. Every person has a fundamental right for a 1Mbit/s internet connection in Finland.

Isaiah Gutierrez
Isaiah Gutierrez

No one even knows what net neutrality means anymore. An example is your pic which seems to believe that net neutrality is to prevent losing some sort of network communism where we get more than we pay for. We don't have network communism.

Nicholas Smith
Nicholas Smith

Kikes hate free markets. Kikes operate by lobbying governments to create legal monopolies

Connor Wright
Connor Wright

The version that was forced in a bill and baked by the "I fucking love science" crowd was not.

Talking out of your ass: the post, NN hasn't been revised.

Xavier Morales
Xavier Morales

Shut the fuck up with these lies.
Net Neutrality only applies between telecommunications companies and their competition. It has nothing to do with the consumers of Internet services. Get the fuck off here. Go read a book.

Parker Thomas
Parker Thomas

We've already discussed this so much that the old guard simply does not want to discuss it.
To put it simply, Pajeet Pai is a Verizon lawyer and lobbyist. It doesn't get any more clear cut than that.
But if you don't understand what that means, it means that he's just a puppet. Net neutrality under Wheeler was pretty good, and none of the shit retards on /pol/ were talking about, such as prosecuting people for obscenity, were not possible under Wheeler's rules.
That's because only core provisions of Title II were invoked.
Also the bullshit about the FCC overstepping its authority is also false. This is what the FCC was created to do. The internet is literally a telecommunications network.
So, what did net neutrality do. It means that service providers could not throttle servicesjust because they hadn't paid a toll.
It also regulated agressive depeering. Which means a provider could not agressively de-peer and, in effect, blackmail someone into their terms. The FCC would remediate these peering disputes if they simply could not come to terms.

Michael Cruz
Michael Cruz

It had been revised. But only because Verizon took the FCC to court. Since Verizon wanted to cry and shit their pants about it, the FCC invoked the nuclear option: Title II.
The reason Verizon and Comcast and others don't want Title II is because they want to throttle services and promote others (their own.)
It's that simple. So now they've cried and shit their pants so much that they just put a Verizon lobbyist at the wheel to tear it apart.
Hopefully Pajeet Pai gets investigated and has to step down for repealing monopoly protections on TV network ownership. Wouldn't count on it though, and some other lobbyist fuck would just take the position.
Wheeler was a lobbyist, but at least he was a lobbyist from the time that the cable companies were the underdog and actually innovated.

Blake Torres
Blake Torres

(((net neutrality))) shills are spamming Holla Forums again
Fuck off. Net Jewtrality was completely co-opted and is full government control of the internet. None of you redditniggers has any sense and keep shilling the same fucking lies for years.
i-if you don't pass this the ISPs will do this crazy multi package piecemeal internet pricing thing that they aren't doing right now without net neutrality passed because uh uh uh uh uh UH UH UH FEAR FEAR FEAR FEAR BE AFRAID JUST FUCKING SUPPORT IT REEEEEEEEEEEEE
i-if you don't pass this the health insurers will drop everyone and literally millions of people will die even though that didn't happen before obamacare was passed because uh uh uh uh uh UH UH UH FEAR FEAR FEAR FEAR BE AFRAID JUST FUCKING SUPPORT IT REEEEEEEEEEEEE
Same shit, same shills, different words. Fucking kill yourselves.

Robert Carter
Robert Carter

Hello shlomo

/pol/res/10918325.html#10922319
/pol/res/10918325.html#10922220
/pol/res/10918325.html#10921698
/pol/res/10918325.html#10921582

Lucas Turner
Lucas Turner

Obamacare = forces one to pay companies for shit health care, subsidizes niggers and jacks up prices

Net Neutrality = forces ISPs not to mingle in data usage or Jack up prices ( niggers don't receive free internet )

Not the same at all retard, NN doesn't go far enough to protect consumers from tech giants but it's good enough for now.

Sebastian Cruz
Sebastian Cruz

Net Neutrality = forces ISPs not to mingle in data usage or Jack up prices

No.
See

Jacob Hughes
Jacob Hughes

it doesn't cover mobile, thus it's evil

First of all the US has the fastest mobile speeds of any country ( albeit capped ) and companies are trying to roll out 5G. Secondly AT&T, Verizon etc are the companies charging thousands per year for their cellular service. By coincidence these same companies paid Pajeet Pai to strip Net Neutrality as it would expose their shitty cable infrastructure in the US.

I know exactly who you are you slithering shill, fuckoff from Holla Forums.

John Wilson
John Wilson

Once again retards itt don't know what they're talking about. This "network neutrality" didn't even apply to mobile broadband. Mobile broadband was not under Title II. Only residential ISPs were.
Yet another reason that Holla Forums has turned to shit thanks to /pol/. Smelly, dumb, newfag scum.

Henry Brown
Henry Brown

you're denying the leddit crowd didn't jump on the NN bandwagon because it was something pushed by Obama you're simply deluded

And (you) didn't jump on the anti-NN hatewagon just because Obama supported it, right?

Caleb Powell
Caleb Powell

So if you haven't already, there's a bot you can text, that helps you write an email or a fax, free of charge, to your senator, or governor. Text "resist" to "504-09" and it'll ask you some questions, then you're onto writing. From another thread a few weeks ago, someone posted this message, and it think it's a great one to send.

"Net Neutrality is the cornerstone of innovation, free speech and democracy on the Internet.

Control over the Internet should remain in the hands of the people who use it every day. The ability to share information without impediment is critical to the progression of technology, science, small business, and culture.

Please stand with the public by protecting Net Neutrality once and for all."

I'd love to credit the user, but have lost the comment, but please, go send some faxes, show your politicians you want net neutrality to stay.

Leo Bailey
Leo Bailey

Nice try you leftypol kike, I'm not giving my location.

Juan Cook
Juan Cook

some mcfucker tries to push all his traffic through ICMP tunnel
ISP should allow him to do that on full contract speed
/neotech/ would actually defend this

Juan Phillips
Juan Phillips

DPIing someone's ICMP tunnel because you are a joyless, autistic automaton and know how to Cisco(tm) NetFilter(tm)(c) when it's literally hurting nobody, nor degrading the network
Pajeet Pai would actually defend this.

Justin Morris
Justin Morris

using pleb icmp
not making self-modifying custom protocol
Be like water tbh fam.

Samuel Harris
Samuel Harris

This. If you want to know what the current year's (((net neutrality))) will look like just read the rule. It's full of SJWisms, that's enough to know what you need to know.

The fact that we have CIA niggers in here posting in support of it, in their typical know it all, haughty, shilly manner, should be enough to warn you that it's not actually in your interest to support it.

Cooper Cooper
Cooper Cooper

Can you point out in the "rule" or "rules" where there's "SJWism"?
Or are you just going to shitpost like an idiot who thinks he's a comedic genius when in reality he's just a useful idiot who repeats dumb in-jokes all day that stopped being funny months ago?

Lincoln Rodriguez
Lincoln Rodriguez

Most people's idea of NN is some sort of Social Justice / Communist mix. Pics attached from GIS, like NN is to equalize the rich and the poor.

Ryder Barnes
Ryder Barnes

That's not an argument though, concerning the actual rules. And yeah, the illustrations are possible under a system without regulated net neutrality.

Leo Allen
Leo Allen

government pitches it as #blacklivesmatter
that's not an argument

Jose Johnson
Jose Johnson

You see the picture that says net neutrality is a racial justice issue? Racial justice is not a rule of net neutrality. Racial justice is the purpose of net neutrality. Racial justice is a non sequitur to net neutrality. If I connect racial justice to socks just because I say so, that doesn't make it so, that is a non sequitur argument. This is why it's not an argument

Cooper Morgan
Cooper Morgan

The first two pics are completely different from the third. Your attempt to equivocate in circles around the fact that net neutrality is simply the name for "no throttling, please" will not work.

This is some absolutely shameful shilling. How big a cuck do you have to be to pretend that NN is complex or scary, when the only people who stand to gain from killing NN are giant corporations that are in the process of fundamentally harming the current structure of the internet?

Easton Reyes
Easton Reyes

This is from like 20 years ago, but whatever.
http://www.stuartcheshire.org/rants/InfoHighway.html

Grayson King
Grayson King

when you start basing your views on computers around cyberpunk fiction
alt.normalfags

Cooper Sanchez
Cooper Sanchez

It's not "no throttling". That's exactly what I'm trying to show you, that people like you want it to be Network Communism when it isn't. If you pay more you go faster and that's the way it always has been and the way it always should be. NN was never intended to eliminate throttling but no one knows what it is anymore. That's why any discussion of it is pointless.

Nicholas Cruz
Nicholas Cruz

I agree with you.
Net Neutrality only affects Internet Service Providers and their competitors. It has no relevancy to consumers of those Internet services.
But imagine if Big ISP wasn't required to carry over their pipes the data from Medium ISP? It would in effect split the network between Big ISP and Medium ISP.

Bentley Campbell
Bentley Campbell

But imagine if Big ISP wasn't required to carry over their pipes the data from Medium ISP?
They aren't. Peering isn't mandatory, and dick wars at the AS level do occur.

Ian Wright
Ian Wright

Wow. https://www.pcworld.com/article/153123/sprint_cogent_dispute.html
Net Neutrality never existed anyways. Where is the argument then?

Jaxson Brooks
Jaxson Brooks

Nice conflation you got there. Let me lay it out so even a bootlicker like you that gulps down poz from corporate shills can understand how ridiculous this false comparison you're regurgitating is.

Connor Thomas
Connor Thomas

Applefag is a dizzy faggot
Shocking.

Elijah Wilson
Elijah Wilson

So, are you going to admit every "argument" against NN is nebulous FUD by greedy megacorps that want to wall off the net, or are you going to flail your arms and sperg about gay nigger space commies coming to government your intertubes?

Aiden Garcia
Aiden Garcia

If you pay more you go faster and that's the way it always has been and the way it always should be.
What if I told you, my country downgraded all of its modems with terrible "new" ones that doesn't even have QoS management and even NAT, IPSEC, all the good stuff.
What's worse? My previously unlimited data plan now became (50GiB * (n<=10)). I used to consume an average of 6GiB daily and It just fucking sucks your internet shits itself in less than a week now. That's net neutrality folks! My ISP won't even issue me unlimited data plan UNLESS I own a company with certain (((documents))).
Net neutrality killed the internet and turned it into a per-consumption subscription for normies. (((Net neutrality))) needs to die.

Parker Foster
Parker Foster

POO ON THE TUBES AJIT

Levi Cruz
Levi Cruz

I hope you enjoy paying an extra $200 for a non-segregated Internet Power User Plus plan or browsing Holla Forums and other sites outside of the Facebook/Google/Twitter normonopoly at 56k modem speeds and only up to 512MB per month for not paying the ISP jew tax.

Josiah Campbell
Josiah Campbell

If net neutrality succeeds, internet pricing shall slowly skyrocket and inflate.
Complete monopoly for the alphabet family namely:
facebook(twitter instagram whatsapp) google(youtube) verizon(yahoo tumblr) most cdn (microsoft google) snapchat tl;dr apps.
It's like the big pharma and big petrol where anyone can literally raise the price however they want because the demand for internet is just the same as the big pharma/petrol. There is always a demand.
Everything will be an app service, even your operating system. There will be no other method to resist against the jew piscean age downfall.
The internet we know today will become obsolete by the time http/3 is implemented.
Everything will be an app service.
Never forget this

Cameron Myers
Cameron Myers

my country downgraded all of its modems with terrible "new" ones
Kill your leaders.
That's net neutrality folks!
No it isn't.

Samuel Harris
Samuel Harris

I hope you enjoy never understanding the legislation you're passionate about. Neither side of this battle is on your side.

John Taylor
John Taylor

this is only about turning competitors into customers. instead of providing a quid-pro-quo relationship with competitors, ISP's want to charge competitors costs accrued for routing data. those ISP's will then mitigate additional costs by charging more to their original customers, and these costs will drain down to Joe and Diana Blow and their awesome mobile internet and DSL.

Angel Jones
Angel Jones

Net neutrality doesn't abolish peering costs or force ISPs to unconditionally lease infrastructure to anyone. This is addressing a different set of anti-consumer practices, like zero rating certain websites and services that an ISP has a monetary interest in while forcing their customers away from competition with low data caps and throttling, as comcast already does with xfinity.

Owen Murphy
Owen Murphy

if you are talking about end-consumer Internet, who cares? it's about the big money, and the real ISP's that actually run the Internet are wanting their cake and eating it too.

Levi Lewis
Levi Lewis

manipulating markets for personal gain
Fucking kike.

Brandon Sanchez
Brandon Sanchez

*16GiB daily
Kill your leaders.
I live in PH. the new president is based and sends corrupt leaders to hell or jail left and right and I'm not hotwheels or josh, sorry
It's the previous leader's fault for licking Obama's nigger balls.
No it isn't.
Pic related. AKA "the slow and bandwidth cap" list.

Matthew Ramirez
Matthew Ramirez

stuff that has nothing to do with the internet and everything to do with the web

pukes out random FUD
berates others about the contents of legislation he doesn't cite any specific objections to

muh caps
You realize the biggest imposer of data caps in your country are the anti-NN "free" ISPs operated directly by sites like Facebook to get 3rd-worlders addicted, by capping access to everyone other than their own sites?

Oliver Howard
Oliver Howard

What these net neutrality protections do, beyond residential ISPs, is regulate against agressive depeering, though. Basically, one cannot just pull the plug in an attempt to blackmail another into their demands. The FCC would remediate peering disputes. Which is a good thing.
I agree that the retards itt that don't know people already pay for their transit costs once, and shouldn't have to pay for it again. That's classic rent seeking on part of ISPs.

Camden Foster
Camden Foster

???:
charge the data! not the subscription! this will save more of consumer's money copared to our previous internet plans!
Shills,zombies:
NN is good, praise the FCC!
What actually happens:
annual/monthly internet subscriptions are charged while you're also on metered bandwidth at the same time.
Magic? hitting two birds with one stone?
tfw 10K video streaming in 2024
😂 yfw gotta pay them 1.4GB/s bitrate but on top of that you also gotta pay that terabit fiber
internet is now a necessity that both idle and consumed bandwidth are both chargeable
have to separately pay for the size of the tube, the quality of tube, the quality of water, the quantity and speed of water, the provider of water, the provider of tube when all you asked for is fucking water.
???:
kikeaku dori
Gee, I wonder.

Luke Allen
Luke Allen

You also have to pay for a water license. If you want a well of your own you need a well license which costs more than the average worker's salary per year. Sharing water requires another license, that cost a hundred times of the average worker's yearly salary to sign up, and ten time the average salary per year in recurring costs.

Cooper Watson
Cooper Watson

Just capture the rainwater that falls on your property into holding tanks.
inb4 u need bucket license

Jason Adams
Jason Adams

A water license, a well license, a barrel license, and a water storage license. Rain water licenses are already a thing in some US states.

Christian Lewis
Christian Lewis

If, worst case scenario, Holla Forums and all our other favorite websites become throttled, would we be able to get around that by using a VPN? In theory, the ISP won't know what data to throttle if it's encrypted right?

Jason Turner
Jason Turner

How long before you need an air license so you can breathe?

Cooper Robinson
Cooper Robinson

Rainwater is a limited and shared resource that's comparable to the resource of radio signals. Your breathing of the air does not take away another's breathing of their air.

Carter Thompson
Carter Thompson

I don't know where you're getting the idea that the supply of air on earth isn't limited. If you can breathe air for free, you should also be able to collect and drink rain water for free at home. When this is done on an personal scale, it doesn't much affect the greater system. It's only when a business comes into play and does stuff on massive scale that it has significant effects. The real reason the state taxes you is because that's their purpose: to impose themselves on you and destroy personal freedoms. They don't get in the way of big business though, because that's their friends and easy money supply.

Justin Edwards
Justin Edwards

Net neutrality has nothing to do with the structure of data plans. With or without net neutrality ISPs are completely free to advertise plans that are throttled to 1/1000th of the available bandwidth, impose 10GB data caps with 2GB increments that cost more than the original plan, charge $1/MB... This is about preventing a ghettoized internet where a handful of big corporations pay to get zero rated for unlimited use but everyone else, Holla Forums included, has to share a slice of the average user's tiny monthly data allowance. It's a world where EA pays your ISP to add an extra 150ms of ping to your Quake III traffic in the hopes you'll play the latest p2w cowadoody lootbox fest instead, or where video streams higher than 360p are blocked so that you'll go watch AT&T Video On Demand instead.

Ayden Jackson
Ayden Jackson

I don't know where you're getting the idea that the supply of air on earth isn't limited.
This is a strawman, I've never implied this idea.

Collecting rainwater on a personal scale still affects the greater system. The key lies in the definition of how much is sensible for each individual. Your personal freedom in collecting rainwater has a real effect upon everybody who lives in your general area. Big businesses should be subject to pay for their share of consumption of shared resources. If it has be judged that their rate of consumption is negatively affecting the residents of the area, then their activity should be curtailed to match the needs of the area.

Daniel Ramirez
Daniel Ramirez

I'll wait for the official release of the proposal tomorrow, but the statement summary seems like it'll be a good thing.

“For almost twenty years, the Internet thrived under the light-touch regulatory approach established by President Clinton and a Republican Congress. This bipartisan framework led the private sector to invest $1.5 trillion building communications networks throughout the United States. And it gave us an Internet economy that became the envy of the world.
“But in 2015, the prior FCC bowed to pressure from President Obama. On a party-line vote, it imposed heavy-handed, utility-style regulations upon the Internet. That decision was a mistake. It’s depressed investment in building and expanding broadband networks and deterred innovation.
“Today, I have shared with my colleagues a draft order that would abandon this failed approach and return to the longstanding consensus that served consumers well for decades. Under my proposal, the federal government will stop micromanaging the Internet. Instead, the FCC would simply require Internet service providers to be transparent about their practices so that consumers can buy the service plan that’s best for them and entrepreneurs and other small businesses can have the technical information they need to innovate.
“Additionally, as a result of my proposal, the Federal Trade Commission will once again be able to police ISPs, protect consumers, and promote competition, just as it did before 2015. Notably, my proposal will put the federal government’s most experienced privacy cop, the FTC, back on the beat to protect consumers’ online privacy.
“Speaking of transparency, when the prior FCC adopted President Obama’s heavy-handed Internet regulations, it refused to let the American people see that plan until weeks after the FCC’s vote. This time, it’ll be different. Specifically, I will publicly release my proposal to restore Internet freedom tomorrow—more than three weeks before the Commission’s December 14 vote.
“Working with my colleagues, I look forward to returning to the light-touch, market-based framework that unleashed the digital revolution and benefited consumers here and around the world.”

Source: https://www.fcc.gov/document/chairman-pai-proposes-restore-internet-freedom

Disable AdBlock to view this page

Disable AdBlock to view this page