Net Neutrality and video games

Net Neutrality is shit. We have a legally mandated monopoly, where we have a communications company who is legally required to make a profit. They are protected from legal action, and they are not allowed to have competition.
"Net Neutrality" is giving the government and FCC control over regulation instead of giving it to a monopoly, when what should be done is dissolving the monopoly in the first place.

This whole "net neutrality" shit sets me off so hard. It's such an obvious tactic that is clearly intentionally being done to divert attention from the real issue.
Nobody up there gives a shit about "net neutrality". They saw people getting pissed off at the monopoly and then threatened to take away what little nice stuff we have left so we'd be bickering about this and lose sight of the fact that it wouldn't even be necessary if the main problem wasn't still the main problem.

They don't care about what happens with net neutrality. They're happy that it's kept the US busy for a couple years and prevented us from demanding that Comcast and the FCC be held accountable for their abuses of legal power to enforce their monopoly.

Changed absolutely fucking nothing after it passed

Reddit supports it. It's cancer. Obama even wrote them a thank you not for helping making it a reality.

businessinsider.com/president-obama-thanks-reddit-2015-2

*note

I can't wait for ISPs to create tier lists where you have to pay an arm and a leg to access just about everything that isn't also paying an arm and leg to get up to higher tier lists. If they were smart about abusing it, they'd charge less for popular things and charge more for things that are hardly used "to balance out the risks of supporting them", while secretly moving things down when they stop being popular, no longer are paying, or stop being kosher.

It gives more money though
The money loses purchasing power so even if the number is higher value is lower, now that's real magic!

Reminder

First reply, every time.

Can't wait to see that nigger hanged for treason.

Except that tier lists didn't happen prior to net neutrality, nor was it about to happen, the only "evidence" of it I have seen is the same shitty image from Reddit.

It doesn't. Increasing minimum wage made employers hire less people and cut hours, effectively decreasing sallary.

Forgot to add. You are thinking of inflation of the monetary base. Which may (but not necessarily will) accompany a push for minimum wage increase. Still another stupid idea though

I was meming about minimum wage literally either causing people working illegally, employers cutting down, or causing inflation.
only 3 possible outcomes.

So now it's net neutrality "under" Trump- is it the lesser of two evils?

Or due to FCC doing whatever the fuck it wants, is it better for it to fail, companies over-step their mark, and Trump does Roosavelt-esque trust-busting for free good press and killing the monopoly?

I'm waiting for it to actually happen. Of course, if they were to do it, they wouldn't come out and say it's a tier list.

It's really sad that you guys gave up fighting this now that Trump is in charge, as if he's any different than Obama.

herewego

Was against it long before Trump ever raised the issue, m8

first world problems

Capped because this is the best take on net neutrality I've seen.

It's actually not that much different from right now, except "games as a service" is still in it's infancy, and net neutrality currently prevents your ISP from charging you extra for "faster access to preferred networks"/throttling non-paying networks.

And it's going to get even worse, in five dollar increments. Come on, guy, it's only $5 a week for FASTER access to XBL/PSN/Steam/etc. What kind of poor scrub can't afford $5 a week.

And then you look back one day, and wonder how the fuck it got this bad. Everyone old enough to remember there were once better days will get shouted down and mocked by shills and children who don't know any better.

It's already happening.
Right here.
On Holla Forums.

Can you imagine what it's going to be later?

Oh.. Wait..

You do know that it was implemented less than two years ago, right? This isn't something that we have had there since the dawn of time, acting as the floodgates to protect vidya, it's simply shit that sounds good but really doesn't actually do anything in practice. The only thing it could even remotely protect against is ISPs throttling competitors like was done with Netflix, but that was already an illegal offense even before the implementation of net neutrality and so adding it wouldn't have changed anything in that matter.

The best outcome would be that all of the giant ISPs in America (which is almost literally every single one) gets broken up into hundreds of smaller companies, and regulations are put into place that help small startup ISPs get into the business.

Whatever brings that about in the quickest amount of time is the most ideal.

Daily reminder net neutrality only ensures that the top dogs, Comcast, ATT, Time Warner, etc., stay the top dogs and never have to worry about competition from below them. Net neutrality strangles regional providers.

None at all.

How fucking retarded are you?

I think one should first define clearly what is meant with this term, because it's about as vague as it could possibly be. I have a feeling large corporations mean something different with it than the basement dwelling GNU+Linux user.

In the end, the only thing most americans (because this shit really only ever comes from murica) really need is more competition between ISPs cause your shit's all retarded.

It's despicable shit.

Net neutrality as envisioned isn't even relevant anymore as carriers can get around it by offering off-cap bandwidth to services they own or that pay them and it doesn't violate the legislation.

Isn't net neutrality that mess of bungled shit that has kept virtually all competitors from being able to dig new cable lines and having to share public and private lines?

Yes, and contrary to what libtards keep parroting it would hurt minority access to the Internet.

I only care because my property is literally one house away from where a local isp can give me internet, and AT&T refuses to dig up their Phone lines or put Internet wire to my house

ATT is stupid like that. A lot of it has to do with the fact their Internet is DSL and has to deal with the "last mile" bullshit. Even adding one customer to your local branch of cables would bottleneck local Internet speeds and if you aren't even on the line the returns from your subscription payments wouldn't pay off the cost to install new cable.

Nothing will happen, because net neutrallity was a meme to begin with

But you're wrong, we've ALWAYS had it and they're trying to take it away.

I'm getting so fucking sick of explaining this. I can really understand why Andrew Jackson had so many duels with people. Spreading bullshit is really worth death.

...

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PBS

And?

You really think PBS is free of influence?

That's not an argument. Try showing me evidence to back up your claims.

I'm just saying I don't find their credentials untainted.

You're just saying like a little bitch.

Their credentials are tainted by what? Prove me wrong. I don't care if I'm right or wrong. I care about the truth, and if there are substantial facts to back your "just saying man" ass claims, then by all means provide them.

Otherwise shut the fuck up because you are a stupid faggot with nothing legitimate to add to this conversation. I would beat you to death if I could.

And I could file a protection order on you just for that post and get your personal information there's a lot of things people can do, I'm just saying that on a personal level I do not trust a Television Corporation, and therefore subject to competing with the Internet, credible on judgements concerning regulation for said internet.

PBS doesn't compete, it's publicly funded. They get government money and spend it on their mandate to provide informational programming.

Everyone has to get paid somewhere.
If they aren't competing one way they have to compete another.

Nice passive aggressive woman threat. Are you as allergic to the truth as you are to masculinity?

Claims based on feelings are meaningless.

I would like to know where your distrust comes from. You know, things like verifiable events that have happened, or marxist postions they've supported anything ANYTHING.

I'm all about distrust, but I have to listen to your meely mouthed namby pamby feelings and it fills me with disgust. I don't care about what you FEEEL I care about what you KNOW.

Whoa, take it easy guy.
I'm just some fucko on the internet who wants local isp to run to my house. No need to project your emasculation complex on me.

How many times have we fought for net neutrality at this point?

lol. NO. You can't. Also, get raped and die faggot.

i've watched both parts of this video and i still don't understand what the fuck net neutrality is.

Net neutrality means that an ISP, like comcast and time warner cable, cant block, slow down, or make any specific websites use data when others dont.

Let's say your local monopoly is Dickmunch Cable Inc. In your city, Dickmunch provides cable TV, Internet, and phone service. Let's say Dickmunch Cable decides they don't like people dropping cable for Netflix, so they start throttling Netflix. Now, the video streams from Dickmunch are fast, and the video streams from Netflix are slow. Dickmunch is now running a non-neutral network.

Every "just some guy" matters you stupid faggot.

Imagine if every just some guy thought that pouring sugar in your neighbors gas tank was a gesture of brotherhood.

That would be crazy right? Alot of cars would suddenly be malfunctioning, right?

I am saying you are wrong in your assertions on both pbs and net neutrality, and you don't have the backbone to argue your position.

Imagine if everything you believed was false. Imagine how stupid you would look. Now right now EVERYTHING you believe is probably not false. But one of the things you do is. And you look incredibly stupid for it.

Like a million. I remember having a link to their website on my fucking myspace for christ sakes. People don't understand whats important. I'm about ready to go live on a fucking island or be a monk or something.

i guess that means its good then? either way its not like i have any power to stop the megajews

Just send a letter to your representatives. It only takes a minute.

I will never understand monthly game subs, even for MMO's. Most MMO's don't deliver content on even a bi-monthly basis. It should be 15$ every three months at fucking most.

Man you are in for a rough ride if you don't get your head unfucked.

The worst part is you wont even know why. It's like you were born to be a slave.

...

That's what real net neutrality is. What got passed and wears net neutrality's flayed skin is the furthest thing from net neutrality.

Look in the actual legalese. Try to find a single thing about that. There's no such thing in it.

a b s o l u t e l y
n o t h i n g

I think your delusional state of mind is unhealthy user, you've convinced yourselves random people are slaves to companies that they voluntarily interact with, do you require a water filter?

i can form opinions of my own better than anybody. where the fuck did you pull that assumption out of?

all i said is i don't know what net neutrality is. and i dont really care, because i don't live in cuckistan. its an americuckold problem being marketed through the MSM to americuckolds. nobody in the rest of the world gives a shit.

i certainly don't see any news about net neutrality in my country's media

*tips fedora*
did you also tell your grandma that god doesn't exist today?

It was overreach by the FCC that was never put into effect. Regulation of the Internet beyond very specific parts is undesirable. Assumptions and speculation on what a company might do has no merit. Laws should solve a problem that exists, not one that may occur in the future if sufficient evil exists in the world.

shiggy

Net neutrality is a textbook example of killing words. They make it sound like it's something to help you get something fair for everyone involved, when in reality it's just same old kikel tricks.

New ISPs will exploit the lack of support for some websites. Soon it will be cable tv all over again.

Not entirely true. Theoretically it does happen, but that's only because none of the national and international telecommunication companies have a big enough share of the market that they can be a monopoly. Other monopolies in various countries get the same treatment as what you just said, but only if they're an absolute monopoly and not a relative one (80+% vs 51+%).

Every major social network support it (Twatter, Faceberg, Jewgle).

It's a fine and dandy idea but it's like throwing coal into a fire with the intention of smothering it. Worse yet:
We're not able to protest the market by not buying what they're selling due to the nature of media. Companies are controlling what we see and do on the internet, but at the same time, we can't protest and just "not buy" internet. It's too ingrained into society as a whole. We can't "not buy" media because it's how we get our news. We're stuck in a horrible situation altogether and looking for any sort of answer for it. Government regulation will lead to the loss of privacy, but at the same time, corporations do the same exact shit. The only thing adding government oversight would do is raise the price of the service and allow for "legal" privacy invasions.

Even a grade schooler would be able to understand the absurd amount of kikery that has been going on to undermine net neutrality, yet you don't seem to be able to apply simply logic ot it.

Online multiplayer games? Well they're all these artificially closed off walled gardens of the kind that net neutrality is meant to stop the internet from becoming already, so~

And this is different to the current situation?
If it works, don't fix it

Holla Forums will start being throttled, that's for sure

This does make it very dubious.

this

So find another source. Here, watch this e-celeb explain it. He's an individual, not a corporation. Anyway, I don't see why the fuck that matters when you're just looking for an explanation for the concept in question.

PBS threw some anti-GamerGate shit in the past though
fuck off retard

So Holla Forums is full of faggots because a portion of it believes traps aren't gay.

Yeah, that's true, fair point. However, I'm just pointing out that PBS aren't the only people out there that have tried to explain this shit. Additionally, I doubt that the entirety of PBS would support what those GameShow faggots were spouting about vidya.

The source of the explanation always matters. The bias and exaggeration of the situation to manipulate its viewers is not always clear to a neutral party.

Net neutrality is a kike scam.

That there are people who think it still means anything is fucking pathetic. Kill yourselves.

Here's another video, this one is a bit more complicated because she uses allegories and goes over a bit of the judicial history that happened over the past 15 years or so, but the common idea is that

this.

Also, friendly reminder that our good old globalist friend (((GEORGE SOROS))) support net neutrality as well.

>>PBS is funded by member station dues, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, government agencies, corporations, foundations and individual citizens. All proposed funding is subjected to a set of standards to ensure the program is free of influence from the funding source.[3]

There's a high chance PBS is cointelpro, don't let their artistic integrity fool you. They're the ones supporting that garbage is art, diversity is our strength, and air this little progressive show people call Sesame Street.

What I don't get is, if anons around here say that dissolving Net Neutrality could lead to startups becoming ISPs, why hasn't Congress explained this? If they can explain that this isn't a profit motive being paid off by Comcast to let Net Neutrality die, I'd think they'd have more traction. As is, I thought people were silent on this due to Trump shitposting and doubling down on his every breath.

...

The whole reason internet in 'merica is so fucked up because of all the regulations creating an artificial monopoly and letting Comcast doing whatever the fuck they like because there's no competition. Retarded leftist make it out like "da corprations gonna steal muh internet", they try and pile on more regulations on top of regulations to fix the problems regulations caused, because they are fucking terrified of the idea of the free market.

So you're fine with ISPs using deep packet inspection to figure out what game you're playing and then artifically throttling or delaying your traffic to 200+ ping if a) the developer isn't paying to get their application's traffic zero-rated or b) you haven't signed up for the Premium Gamer Plus package for only $100/mo on top of your existing bill?

sounds like something a greedy jew would say

...

think about what youre saying

...

what happens is more expensive and more numerous paid subscriptions. and nobody fucks off because everyone is already addicted to the internet and social media isnt going anywhere. hell, they probably have a hand in this.

What makes you'll get your cake, let alone eat it, when you're choosing between being a government cuck, an elite cuck or a corporate cuck instead of standing for the working man?

hey dont throw such accusations at me. im just explaining what i think is a more likely scenario.

You say that like abolishing net neutrality is gonna change anything to the fact that some area only get one ISP.
Not to mention the places where there is a choice but everyone is equally bad.

That's why you need a free market instead of the legal monopolies that are enforced by the (((government)))

kek

if you guys are lucky, maybe the creator of Iliad (Xavier Niel)
will do the same thing he did in his motherland (france) were he decide to create his own phone/cable company by instal his own lines instead of loaning it to Orange, bouygue, SFR and france telecom…

maybe you will join the master race of Internet, TV and phone for 29.99€ ( i guess 39.99 or 49.99$ ?)

i mean USA = american dream right ? land of the free and the brave ? so HOW THE FUCK does this still didn t happend ? was i fed with lies like you in your schools?

Everyone will be locked to the spectator team

user, the internet situation in france isn't exactly great, sure the price are rather low but it's still crappy DSL in 80% of the territory, fiber is slightly pricier and unmetered 100/100 fiber is closer to 45 bucks anything above that doesn't even exist for regular people afaik.
There's also the numerous instances of badly disguised throttling of certain sites by most ISPs (only OVH aren't faggots about that) and the different ISPs trying to fuck each other up with fiber installation contracts when they were supposed to cooperate so that the infrastructure is completely shared.

test onmy grandparent house speedtest.net/my-result/2937553518 they have fiber

As you mention it:
the issue is the "ither ISP strike back" with mafia's style tool. .
they use loby to force each city to adopt ONE fiber. they bribe the government and you end up with "you can t have fiber here because your city decide to go with numericable" (numericable is shitty as fuck and was a "toy" made by SFR group who in 2016 decide to shut them down to increase their coverage % when statistic came)

maybe i didn t understood you correctly but no.
internet, house phone line and TV is 29.99€ period (and all had to align to that price). Also:
^was always a thing since the beginning of Free.

the "mafia" behaviour is changing due to how much delay the conversion to full optic cable took because of it.

BTW in 2012 he did it again with mobile phone market.
before 2012 you had to spend 70-120€+ for an unlimited internet use on yourcellphone.
now it's 19.99€ maximum (14.99 if you are a free subscriber)
and the regular 20€ cellphone sub is not either 0€ (if free sub] or 2€/month with no engagement
they had some issue with poor connectivity because at 1st, while they were creating their own cellphone network they paid orange to use their. Orange try to sabotage them by giving thoses using "freemobile" the worst connectivity possible.free sued them won their lawsuit

but please note one fun fact:
free's 1st slogan was "freedom have no PRICE"
that must be the most "anti american" thing you can ever heard: "somethign without price" :^)

TL;DR
DSL and lack of total fibre coverage isn t Free's fault but the lobying made by all other ISP and the mafia's style kind of coverage. thus it cost so much money because instead of playing it cool "we make a whole and all ISP put their fibre cable" they went for territorial mafia-style coverage. each one fighting for exclusivity in X territory. many government official surely got their pocket full of money thanks to that, but the fibre coverage was delayed by so many years.
Thus the ministery of economy and development had to rethink the coverage schedule

Meanwhile over in Bongland we've got healthy competition between net providers, unlimited bandwidth as standard, and fibre internet avaliable to around 80% of the country.

Shame about all the sandniggers though.

who doesnt ? aside from 3rd world country?

Not sure about free but I distinctly recall some ISPs trying to make you pay extra if you wanted actually fiber worthy bandwidth instead of the default 100/10 or something like that, either by simply making the extra bandwidth some special option or trying to bundle useless shit with the upper tiers so that you have to pay extra.

>tfw 50 meters away from the first fiber deployment zone in my town, and can't get VDSL2 because reasons

Lot of US net providers put download caps on their services.

And surprisingly, some of the poorest countries actually have the fastest internet.

no free do nto do that that would be a scam. however its true that your speed depend on how far you are from the relay, the 1gb/sec i linked in download was because they were just 1-2block away from the relay (i use to download all my game there in mere seconds)

the only thing you can pay (+5€/month) with free is if you want your own personnal NAS with 200gb + some feature like controling your box with your phone creating parental and check logs and internet use (as if you were the boss of a company checking what yoru employer do with their computer, exept it only concern internet) great to spy on your daughter and check what porn she like and when she watch it … i guess but i do not have a daughter yet.

ow, your poor souls… how come you guys do not complain and/or force them to do so? where is the "mighty america" we are being sold accross all western country since WW2 ?

Literally all the ISPs in bongistan are shit apart from Virgin

You're a liar

Shame the Government apparently wants to ruin everything good about the internet.

Gonna go full inna-woods no step on snek mode if any of that dystopian shit passes.

One of the solutions I've seen is letting communities/towns/counties create their own internet/tv utility, usually paid by a monthly or yearly fee.

This was actually taking off in burgerland with a couple states, offering far better internet service than ATT or Comcast at really cheap prices. Every community that introduced this crushed those companies.
Comcast seeing a thread, lobbied the states this was happening in to make town/county owned internet services completely illegal, leaving them forced to buy internet service from these companies in the end. Think it was in Georgia and another state.

Comcast is fucking cancer and needs to be purged from burgerland.

citizen of burgerland have so much way to presure their government and win against the loby guns and yet they are the most docile and manipulated population in the entire word. not even germany is in that state.

A quick look at who supports this is enough. I swear some faggots will fall for it if they name something "supergood thing that will help".

...

Maybe the solution is for the United States to stop thinking that they own the internet, and that it's theirs to control. Just a thought, but maybe the problem is the country with the biggest amount of hypocrisy.

Well maybe if every other country weren't retarded we could trust you with the internet. Shit the only reason we surrendered control was because some kenyan faggot playing the black card two elections in the row thought it would mean trump couldn't use twitter anymore if he gave it away.
(It Didn't)

Jokes on you, I'm American. It's not like this is even a "trust" thing, it's all about the MPAA and the music guys. This isn't a "trust" issue. It's because of YouTube, a fucking website owned by an American corporation who changed their corporate policy from "Don't be evil" to "Jew the right thing." Cause you know, preserving the copyrights of dead fucking people is far more important than preserving the internet. And then there's the SJWs, who also want to censor the internet, which Google does as well with their fucking search manipulation.

So many things that we need to preserve, so many problems that we need to solve, and we're still too busy protecting the interests of the corporations.

Fuck off.
>>>Holla Forums

it's not hyprocrisy. USA and USA-capitalism is basicaly a pyramid scheme.
USA is one of the few country were you lietraly live to work. sio if course it s the country where their citizen have gun but do not have time to think.

you wanna create a business ? you gotta have the approval of the richer 1st. that s how a pyramid scheme work. no "breakthrough" by yourself. else it upset the balance **unless a totally enw market can be created thanks to a new technology

well to be fair americain are really good at conditioning their citizen… AND military.
For example: they will give you a medal even if you fuck up HARD
In 1988 Iran Air Airbus Flight 655 shot down by USS Vincennes due to a psychological trauma created by conditioning done to US soldier: aka
< shot down this plane he will suicide attak on our ship !
they came back to US, they still got a medal because
>IF it was a real attak their reaction was perfect
the level or "retardation" is fucking insane in burger land. USA really is "the baby with a grenade luncher"

did i mention a american citizen start his life with over 30k in debt ? for fuck sake, wtf

What the fuck are you talking about?

if you want to get a minimal chance to get decent job, you have to go to college and that put you in debt.
you start your life ( went your parent wont be here to shelter you pay your stuff etc. aka when you become an autonomous adult) with debt …

Oh, okay. When you say "start his life" I thought you meant the moment someone is born. Yeah the college thing has gotten so ridiculous that now there's college courses and degrees for CUSTOMER SERVICE. Wew, you need a $30,000 piece of paper to ask if someone wants fries with that.

I kinda get what you're saying saying but can those new ISPs use existing infrastructure or do they have to build their own?

they will have to buidl new one.
like i said: even in france if free wanted to break the chain of TV, house phone and internet: they had to create his own infrastructure. else he wouldn t be abble to put the services and the price he wanted if he was tied to Bouygue telecom and the other leaders.

and fun fact: he did all this using the money he got from erotic minitel "3615 ULLA "

How does it feel to be a nogunz freedom hating faggot who thinks anybody who owns a gun doesn't think?

I can't speak for Europe or Asia, but I can speak for America. In America (as in North America in this case, Canada is the same so far as I can tell), the cable companies built their own infrastructures using government money many years ago. Because they built it, even though the government paid them to, many of these corporations now claim to own those lines. But any one corporation doesn't own all of the lines exclusively, so there's this thing where the big 3 (Verizon, Comcast, and Time Warner) share lines in a mutual deal so as not to need to license it. Smaller ISPs exist by paying for usage of said lines from the big three. And the big three exist in both Canada and America, although Canada from what I've seen gets the short end of the stick, because they constantly deal in data caps.

Because it was built with government money, those lines should be for EVERYONE, and they should be public property. Everyone should be able to use those lines. But the big three have basically fucked around with it so that they can still control those lines, even though they don't truly own them.

This is why Google Fiber was so fucking slow to gain adoption, is because they had to lay their own lines to offer Gigabit (1000Megabits/second; aka roughly 125Megabytes/sec) connections without charging people more than $80. Google actually bought a tech company who had developed a beaming technology and now they're using beaming to spread internet much faster, and now fiber is easier to get because of it. Instead of waiting 5 years for the next state, they pretty much have increased pace exponentially because of it.

But the fact of the matter is, three companies are holding monopoly over those lines, and they don't like to play ball. When a state government ISP started offering gigabit connections for under $60, they tried to sue them. But thankfully the case was dismissed before it ever made it into a court. Cause the state was using what is technically public property to offer (at no financial gain) gigabit internet.

What the fuck are you talking about? The US did not have government control of the Internet to begin with.

This is how my commie country did things. The lines over here can be used by any company. can't complain though. We have plenty of choice and reasonable prices compared to the US and Australia for example.

Why is everything so jewy over there?

Because during World War 2 a narrative came to light that someone tried to kill off all of the jewish people. And now because they don't want to be compared to the ultimate evil they've been taught in school (the Nazis), because it makes them uncomfortable, no one wants to risk being called antisemitic. So they basically let them get away with it.

Why should property that some single entity pays to install, maintain. and expand become public property?

I'm no socialist or communist, but national socialism is usually used to protect the interests of the people by making it so that the people can not be exploited in the same way that the Medical, Entertainment, Military Industrial and Prison industries in capitalist countries tend to do.

By keeping all properties open and available to public interests, the idea is that you will stimulate people to better society, rather than only to benefit themselves. It kind of works, in a way, Cuba's got a lot of inventive people who have significantly improved the lives of Cubans. But on the other hand, because their government structure conflicts with the US, they've blockaded them several times throughout history (illegally, no less). So their country's exports aren't bought by their closest neighbors, and they're basically poor as fuck.

It's a nice idea being able to better all of society with ideas without anyone taking advantage of it and making it exclusively theirs, the problem is that part of the power in trade really does require big corporations.

can you say otherwise ?
you can play "freedom fighter yea baby 1st and 2nd amendment" in the middle of the desert.
you can play cowboy when a police officer arrest you because "if he ask me something that i am not legaly FORCED to do i wont comply and create tension"

you guys just do not think. that doesnt mean GUNS is what make you not think. its quite the oposit actually and i said it with the "USA is like a baby with a grenade luncher"

there are so many issue with your society and the way your work philosophy. Holywood is only here to keep you in the illusion, or at least give a good picture to the rest fo the world because:

working all day long and not have a familly life is unacceptable. I knwo that many father who work late are tired and conceed everythign to their kid to avoid crys (aka: zero education)

even in terms of politics.wtf is this? TWO CHOICES ? and the same at that. you vote for trumps (i supported him) then he announce Pence as sub (hype = lost)
and here is the result
< hey trump i bet you are to weak to drop bomb in syria
and cuckchan is defending it

I understand you guys to well (maybe because i have part of my family who live there)
It seems you basically just love shouting 1st and 2nd amendment because YOU KNOW that you have absolutly NOTHING without it. and it's sad.

your wife may even put you some horn when you are out working because similar to japan daily reminder that US is one of the biggest cuckhold/cheating porn producer with with japaneese's hentai (but to a lesser extent)
Your familly life come second²² and for many the Father is just a walking wallet (since it the only thing you can do if buy stuff)
instead of spending time with your child it seems you just buy their love with gift and present. this is a vicious circle who will make yoru child have materialistic value. As Mr goldberg wishes

i just have one question:

what is the point of the US government ? what does he do for its people ?
you have:

and if it do nothing, how come you don t have any revolt ?
all the revolution in europe happend at a time when their citizen felt unprotected by their government. they felt like the goverment was a parasite and overthrown them to create DEMOCRACY: a system by the people, for the people .

So what does it do ? assure free speech? your protection? i dont know you have gun and many love laws that allow you to shot someone for protection so … i guess you could protect your freespeech with it and by the way, many of you love be in confrontation with the police and be like
So its not like you see police as someone here to protect you but more like a sparing partner who can t do much aside from bearing your childish act or make a mistake that will expose him and give you a day or two of "E-celebrity
"
i really do not understand the purpose of the US government aside from puting shackes and overseeing the Pyramids scheeme you are all taking part and were the entry ticket is an upfront 30 000$ of college fee.

So please light beam me up Scotty if you manage to bear my awfull english and buggy keyboard

Do these retards also think that the DRoC is actually a democratic republic

It was inevitable.

Those aren't freedoms, infact, they impede upon freedom.

Net Neutrality sounds great on the surface, but over the years I've come to realize that all the wrong type of people (Democrats, Commies, SJWs, etc) are the ones pushing hard for it, and they are really just trying to get the government to control the internet, like they want it to control everything else.

You know where that shit leads to.

The entire media being controlled by so few entities definitely sucks, but don't think for a second that government control wouldn't be hundreds of times worse

good boy you learn your lesson well, now go to work !

seriously thought: it's impressive to see the effectiveness of the brainwashing you got.
you are seriously saying that a system that help you in case you are sick, or got injured or in general the government giving you insurance is "an impede upon freedom."
meanwhile you let the government do everything he want to block your freedom as long as it doesn t hurt your right to have gun&co

you really are a good slave. But hey, i wont try to change you that s why i just asked a question (sill unanswered)
i am just showing the hyprocrisy of some guys here who write like they Hate X but who in reality dream of being X … again: pyramid scheeme

(10)

SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED

Net Neutrality is the government controlling corporations so corporations don't control the internet. The government already has control over it through the FCC. NN is trying to stop ISP companies from charging you different rates for visiting different IP addresses, as if the internet were cable TV and websites were "channels" to be bundled.

Learn about shit before you talk about it.

s or nigger's(likely both) leech lifestyle is a good thing

(I'll grudgingly check those dubs)
If I get hurt, it's my fucking problem. Reminder that 20% of people always use 80% of healthcare
Most people who own guns (other than the Negotiate Rights Away) often will usually oppose other freedom hating bills, even those not pertaining to firearms, it's just that, like most other people, they are unaware of these bills, or uninformed as to what they really mean.
Let's say I don't like shitty video games. So I make a video game company which makes better video games, and therefore makes more money than the shitty video game companies. The consumer wins, because he now has better games, and my company wins, because I make more money.
This idea isn't hypocrisy, and benefits the consumer just as much as the company that makes the vidya. However, with ISPs, overregulation makes it impossible to make a new ISP that can feasibly compete against the already established cartel.
Also,
install spellcheck.

I'm afraid of what the world is turning into, Holla Forums.
The complete loss of privacy has never been more real, and the government is creating debt from nothing and making the citizens pay for it while they live in luxury.
I try to see a solution in all of this, and all i find is a tightly closed tangle of regulamentations and rules that do nothing but keep everyone down.

This entire thread is cancer. The amount of 'but muh free market' is disgusting. State regulation is crucial to the success of a free market, it's only when it becomes overbearing that it becomes an issue. The government telling ISPs that they can't control or snoop on what their customer do with their internet is not a fucking overbearing regulation, it's a pro-consumer common sense rule.

As someone who actually works in the industry, let me explain something to you chuckle fucks. These ISPs are making disgusting profit margins. They were paid billions back in the 90s to give proper internet to the whole country, pocketed it instead, and got away with it. They continue to push for more and more control over you and what you do online.

Basic rules about what ISPs can and cannot do with your internet connection is the very definition of 'reasonable regulation', right up there with making sure food manufacturers don't fucking poison you.

I have yet to see a single post against the ideas of Net Neutrality that made any type of real argument, just shrill cries of 'but it's all a kike plot user!' No. Fuck you. I work with these people. You don't know what they are like. You need these rules to protect you from them. These rules, along with them being forced to actually upgrade their networks, forced to compete with each other and not try and shut down new competition is what we desperately need for a healthy internet. We need all of it.

Now if only we had some type of organization that could force these companies do act responsibly as a business instead of fucking you in the ass until you bleed money. You know, someone who could 'govern' all the bullshit they do. If only.

Actually fucking kill yourself

I don't disagree with most of what you're saying, don't get me wrong, but on this one you're not completely wrong. Most private industry is a pyramid scheme of one sort or another.

There's one conglomerate who owns multiple corporations. Those corporations have child companies. Those child companies have businesses. Those are pyramids.

Even seemingly private small business can be a pyramid scheme (such as Avon, Mancave, etc). There's the company who has what is called "multi-level marketing," you know why they use that term? Because pyramid schemes are illegal, and you have to prove them if you want to call something a pyramid scheme. They keep coming up with tricky little fucking names for it.

But the way it works is thus, you have the top echelon the apex. This is the business, it's run by a small group. Those business partners then recruit a series of marketers. Those marketers will then buy product, and sell it. And here's the thing… They still have to pay royalties to the guys above them. And here's where the pyramid scheme gets its name.

Let's say at the Apex you have 1 business. At the first tier you have 3 marketers. Those marketers have to pay a percentage to the business, but they get promised that if THEY recruit more marketers, they can then get their own percentages. So those 3 then recruit 3 of their own marketers, or their "team" if you will. Now it's 1, 3, 9 on the rows. The business gets a percentage of all profits, the 3 get a percentage of their own 3. Now those 9 recruit their own 3 marketers and form their own "teams," and so it's now 1, 3, 9, 27. It triples every time, understand? The shape of a pyramid forms among the various tiers.

The business gets a percentage of the profits from the 39 marketers. The 3 marketers get a percentage of the profits from 12 marketers each. The 9 get a percentage of the profits from their 3. And it continues on. If you haven't figured it out yet, the guys who are paying for product aren't making money, in fact, they're paying money on the idea that someday they'll have their own team large enough that they can stop buying product and making money. The pyramid scheme is called a fucking scheme because it is a scheme. You want to know another form of pyramid scheme?

Old age retirement. You ever notice that old age retirement ages go up? They say "oh that's because people live longer, so they can work longer now." As if it's a benefit for them to be working at the age of 64, when their fathers retired at 55. When old age retirement and pensions were formulated, the idea seemed sound, you pay into this thing throughout your life, until it's time for you to retire. But the system was never made futureproof, because it can't be. The more people in the population, the more retirees. The more retirees, the less money. Ergo, the young need to keep working in order for the old to be able to keep getting money.

The boomers sold you out on a pyramid scheme, and continue to suck your blood while you grow old and embittered, and what do they do for it? They hate you, they show you enmity. They're living on your dime, living on your blood, and in exchange they treat you like old toilet paper.

We're all in a fucking pyramid scheme, and there's no god damn escape.

...

Well, there is a kind of final solution.

I suppose. You guys go first, I'll watch and take notes.

Boy, you sure told me.

Silly goyim, how are we supposed to abuse our customer base when we have a caring government watching for their well being? No, no, no, you NEED a free Market Goyim, no government intervention, government bad! I, the eternal merchant know what's best for you! No steppy on snekky, hehehehehe…

I hope this board dies and takes all of you with it.

Fucking this.

I hope you are just pretending to be retarded instead of falling for the bullshit that is NN. Good job falling for it though, people like you is how the internet got fucked over more and more.

Alternatively
>make new country the big question is how

user, what part of "That's not actually what's going to happen under net neutrality" is hard to get?

Holla Forums I D Y A G A E M Z

ISPs are the lesser of two evils, retard

If "she" wasn't saying "she" has a weird boner right, and it wasn't a trap, that picture might be cute. Fucking trap crap.

Communists and corporate cocksuckers both get the rope.

This

So, post some sources on what they actually trying to accomplish. Total FCC control of the internet? Solidification of ISP monopolies? What are they using this as a smoke screen for, don't just say 'they are up to something'. Of course they are up to something, they are always up to something.

That doesn't mean you just give up and take the ass fucking.

You know that the FSF has hundreds of their own patents, and that the reason that they stay in business is because big name companies pay them, right? Microsoft, Apple, Google, IBM, HP, Cannon… Richard Stallman and his friends all have 3 and 4 different salaries, which as a non-profit organization they have to report. You can look that shit up, it's public information.

Do you think the FSF runs on happiness and rainbows?

I fucking wish.

The reason NN is bad is because the ISPs would control it anyways, dipshit.

I'll check your boob get. Feels bad man.

It's almost as if I want to maintain the current balance between the government and the private sector in order to prevent either of them completely dominating it. The struggle between the two is necessary for the survival of the internet as we know it.

Are they paying you or are you doing this for free?

Nigger you can choose not to fund semitic business practices when you have a free market. But when you have a government which will inevitably be infiltrated by (((certain influences))), they will either grant (((legal monopolies))) or nationalise it. Government action screws over everyone because it's not voluntary. It discriminates against any small business that might in the slightest act as competition to these big companies

GIVE ME SMALL BUSINESSES HERE. I NEED BETTER INTERNET.

Oh man, all those ISPs fucking over their costumers in those countries without net neutrality! Wait a minute

Gib examples

Reminder a portion of your pay goes towards money reserved for bailing out jew banks and if you try to do anything about it, you get to spend the rest of your life in a concrete cell.

Korea doesn't have net neutrality, they're pretty good at censoring things. Porn is illegal, for example. But their internet speeds are fucking insane for the cost. I have a friend who's living in Korea as a teacher's aid right now, and he gets 100mb/s down, 30mb/s up for about $45.

Ohhh yeah, I have heard of that! Korea has THE best internet in the fucking planet.
Interesting take user….

Serbia

Bullshit. You'd have Crossed levels of rioting and mayhem in the streets.

...

It's probably just one of those laws that are there, but nobody is actually getting in trouble for breaking it
Kinda like lolicon. Some countries ban it, but people getting in trouble is extremely rare

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pornography_in_Asia#South_Korea
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pornography_in_Asia#North_Korea

In one country, you can go to prison for 10 years. In another, you can be shot to death with your entire family in front of the entire town, who must watch.

I only mean "Full stallman" as in "take the privacy measures stallman takes"

tbh, I don't know, and I can only really guess. I'd wager that they'll just cement the current way things are now, albiet with more expensive prices, shittier speeds, and more botnet.

"Net neutrality" will continue to be a red herring for all sides of the convo until people realize that the only real 'fix' needed is separation of infrastructure from services.
In countries without net neutrality (like those Eastern European countries with massive speeds), they knew the risk of the communist/bureaucratic/government appointed utilities.
What is done in most other countries is actual free market done right by separating infrastructure (poles, ditches, cabling), from Service providers (access to ISP machinery that connects into infrastructure).
When a pole-owner is 100% forbidden from touching the final customer i.e. regular jackoffs like you and me, their incentive becomes selling as much capacity to Service Providers.
In turn, Service Providers who buy capacity from Infrastructure Providers are incentivized to lower prices to get as many customers as possible. They also pressure Infrastructure Providers to increase capacity so that they can obtain more and more subscribers.
In the unholy scenario of the US, since ISPs often do both sides of the coin, they have 0 incentive to reinvest into their own infrastructure and, once granted regional monopolies, 0 dis-incentive not to raise prizes every time they feel like it.
"Net Neutrality" amounts to "Please daddy government, keep this shitty marriage of monopolies so ISPs can keep their profit, but keep my internet alone"
It's a fucking red herring that distracts from the main point.
Complete and non-negotiable separation of Infrastructure from Services for the benefit of the End User

According to gookanon people are getting actual jail time for looking at 2D porn, doesnt matter if its loli or not. Thats just the word of one user though so take it with a bag of salt.

Ah, well if you want to go there, just say full Zuckerberg. That guy is funny because he runs one of the biggest snoop and spy sites on the planet, but he's deathly afraid of surveillance and spying and he literally physically mods his laptops to disable and/or remove the webcam/microphones, he even puts in his own switches to turn off wireless internet because he doesn't trust the switches that they come with.

The guy is John McAfee levels of crazy about it. And he definitely doesn't use Windows.

I can see that being the case in some backwards banana republic, but I strongly doubt it's the case in SK
However, I'm just one user as well so take whatever I say with a bag of salt as well

There are gooks who got 10 years for playing Katawa Shoujo.

Dude, their president just got impeached because she had a cult as a shadow government.

It's not so much jail as fines too. Only when someone needs a headline would someone get jail. Usually it's "hey, no shitting dick-nipples allowed, pay the fine or go to jail".

Well fuck

Shitting hell, is South Korea a fucking caliphate?

Of course he's paranoid. The dude RUNS Facebook. Can you even imagine the kind of skeletons he has in his closet?

Child sex rings maybe

web.archive.org/web/20150929182519/http://www.forbes.com:80/sites/timworstall/2012/12/10/south-korea-attempts-to-ban-online-porn-emptying-the-ocean-with-a-bucket/ (archive.is didn't work)

user I'm sorry you're an illiterate anti-gun freedom hating cuck, but you need to quit posting here, also
And you say Americans don't think, wew.
It does nothing and that's why the federal government must be stripped down and that states need more control over their own government.
Please consider suicide since you have no idea what you are talking about.

...

Take it from someone who lived there for a few years, it's all true. Even the internet services available to American soldiers stationed at the few camps we have left over there have these same restrictions, but the ISPs that provide to them do a hell of a lot of site blocking to try to keep them from accessing anything "illegal" in the first place.
In the three years I was there, the only time I ever heard of an American getting in trouble over something internet-related involved idiots getting caught pirating shit in the barracks during an inspection. They left their laptops on with a torrent client open with active downloads and uploads going.

Why would a kike want competition?

He's true though, Net Neutrality it's like Obamacare.
Problem: health costs are too fucking high for loads o' people
Kike-approved Solution: mandate health insurance (ignoring that health insurance companies are kike-owned mechanisms that increased prices in the first place).

Net Neutrality
Problem: ISPs are increasing prices through the roof and violating basic privacy!
Kike-approved Solution: Net neutrality, so no info can be discriminated! (Ignoring that the real problem kike-owned ISPs are powerful is because of regional monopolies granted due to their ownership of infrastructure).

There are two opposites of net neutrality. There's monopoly, and then there's regulation. Regulation would mean that companies like Comcast/Verizon/Time Warner would lose their hold over the prices of the internet. Gigabit internet could become a standard. But on the other hand, it would mean the loss of control over the content you can view.

Net neutrality is supported by Google for more than they're letting on, if government could control the cost of internet, they could change the cost of Google Fiber, and then they'd lose what makes their business so profitable. Google censors and manipulates search results, they're not neutral right now. They've been caught dozens of times fucking with things to manipulate peoples' lives.

They act like they're all for net neutrality to protect the consumer, but maybe their intentions aren't so noble.

Google fiber doesn't make them much money. The only reason they entered it was because they were sick of Comcast throttling people's internet which by extension hurt them.

any sources?

This is an English only board you babbling shitskin.

The problem with american health insurance was that it was left up to the free market because burgers are retarded.

wheh

You a kraut? A frog? A slav?

He's probably american.

Other guy was a frog, I'm polish myself.

Also because shit's fucking spread out. You can read about the origins of Kaiser Permanent for example.

But of course, those days wouldn't last because of greed and hey, if it works in Bumfuck Nowhere and makes money, we're sure to make even more money in cities!
Then, once enough coverage was done through insurance companies, doctors who wouldn't play ball with the insurance system would be pushed out or forced into the system.

what the fuck are you smoking? what kind of king-tier disinfo is this? Net neutrality is GOOD for people that use internet. Only on 8ch have I seen threads where people that are literally benefitting from net neutrality by the mere fact they post on this site, start shitting on it like they don't have a clue what net neutrality means!

don't feed the shills

Problem: ISPs are increasing prices through the roof and violating basic privacy!

Kike-approved Solution: Net neutrality, so no info can be discriminated! (Ignoring that the real problem kike-owned ISPs are powerful is because of regional monopolies granted due to their ownership of infrastructure).

neither of those two things, isps raising prices, and monopolies, has anything to do with net neutrality. net neutrality is what's been around since the internet was invented. if you get rid of it, the internet as you know it now, will cease to exist. it will be like expensive cable, with a few providers giving you content they have made deals with, and all you can do is ingest it and have no input or real participation in the internet anymore.

Read your post over and realise that you provided absolutely nothing of substance.

((("net neutrality"))) != actual net neutrality

When was the last time you saw a legit user use tor?

As I stated above, net neutrality is a prevention of competition that's good for the consumer
If there were 20 choices for Service Providers in an urban area, the first SP that dicked around like Comcast does would fall as customers moved elsewhere.
Infrastructure must be separated from Service

It changes nothing.

FUKKEN CHECKED!!!!

Newfags need to fuck off

...

it's the cheapest bait cmon

net neutrality is not an either/or with monopolies. like i said before it has nothing to do with monopolies. there are other laws meant to deal with that. repeat, net neutrality has NOTHING to do with protecting a monopoly. NOTHING.

Okay, so get the monopoly laws working and get that fixed. meanwhile, fight for net neutrality so you can have an internet.

In here is where mistrust of government comes in user.
Fight for net neutrality. Sure, as a concept.
As legislation? Fuck that noise. I don't trust any legislation effort as far as I can throw it.
Reminds me of the privatization of Social Security attempts in the Bush years. Everyone pointed to Chile as a success!
However, when Chile did their retirement changes they had just come out of a Fascist period, and they wanted to get shit out of government and into free markets. So they privatized their retirement, but with a shitton of regulations to protect regular people's investments. They had to or the hot-blooded revolutionary sentiment would probably hang a few politicians.
But in the US? Would you have trusted the politicians of that period to pass good 401k improvements and modifications of Social Security? Fuck no.
Same with Net Neutrality.
The concept: fucking awesome, good stuff, that should happen.
The legislation: How about fuck and no.

Is it hard for you to get that this the NN pushed by the govt isn't actual net neutrality?
You're not from around here, get the fuck out.

but understand, without legislation the ISPs will go ahead and cut deals with cable companies and start giving you "free downloads" and "no bandwidth usage" on the content they shill to you, while putting 8ch and all the sites you love to visit in the slow lane. then what will you do? you won't even HAVE a decent working website or forum to gather together with anyone to fight against it because they'll all load at a rate of 1kb per minute!

then why are you calling it net neutrality and arguing AGAINST … um… net neutrality? Have you been outfoxed by your government or the ISPs? Have they proposed legislation that has nothing to do with NN but called it that, to confuse the public and make you and everyone else fight against what is good for the internet consumer and give the big ISPs more power, and actually KILL net neutrality?

user, we understand that without your dream legislation, ISPs will keep on fucking us over like they already are.
Again, that's not the point.
The point is that you would NEVER get your dream legislation passed. You'd get a gigantic steamy turd of giveaways to ISPs and other lobbying players.
It's a monkey's paw AT BEST.
< but regional monopolies are now set in stone
< but prices keep increasing at a breakneck speed

ice dubs btw and yea setting up an english spellcheck bores me but i will try to be more carefull, at least regarding my buggy keyboard
for something like health you must be stupid to think you wont get hurt and be sick
plus if the government pay you have the government strenght to presure the health industry and make price drop. (that is what a government for the people is)

and obviously: stop your sophistic logic: the drug addict do not get healthcare. just like the whore who do abortion each week end because its cheaper than buy contraception.

your logic is so wrong that it make no sense:
why would i pay taxes ?

Put it in simpler terms:
Net Neutrality is important and good. Sure.
But then, why the hell would you ever trust the disfunctional government we have now to pass a good bill protecting it?

< but regional monopolies are now set in stone

< but prices keep increasing at a breakneck speed

pink text and green text, AGAIN, have nothing to do with each other. You can fight for net neutrality and also fight for fair prices and more competition. the two are not mutually exclusive.

And you're missing the point.
Only dumb niggers would be against the concept of Net Neutrality.
But only a dumb nigger would trust legislation that pretends to protect "Net Neutrality".
Oh sure I can fight for Net Neutrality. And then the law gets written, and it's a piece of shit, and I get lumped into a politician's speech about how "it's what the people want" so that an abortion of a bill gets passed.

Nope.

This discussion about Net Neutrality is inseparable from the discussion about trusting Government processes.

Let's not forget whatever other cancerous legislation would be amended to any such bill. My guess is it would be more foreign aid pork under the guise of "lifting third worlders out of poverty by providing the US taxpayer subsidized internet access" or some shit.

But concepts are just empty glass, you're asking corporations to abide to a concept. That's fucking retarded, you need laws to make certain agencies and groups abide to ideals. It'll never be perfect, but if we're only allowed to pass perfect laws, no laws will be passed and we only have lofty concepts, which humans have proven incapable of living up to time and time again.

And I agree, that laws necessitate agreement and compromise. Of course!
But then why expend all of that energy jacking off about Net Neutrality when instead we can name the Jew:
Legislate a separation of Infrastructure from Services
You touch a cable, a ditch, or a pole? You never fucking touch individual customers, only businesses you sell capacity to.
You touch an individual customer? You never fucking touch a cable or a pole, only purchase capacity from pole-lickers.

All that is great to fight for, but why does net neutrality as it is have to die in the meantime? Wouldn't it be prudent to keep it in place until newer, better laws come in so there's protection against predatory tactics?
Net neutrality going defunct should scare you because there's nothing to replace it with, cheering the loss of a rusted shield when you have no good shield ready to leap to your hand seems premature

Just because they haven't tackled the main problem doesn't suddenly mean I now want to give ISPs the right to throttle traffic and set up fast lanes on a whim. I'm really not following the logic here.

At least learn to speak proper english then get back to me, OK Holla Forums?

you really, trully are a good goy for thinking that way but that's why /pol is hillarious

Maybe we need to give NN a new name.

Which is why I should pay for the doctor.
Now you're just putting words in my mouth, taxes for things such as roads are sensible, healthcare/a protection net is not, because inevitably a minority uses the majority of it.
Minarchist Liberatarian.
Could you elaborate?
Which is illegal for a reason.
I seriously doubt hgames make more money than legitimate games.
Touche, but you will have something to start off with. Now with the money from the previous game, you make more better games, until you're at the level of a triple-a co
Those who just envy X sure as most likely will, but if you wanted to be X not primarily because of power, you *might* end up as a better X, or at the very least producing a better product/service that X originally did.
That's just an example of pure incompetence.
Here's the thing, the guy who actually makes the game has to have Mr. X with him, because Mr. X is the guy who's actually in charge. Mr. X wants the game to be good because that makes him a profit, if the game is shit, he loses sales. The devteam want to make a good game because of artistic vision. So long as Mr. X doesn't give a shit about what's in the game, only what result is, the consumer should theoretically be getting what they want. Problems arise, however, when Mr. X tries to meddle with what the devteam is doing, trying to get them to copy another devteam, which ends up leading to a stagnant market, which fucks shit up
This isn't bad for the company mind you, it's just that many incompetent people in charge usually make the mistake of *only* wanting lowest common denominator. So long as it turns out a profit margin, Mr.X shouldn't meddle with what devteam is doing.
At least we can agree on some things, even though the way we want them solved is completely different.

You're not as incognito as you think you are, you know. Feel free to go back to your sorry excuse for a board anytime.

i- … cant you not? i just make a small parenthesis and explained it just below… read everything then answer.
star citizent, of if you want outside videogame stuff:
hyperloop, solar roadway, self filling water bottle ..
there are tons of way to make a scam give you money by just playing on hype and ignorance.
really once you do that what is stoping you from making a hyped video, get fund, use 25-50% of that money to make a product that barely works just to avoid refund (self filling water bottle is a great example of that)
even this douchebag of fenoxo makes 30k/month patreon.com/user?u=121401
and you will realise what attrition is. big company make their shitty game and drop it when it still barebones to avoid attrition to avoid paying their employer "full price for details" and thus making more profit.
No, Mr.X wants the game to be profitable. why do you think activision ubisoft and EA are still here? they make game and realeas them ASAP when the quality is just enouth that people will be like "meh … ok".
This is what you do not understand: you are being delusionnal MR X will cut and put a deadline NOT depending on the game but on the total money spent on the development until the deadline. He want a profitable game and Mr.X aint a gambler he won't be gambling on making the ultimate game and hope it will sell more than it just being "OK"
freelancer was an example of that i some way.
youtu.be/IHUbzzKJXBc?t=6m1s
And now chris roberts is doing it again and you get the full power of attrition in your face. and look at the result ?
you must understand that:
Mr.X do not care about making a great game for it to be sold, he just want to make a game good enouth with the least ammount of money to be sold enouth
and thats the case pretty much for everything even in movies since FF.the spirit within.
They decide to make something exeptional and even aim to make Akki be the "1st world real fake actress" (waiffu anyone?) and it failed. here too, they had attrition issue along with retarded fanbase
it does but only 1-5% of the people cares.
look at the sales of battlefront1, look at the sales of every CoD and battlefield since battlefield 3
again MR.X KNOWS that you don t NEED to make a great game for it to be sold. People will buy it anyway.

you should go back

P.2
it is if you plan to make the greatest game of that niche … because you wont bring enouth customer to ever finance your development cost.
They do this to increase the customer pool. and by doing so they even manage to reduce development cost: less feature, more simple game attract more casual stuff.
well that was my initial statement on my initial post. who then end up with my question:
you guys are just brainwashed by Mr X. he makes you OVERLY individualistic because that s how you avoid any "revolt" you have a government but they make you think the government shouldn t help you in any way insert freedom card here …. they should help and safeguard him instead. daily reminder that NO revolution, NO changement was done by a single man exept in hollywood movies
And you are praising the government for that, you are praising them for helping thoses who abuse of you be it the cable company or anything else.
you think you are free but you arent you are just as free as the slave working on the field. he too feel the breeze, he too see the sun, feel the heat, jump around and sleep under a roof shed at night. but that s now what make him free. and you cant see it you can t see or grasp what freedom is because you have been formated to think true freedom is working for your master and earning your master's goodwill.
you can't see or touch freedom, btu they sure will make you think so with "freedom if the right to have guns" (as if gun were only available in the US) i took this as an example because it's the most famous

again: what is the purpose of US government aside from spying on you and protecting big corporation ?
oh because you plan to create and be the next big corporate ?
too bad try again you gotta walk on the line, that s who the pyramid scam works
The state, instead of making so that you are protected against abuses: they make sure the pyramid scam works well for everyone and you are praising them for that.

kind of remind me of the french government by holland who decide to offer reduction in company's taxes hoping that they would employ people. powered by an Asshole CEO with a pins " one million of employment"
guess how many he employed ? Zero
but he did make more money since he had less taxes. hurray! when the government don't protect you everything is better right?
well yea .. for Mr.X at the top of the pyramid. not you.
and if you want to reach the top, dont worry you will have to go through a processus that will corrupt you and you may become the next Emannuelle macron.
else ? just stay down.

but goyim whats good for the rich is good for you

Once ISP companies can place paygates arbitrarily, they'll put them everywhere. Want to play a game online on a server affiliated with a competitor? - $5/minute connection fee.

Basically, it'll be like the early days of dialup internet all over again, where there was no net neutrality and companies DID gate everything that way. We've seen it before, so we know exactly what to expect. Racking up a $1000+ internet bill in a single month will once more be a reality.

It looks like Earth, but it's actually hell. Everyone here should already be intimately aware of that fact, though.

If that were true, then how come it didn't happen prior to Net Neutrality being passed? And I don't mean at the early stages of the internet, what I mean is - if this were so profitable of a move to take then why did this method not continue despite still being perfectly legal at the time?
The only case where something even remotely close happened was Netflix being throttled by Comcast, which actually got away with it even after it passed because they could argue in court that it didn't violate the law. On top of that it was Netflix that got punished under Net Neutrality because it throttled its data on mobile devices to ensure people don't waste fuckhuge sums of money due to how expensive data on phones is.

I have 2-3 ISPs near me and I am not even in the city, I chose my ISP because it was the one that actually had fiber and was cheaper then what I was paying for 200 megabits. Im just very lucky I guess but shits comfy.

Checked, also the interesting thing about optic fiber is that the lack of competition means ISPs can afford to make it MORE expensive than ordinary cables despite the fact that optic fiber cables are cheaper and they can be certain that nobody else will decide to charge less than for regular cables, effectively forming a cartel. Meanwhile in Eastern Europe and Scandinavia people can get internet that is a hundred times faster while still being cheaper than even the shittiest internet in the US.

They put fiber in the area I lived a year ago and I just now switched. Its one of the bigger companies who I know is sending shit to the NSA but a VPN with OpenNIC DNS usually solves it. Using that shit reminds me of using my old internet which was pretty fast before they put fiber here.

Holy Shit so many people in this thread are retarded and don't fucking know what Net Neutrality is.

The problem already exist, numerous company have been known to violate Net Neutrality. Att&t blocked 4chan and Comcast blocked all use P2P services once for fuck's sake.

Not actually the cities that Google Fiber comes to already have fiber optics cable they were just not in use referred to as "dark fiber", the cities usually just gives Google the fiber. It's still a difficult process though for many reasons.

Thank you

It's literally not that at all. It's just basic regulation that stop ISPs from fucking over their costumers.

What you want which is for ISPs not to own the lines isn't mutually exclusive with Net Neutrality.

To make an example say the FDA wants to regulate the meat packaging industry to prevent unhealthy practices. People oppose this because a few companies own special roads that are needed for meat packaging and say the roads shouldn't belong to those companies and that if they didn't more competition would come and that'll fix the unhealthy practices. In that situation if you only choose one instead of both you end up with problems. If you choose only to regulate the have oligopoly that can get away with bad service and horrible prices. If you choose to only free the infrastructure you still have companies with bad practices just more, with no force to maintain a certain standard it could become the acceptable industry standard overtime because of it's ubiquity.

That why we both man.

I wasn't perfectly legal, it was in a legal gray area. So that why they stuck to prioritizing sites and services.

That doesn't answer the question why they at one point did do it and at another did not. Even for legal gray areas you would have people that do it convinced that they can argue their point, yet for this one you didn't have a "$5/minute connection fee" and "paygates arbitrarily…everywhere" from anyone. For example, if killing someone in a contractual duel were a legal gray area, you would as a result still have people conducting contractual duels even if less than previously, but for this you have NOONE doing it prior to Net Neutrality. The only thing that had been going on was silent throttling of competition, and even that was incredibly rare, paygates against certain sites and competitors on the other hand did not.

S H I G G Y

so instead of breaking up the monopoly, we should put more regulations to keep the monopoly in place?
sounds really nice, sign me up.

Outright charging people for sites is insane and is PR suicide that why I highly doubt ISPs would do it right out of the gate without Net Neutrality. They'll wait until the public is used to not having Net Neutrality and slowly creep it in like saying "extremely fast speeds on Facebook, Hulu" like how we're mostly normalized to datacaps. The more likely and immediate future is they won't charge on the costumer side instead they'll charge the sites and make deals with them, this has already happen actually. Microsoft made a deal with Comcast in the past not to count Xbox Live to costumer datacaps.

In short ISPs have already been dipping their toes in those water and usually get pushed back by consumers or the law but with this they'll be no Net Neutrality or grey area and they'll slowly get away with their bullshit.

Forgot one thing

It not rare at all they're been numerous cases of throttling and other violations of Net Neutrality, I already mention some extremes and there's also the throttling on individual "heavy" costumers especially during peak times.

But people were ALREADY used to not having Net Neutrality prior to having Net Neutrality. The only reason most people even heard about Net Neutrality was because of John Oliver's shitty show putting it into the spotlight. People were already used to being forbidden BY LAW to have a different ISP so I am not exactly keen on buying the idea that "just not ready for it yet" applies.
It also happened with Netflix. In the legal case between Netflix and Comcast on Comcast throttling Netflix, and mind you this is AFTER Net Neutrality was passed, Comcast still got away with throttling Netflix, thus forcing Netflix to pay them to stop throttling their services.

I worded it badly I meant living in world where they don't pay for internet fast lanes, the average person doesn't know about Net Neutrality but they'll understand paying for sites.

Also Prior to Net Neutrality there was still a possibility of saying fuck you to ISPs and it meaning something. Before the 2010s along with the legal grey area less people use the web and the people who did wouldn't tolerate it but now with the advert smartphones, social media & streaming the amount people who casually use the web has increased drastically. Along with that is the impeding death of television which ISPs who are usually cable companies make most of their money off of making them much more desperate to squeeze money out of internet which is actively costing them.

Hope I explained that properly. Last time

Mind linking a credible article(s) I legitimately interested and am wondering if there missing details because from what I've heard Netflix has tried to skirt around Net Neutrality to get ISPs to prioritize them.

There's a lot of problems but not having enough government subsidized programs isn't one of them.

that's because net neutrality has nothing to do with the fucking ideas of net neutrality
not to mention that it's a step in the wrong direction, instead of regulating shit by breaking up the fucking monopoly we tax on more protections with a Trojan horse of being able to regulate the internet as a whole? great fucking idea.
(you)

Can't find many articles that easily due to the fact that links saying Netflix is being throttled drown out the links talking about the actual end-result, but here's one, even if incomplete.
consumerist.com/2014/02/23/netflix-agrees-to-pay-comcast-to-end-slowdown/
Do you mean the shit with AT&T?

Recently I've seen people making a petition to make net neutrality not die, because cable companies will buy every fucking popular site and charge you for just visiting. What are they trying to imply?

Net neutrality is merely a concept, and it is not in direct opposition to any sort of free market principle that would serve to break up these "cartels". I don't understand how you people can't understand that.

The law isn't just a concept, it's a fucking law. And it holds all the pitfalls putting more fucking regulations on industry holds. If there weren't a fucking monopoly, we wouldn't be having this discussion, because the free market would fix this issue the second someone tried to throttle websites and implement tiered services. Someone else would step in and compete by not being Jewish, but mandating it only serves as another red fucking tape that businesses have to cut to access the market. Monopoly only exists through government means, and giving that shit law makes it stronger, but in order to break up the monopoly you must, and I repeat, must break up any laws they have to protect them, which is why the law version of net neutrality must be dismissed. It's merely a step in the direction of freeing the market, and busting the monopoly.
Tl;Dr Bureaucracy impedes free market and creates/protects monopolies, adding more paperwork behind it won't do shit
I don't understand how (((you))) people don't understand that.

...

...

I understand this, but this concept can come about if there's competition, having a law forcing it is meaningless, which is what this fucking thread is about.
If you can't fucking realize what a thread is about, maybe it is you who should kill yourself.

Maybe I didn't word that right.
The thread is about the law that is now gone, not the concept of net neutrality suddenly not existing.

HA, look where that ended up
>B-but, the (((jews)))
How convenient, getting rid of jews solved all the worlds problems!

kikes creating (((intellectual property))) and passing regulations to strangle competition?