Tells viewers to save net neutrality yet Can’t even describe it

Someone should ask Doug what the Rural Electrification Act and the Fair Credit Billing Act are
Too be honest I wish it was that simple, the internet needs to die. Unfortunately we're stuck with it and its long-term viral effects on society

Well I'm reluctantly a #netneutrality shill now. Don't give me contradictory information or I'll screech at you and call you misinformed.

Poop doesn’t keep it shape unless it frozen. Stop posting literal bullshit

I'm 8 minutes into this 38 minute waste of time and so far all he's done is point of that Ajit Pai exaggerated and that the FCC is criminally inefficient. He conveniently glosses over the fact that it took them like 6 years to solve what he framed as some YUGE problem that was affecting everyone on the internet. I guess everyone just suffered while the FCC took the better part of a decade to create a document that didn't regulate or fix anything.

Fuck you nazi piece of shit.

I was on the anti side if nothing else because Soros was on the pro side, but after looking up shit, its a double-triple-jew pile and now I'm pro.

The video's tldr is: FCC had been fighting for neutrality for years now, with several legal cases people seem to have memory-holed (p2p throttling and a whole lot of shit), the act to regulate internet as an utility had to be put in place just because that is what the courts demanded, they stripped down the rights the government/FCC would have over the internet to the bare minimal, so they DO NOT have power to censor the internet with it, just to keep the providers from doing it.

This is about removing that, not about giving the FCC more power.

Kinda like how Holla Forums became ardently anti-NN once Trump announced he was going to end it. Funny, that.

Where did I imply this? Also if you want the video summarized just ask cuck. TL;DR corporations have been fucking people for years with everything they can get away with, a fair and open internet has been fought for by the FCC for a decade (probably longer) now using net neutrality. The video outlines the various court cases surrounding net neutrality that led to it's ratification in the first place, as well as several of the numerous instances where corporations have over-stepped their bounds to fuck the customer for a buck.

Good attempt.

Well that su-
So why should I care at this point if the internet dies again? It was great from the early 80s to the mid 2000s but it's become a big ball of cancer. Who knows? Maybe we'll all actually go outside now and make something of our lives
Glad you see my point. I needed motivation to leave thanks!

This

user, Facebook, Tumblr, and Twitter aren't going to die. It's only places like this that will die. If anything bad happens to those shit social media sites they'll just be replaced with divided up alternatives sponsored by the internet companies.

Even better, we'll all end up making something of our lives while retarded normalfags waste their lives on Goybook. It's a win-win

Does the video cover the introduction of data caps which occurred under net neutrality? I'm already throttled to all sites after I reach a cap. I hardly expect this to change if net neutrality stays.

Also you sound like a massive hypocrite considering the largest mega-corps are arguing for net neutrality.

Yes, it does cover the issue.

Time stamp or I'm not watching it.

I just got to the part where he outlines that net neutrality is exactly like some previous document, none of which states that ISPs can't throttle or adjust the rate at which people are able to access certain content, just that they can access it as long as some other part of the government deems it 'lawful'

Maybe he'll make a good point later on. Maybe I'm just coming at this from the wrong mindset. My point still stands, though. The pro side of this debate is largely made up of people who really don't know what they are talking about. "IT'S THE END OF THE INTERNET!" they cry, after having done literally zero research outside of seeing some facebook memes. None of them are able to prove that comcast and the other shitty ISPs are gearing up to offer special packages that charge you extra to browse certain sites, or that they're programming firewalls that slow down the download rate from their competitor's sites and servers. All of that is possible but there's also very little stopping them from doing that right now anyways. You think the megacorps that own the ISPs that own the companies who invested a gorillion shekels in hulu and other streaming platforms aren't trying to do something to stop people from using Netflix and youtube all the time?

>there are "people" on this board who are in favor of giving (((corporations))) more power to fuck the average consumer over
We need the Final Solution for the Libertardian problem immediately.

My dude, finish the video before sperging.

It's 38 fucking minutes long and this pedantic faggot is only talking about one really specific article written by Ajit Pai while making really poorly substantiated arguments against him.

I know millennial suffer from ridiculously short attention spans, but I swear that is the only video you need to watch.

But I'm a 32 yr old jewish man…

Keep watching. The back end is loaded with nothing but a long ass list of companies fucking people. In fact, here is a time stamp since you're not being a faggot: hooktube.com/watch?v=nqJDW_s93rc?t=24m3s

It's really sad that we have so many people on this board who put so much value on their retarded memes that they really give a fuck about who runs the internet to begin with. Maybe we all really do need to go outside more often

He's doing an insanely poor job of making the argument you insist I need to hear because it changes everything. Did you watch this? Because he just said that p2p software getting throttled is somehow a violation of net neutrality which kind of conflicts with the "lawful" part he just mentioned.

Thanks for not being a faggot, m8.

The sum of the situation is:

So, as a matter of THIS case in particular, its best to keep things as they are. But in the long-term discussion of neutrality, it would be better to find a non-FCC way of doing this.

The premise is false because ISPs are still being regulated by the FTC and government provisions for broadband internet already exist as part of the Rural Electrification Act. There is nothing wrong with trimming unnecessary federal government fat

Exactly. But I have no hope of nu/pol/ grasping this.

Woah wtf kys, there's no room for reasoned arguments on the anti-net neutrality side.

I'm watching the bit about all the bad things ISPs did, and yeah.. all of this is bullshit, but it would all be illegal under an assortment of anti-trust laws, false advertising, and infringement of consumer rights anyways. All of these things are illegal and punishable under our current system of law, even if the FCC isn't involved one bit.

So why didn't anyone but the FCC stopped them?

You're right, my mistake, I forgot all anti-NN people were strawmen from nu/pol/. I promise I will try my best to follow thr pro-NN intellectuals from Reddit. I will begin watching Rick and Morty now to hopefully boost my IQ

Break up the oligopoly that has a strangle hold on Internet service. If I had any other option I'd be with a different company, but there's no competition so they charge what they want for shit service

Who's to say that they weren't involved? All of these cases weren't solved strictly by the FCC jumping out and screaming "NET NEUTRALITY" at them to get them to stop.

/thread

Welp, after all that shit, I now think that consumer watchdog groups and smarter reporting on misdeeds by major corporations is a better system for keeping verizon and comcast from doing stupid shit with phones so customers don't use 3rd party SIM cards or download their competitor's apps.

Shitty companies doing shitty things is not a good justification for giving more power and control over society. They can get punished and fined for all the same reasons without needing a special commissions on top of the few dozen other ones we already have.

...

Even the most abstract concepts of anarcho-capitalism have courts, this is a case of law and not state. FCC merely is enacting that law. Your consumer watchdogs without that law (which is the issue of the jour) would have no teeth.

They would only be able to tell consumers "hey, you are fucked" and the consumers would reply "thanks, we know" and not be able to do shit about it.

What the fuck is wrong with his face?

He is no longer human. He is a bugman.

Consumer awareness gives the FTC and the myriad of other government organizations that aren't the FTC more cause to step in and do the job they were created to do. A well-informed public and constant bad PR from shady moves would encourage companies to get their shit together. Several of the examples even used in favor of Net Neutrality happened after it was put into place, showing that the FCC is only capable or reacting, not actively policing, which is no different than how things would be normally.

Holla Forums here
ackshually net neutrality was a thing forever
then in 2005 some small ISPs throttled Vonage and got slapped with a fine, this was the first regulatory direction for network neutrality after Tim Wu described the regulation framework. A republican administration. Then in 2010 Comcast throttled BitTorrent, again fined.
A year or so later we got network neutrality rules under the Title I deregulated framework, but then Verizon cried and shit its pants, shot itself in the foot, when the judge said that the FCC did have the authority under Title II common carriage to do this. Then came the actual Title II network neutrality rules.

One thing you have to understand is that it was basically impossible, the hardware did not exist, to do this before the early 2000s. Another would be that the reason Pajeet Pai does not want Title II is because it means that regional monopolies cease to exist. ISPs are forced to lease their last mile to competing ISPs, thus no more regional lock in.

Anyways most of you faggots can guzzle down Holla Forums semen all you want and scream "muh FTC" like Pajeet the streetshitter does, it doesn't make ISPs stop being telecom, and telecoms are the FCC's purview.
1) All pajeet is doing is instituting regulatory uncertainty
2) This will not hold up in court, because a) there are no actual facts backing the change in regulatory direction (a direction taken since Bush II) and b) one of the legal requirements of the FCC is to be beholden to the consumer, it's an actual legal requirement.

As soon as it's voted, you can be sure the EFF and the ACLU will ream their ass in court. I'm not too worried tbh. Pajeet will be back to shitting on the corner of Poo and Loo surrounded by dead dogs and aborted fetuses in no time.

t. Holla Forums

They always had the power to classify ISPs under Title II, and fine ISPs for anything they feel like fining them for, shit for brains.
What Net Neutrality is, is a codification of the regulatory direction that came about since Bush II's FCC.
ISPs are telecommunications. FCC was created to regulate telecom.

Zero rating and data caps are different from net neutrality. Although in yurop it's in the same vein as net neutrality, the fact is that ISPs do have an argument for data caps and zero rating, just based on capacity alone, for "reasonable network management."
The thing Title II helps with is forcing ISPs to lease their last mile, thus actually enabling competition. You can have an ISP that leases capacity and sells plans with no data caps, if someone wants to try that business model, instead of your local shitty ISP that reams you.

Title II is not network neutrality. Title II is the embodiment of common carrier ideals, which is basically the crux of network neutrality. No one really thought we'd get Title II though, which is why they went for Title I open internet rules in the first place. It was pretty much a miracle that this happened in the first place, of course only to be torn apart by an industry shill two years later.

There's nothing Holla Forums about this post. At best it's amateur lawfag status. Stick to reddit pal.

Net neutrality needs to go. You don't even have to argue against it, although doing so would convince anyone with an IQ above room temperature, whom it's advocates are is enough reason to oppose it.

I'd just like to interject for moment. What you're refering to as Network Neutrality, is in fact, Title II/Network Neutrality, or as I've recently taken to calling it, Title II + Network Neutrality. Network Neutrality is not regulation by itself, but the bedrock of a regulatory framework made useful by the Communications Act of 1934, the Telecommunications Act of 1996, and various legal techniques such as "forbearance".

Many computer users use a telecommunications network everyday, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the FCC regulated ISPs under Title II of the Telecommunications Act, and many of its users are not aware that they are basically telecoms, and legislation dating back to 1934 is fully applicable.

There really is Network Neutrality, and these people are arguing for it, but it is just the bedrock of a regulatory framework. Network Neutality is the kernel: the original phrase and scholarly article authoried by Tim Wu which persuaded the FCC to pursue a particular regulatory direction for the benefit of the consumer. The kernel is an essential part of a regulatory framework, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete regulatory framework. Network Neutrality is normally used in a context involving Title II: the whole system is basically Network Neutality accomplished with Title II, or Title II/Network Neutrality.

I'd tell you to "stick to what you're good at" but nobody on Holla Forums seems to be good at anything, not even GNU/Linux. That board is the biggest group of LARPers

What are you good at, friend? Obviously not celeb faggotry, nor discussing television or movies, not even cuck nor baneposting, since this board fails at all of it.
Feel free to prove me wrong, if you want to actually have a discussion. Clearly you're not capable of that, though. What you are capable of is reiterating shit verbatim from Holla Forums which didn't make sense when the first retard you copied made the shitpost, and it doesn't make sense when you vomit it out.

Again: prove me wrong. I don't see the point in getting all uppity about network neutrality though, EFF and ACLU will ream Pajeet's ass in court. There's no statistical evidence of a depression in broadband investment, and the FCC is supposed to be beholden to the consumer, therefore making the ignored public comments yet another piece of ammo they will use, not to mention regulatory uncertainty after more than a decade of going towards the direction of common carriage.

...

So the days of Pax Americana Internetica are coming to an end. Under a mutt-free internet, the Australian Shitposter is expected to take over and lead Yuros, Cancucks and select Azns to a new era of online prosperity. What will you do once the whole United States esssentially gets perma range-banned from every website that matters? What sites do you plan on filling the impending power vacuum with?

Personally I think with all the 12 year olds gone (kek, there's no fucking way their parents will pay for their internet privileges) we could attempt to retake cuckchan. The posting rates will be dramatically reduced and so stuff stays on the front page for longer. The jannybase will too be reduced and they'll be looking for new volunteers in their wake. If we can infiltrate, we can begin to subvert those who subverted the site in the first place. And if we are able to take cuckchan, then from there who knows? Maybe the original homeland of tenbux and kill a significantly weakened SJW menace once and for all?

And ignore any mongreloids that think Net Neutrality is important to the rest of us at all, It's just the dying protestations of a pestilence on the verge of being ultimately cured. Consider it collateral damage if you will. Legit burgers who already know their role may leave sites such as this forever, but thousands of SJW landwhales will be similarly eliminated. In a way it's a bit like successful chemo, losing your hair but killing the tumors.

...

holy shit when did he get bald
he looks even more psycho now

...

>>>Holla Forums
>>>/suicide/

Nice

Doug walker fails afain

Where's the "look at this dude" edit?

Shit he finally became bald. It was only a matter of time.

fucking Holla Forumsyps

nice, really well done

Don't they know they can never take us down? If they ban Holla Forums, we will still be using HAM radio or messenger pigeons to send memes to each other

We could use tumblr

Holla Forums is a fucking gay board go back and stay there

He has bigger tits than my sister

Prove it.

...

That's the entirety of deviantart.

...

You mean, paying less since I don't use Netflix.