Net Neutrality

They can charge you extra now if you are acessing websites that aren't kosher.

Fuck off

They can outright block Holla Forums for you.
And VPN services.
And tor.
Whatever the fuck they want.

Its a possibility an ISP can blacklist a site, but it is most likely they will just throttle traffic so everything will be slowed to a crawl.

so it did pass?

No it is being voted on December 14th.

Google, Apple, Facebook, Netflix, Amazon, Microsoft, Steam, Etc. will now have to pay hundreds of millions of dollars per year to Internet Service Providers because of all the data they transmit

...

Sucks to be in Westernland or the Americas I guess.

They could have done that from inception until 2015. Never happened. BUT WHAT IF!?!?
LOL

Sure thing user, tor is used only for two things, getting sick IDs and cheesing pizza, isn't it?

they legally couldn't

this

That explains the child porn part and cruel onion very well, step on snek

Just because the kikes didn't think of new ways to kike it up before doesn't mean they don't want to do them now that they realized they could charge you extra to access youtube at normal speeds.

extremetech.com/computing/186576-verizon-caught-throttling-netflix-traffic-even-after-its-pays-for-more-bandwidth

Maybe stop being an oblivious faggot and pay attention to the news every now and then.

Next level jewery is being encouraged now so it is going to ducking happen.

literally the only thing happening is the 1st one.

and instead should be "FCC is relinquishing control of the internet" and the bunch of faggots are shouting "NO" because theyre terrified that companies might do this stuff assuming they wont lose all sales or be replaced by satelite and other services just like cable.

but removing it from FCC control prevents the "current administration" or obama 2.0 and NSA from having absolute control over the internet and whos allowed to bring us internet.

for the first time i can recall, our government is attempting to release their control of something, and we're calling them monsters for not wanting to regulate it anymore.

"net neutrality" is just another way of saying "government control of the internet". but good job helping soros and his cabal of jews and corporations seize control of the internet by putting it under government regulation that they'll be able to control with lobbying.

It happens in poortugal, ISPs are selling "special" 4G packages for popular mobile apps. No laws to prevent it, they will just kike harder from there.

Do you know what an oligarchy is?

The Internet is a right.

The government should control it so it can't be censored.

Down with big business.

Net neutrality forever!!

yes, hence why we should get the FCC as far from the internet as possible.

right, because the government would never implement a massive censorship operation and get ISPs to cooperate based on their political leanings without any outside input or letting the people know.

you were kidding about that, right?

Oh no not Netflix. How will I watch my Soros-brand shows?

Reddit, Facebook, Google, Twitter and Soros are all pushing NN. Why should I trust them?

Meh, that's a shame but my level of caring is fairly low right now.

I hope all you fuckers that wanted it to end are happy now, I hope you burgers will enjoy getting $1000/month plans to browse the internet and having threads take a day to load thanks to throttling.

Do you know what game theory is, and how it applies to Oligopolies?

Those are just unlimited plans for specific apps. No throttling.

In more general news, if anyone actually cares about keeping companies fair, ignore net neutrality and focus on making data cables a public utility, much like water pipes and powerlines

THEY WILL SHUT DOWN CHANS

Good. If you can't afford a truly free internet then you don't deserve it, you commie fucks.

Can I get an amen?

...

You retard. It's just a regulation on the ISPs, not the internet. Now the ISPs control the internet.

See you have some good points in there, and if we were in a truly free market for internet services I might even agree with you but we are not. We are strangled by a government backed monopoly keeping the. Incompotent ISPS afloat and keeping new competition out. These are the same Jews who were given billions to update their failing infrastructure and just pocketed the money instead of improving serrvices, people like Comcast don't care about service and only want to bleed everyone for what they can get and this bad deal passing declares open season on everyone who uses the internet for business or entertainment.

I thought the vote on this wasn't until December. Having a draft of this doesn't mean anything until then, right?

...

Another win for Trump!

government releasing their claws from the internet is definitely a win.

its like pottery

you say that, then act like lobbying doesnt exist. without FCC control then people can fights ISPs on a case by case basis and boycott, etc. FCC has the power to mandate these types of controls and legislate it. they can force ISPs to throttle traffic to certain websites. and they can force "public services" to get cleaner services. think about this for a minute.

Didn't you know? Trump is a Republican and Republicans are NatSoc's somehow so this is good. Democrats are pro net neutrality and they're the baddies so we KNOW net neutrality is gommie shit.

More likely that they block p2p protocols like Bitorrent.

There is a phrase about infant fowl that would be highly appropriate here.

Wtf I love Democrats now.
FUCK TRUMP!

The only thing I can think of is without regulations competition will lead to lower prices but that's ignoring that every ISP is going to go way, way up in cost

Sure! That isn't good either I guess!

Save the Internet!!!

Are your isps that bad? Ours appeared after commie times ended. Each town has several isps. The big ones provide bad service so you go local. 9 bucks a month for decent speeds otherwise.

It means you get to inspect the rusty dagger before it gets shoved inside you.

So you are implying the apathetic masses will be able to hold the ISP companies in check? This sounds hopelessly naive

I guess I have to spell it out for you since you're retarded or a shill.
Nowhere in this picture is "government control of the internet"

Trump is going to kiss second term goodbye.

Government regulation of evil corporations is the best way available to keep the Internet free for everyone!

Yayyyyyy!!!!!!

Holy shit, what's with the drive-by anti-Trump shills?
You get butthurt from being called a kike on Holla Forums, so now you have to try and astroturf Holla Forums?

Trump put the Pajeet in charge of the FCC. Trump indirectly is getting rid of Net Neutrality through the Pajeet. People are pissed, he's not likely going to win another term thanks to this blunder.

people think because the FCC sneakily took control of the internet with the help of soros funded shills and reddit, and they've had control of it for a few months, that they'd never do anything wrong in the near or distant future, so removing that control is objectively bad.

the FCC chairperson is basically saying "we dont want to control this anymore" and we're begging them to continue their control?

when do you think we're going to get this chance again when the FCC starts overreaching and doing something horrible? future generations are going to call you faggots for ignoring this opportunity. "they had the chance back then and gave it up for netflix and youtube!"

there are so many ways to access the internet. so many alternatives. competition between them is crazy.

apathetic masses forced them to take control of the internet under obama.

where i live there are 4 different ISPs i can choose from, not including all of the satellite and phone carrier options.

soros is paying people to shill for your stupid idea.. literalyl nobody is being paid to shill against it.
next try to argue that the government doesnt control broadcasts like television and radio.

do you have any idea how stupid your argument is? they cant throttle bandwidth because people and companies will fight with eachother. do think netflix will want their shit throttled? do you not remember how that fight turned out? do you not know that the FCC can mandate legal and enforce censorship on ISPs?

In about 5 months when we repeat this same situation over again.

top wew, lad

You're telling me one issue out of hundreds will cost him an election 3 years away?

So what's going to happen when some (((concerned human rights group))) writes several ISPs about this evil nazi hangout called Holla Forums causing it to get throttled by everyone? Netflix had big money to back itself up and if need be, they'd probably go over the lawsuit again because that's their business model. They make money off their service. Do you think that imageboards will be able to put up as much of a fight as well? What ISP will say "no, those anons from imageboards deserve a place on the net too?"

PLUMPF IS FINISHED

He will never get that second scoop now.

Try harder.

Shills are at it again. Or do these people take their queues from Steven Crowder or some other controlled opposition memer?

consistent with the Supreme Court’s holding in Brand X.
Imagine an electricity company that stopped being a public utility.

what the fuck do you think is going to happen to archive?

soros wont give up this fight. he'll keep dumping money into it. they need to rebrand net neutrality and call it something else so morons and redditors will understand, or atleast feel weird about criticizing it.

are you new to the internet? serious question. how old are you?
are you implying those same groups cant write the FCC? keep in mind, you can go to jail or be fined for cursing on the radio.

Remember kids: The only reason you don't have to pay extra for clean water in addition to grey water is because its a utility.
If the internet doesn't stay a utility they charge extra for whatever they want. This could effectively destroy the internet and all the progress we've made.

Cute. The only people who ending net neutrality helps is ISPs and giant websites. Nobody would defend it unless they are stupid or paid.

I think they want their competitors throttled. Which is exactly the kind of shit that can happen without NN.

And yet you have to pay extra for clean water. What person actually believes that spicket water is actually pure? Pure water has to be bought from the store, otherwise most people would get diarrhea from their public water source.

look up con-ed in NY. its a government mandated monopoly. its illegal to compete with them. the way around anti-trust laws is that con-ed provides electricity "supply" but youre forced to pay con-ed "service" charges, which are often higher. so what does con ed do? they sell the supply at 0 profit. which makes them the cheapest alternative, but it doesnt violate anti-trust because you technically have more expensive options that arent allowed to make money off of service fees.

no it doesnt. the opposite is true.
yes, im sure verizon would love to throttle themselves. dumbass.

You don't get it dude. All corporations are pure evil! If the water company can't get a few extra dollars from you for providing clean water, they're just going to let you drink poison water or die from dehydration!

forgot to mention. while i had con-ed. my electricity bill in a single bedroom apartment was about 600/mo in the summer with air conditioning. 200 would be the "supply" charge… like the cost of the actual electricity, then $400 would be the delivery charge.

i've moved to a larger house in a different area where we have other electricity providers. my bill hasnt gone above 100

At last I truly see.

Well to be fair, if Net Neutrality is killed, sites in which support for overwhelmingly for Trump will probably suffer as a result, as their content will be deemed "offensive".

If there aren't a ton of SJWs already infesting major ISP providers, there will be if Net Neutrality is killed, chomping at the bits to regulate the content we're allowed to access.

ISPs want it because it allows them to charge more for 'premium' services.
Say youtube, pay for the Youtube package.
But they also throttle the speeds of other video sharing sites, especially newer ones that can't really stand up against them.
Also means if a company like Netflix doesn't pay up they can slow it to a crawl to basically strongarm them.
They could also just not allow access to websites entirely.

Big websites also want it because they can pay the fee to be usable and just pump in ads to make it back.
But their competition can't, meaning they get a monopoly on their services.

About the only possible good thing is if basically everyone drops major ISPs and websites to allow smaller ones without restrictions to pop up. But thats almost certainly not going to happen. This is mostly a bill to make money for big companies and put a stranglehold on information.
Granted fuck all we can do, but still.

This too, because lol you pay for it so its not public! Thus not free speech applicable.

You're also implying the standard internet user will be in a higher position of power than they currently are. It sounds more likely that big corporations can court ISPs even more directly now, record companies and networks can finally shill hard enough for things like Pirate Bay and Kickass to be blocked for good instead of just trying to take down their domains, sites like Holla Forums can be taken down for virtue signalling reasons where they can show they take a 'Hard Stance on Internet Hate', and any forums for discussion that do survive the purge will be slowed to a crawl while Facebook can keep being top dog as a form for social interaction for the masses.

But hey, in your ideal best of all possible worlds we'd all be winners in these conditions because we made the government give up something right?

Governments been trying to stamp out the Internet for decades. By bringing in this shit they can force ISP's to crush any websites that dare question the government narrative, and crush free speech like a paper cup.

It's also literally impossible for most people in the US to drop major ISPs and join smaller ones because the major ISPs have successfully lobbied laws into legislation that make the barrier-to-entry in starting an ISP so expensive only mega-corporations can do it. Not to mention the collusion between them all at the top.
Net Neutrality is a necessary bandaid on a bulletwound thanks to ISP Jews.

Thats already happening with sites that provides services, like Google, Facebook, Twitter and Youtube doing purges over bad thinking during 2016 and this year.
If its not the ISP, its the company hosting the site that'll do the service.

...

But without NN it will be harder for new sites to compete with them.

When did government regulation come to be viewed as freedom? This legislation that "protected" americans through the FCC was in place for TWO YEARS. It was enacted because Netflix was overburdening their carrier and the ISPs wanted to satisfy their bandwidth requirements. I see people acting like pre-2015 internet was run by anti-consumer ISPs attempting to control the content we see regardless of how it would have damaged their profits.

"Don't you remember the internet in 2014 and how the ISPs throttled us all to death?! OY VEYYY"

The most likely thing that's gonna happen is huge bandwidth sink are gonna cost extra now,
What's the point in throttling niche sites with potentially higher concentrations of tech savvy people that could bypass throttling? unless they start throttling any and all traffic that isn't http but I seriously doubt it
Little to none.
But if you start throttling Facebook/Youtube/Netflix/Twitter you better fucking believe you'll rack in the cash instantly because people are retards and can't live with that shit anymore

Anyways the pajeet from the FCC put it best the biggest enemies of "an open internet" is and always was the big companies that decide what you should be able to say and do on the bigger platforms.

Finally lets not kid ourselves net neutrality was barely a thing to begin with, I'f be surprised if the vast majority of the thread hasn't experienced throttling in some way before, and also every single people that deals with caps which is basically the thing ISP¨used to bypass net neutrality.

Stop using false equivalences the faggot who tweeted that needs to be shot for not even attempting to translate the website like the rethoric pushing Amerinigger he is.

Tap water is generally cleaner than bottled water in most parts of the United States.

The cleanest brands of bottled water, like dasani, are actually tap water.

>regular r/VEE shills users calling out muh Holla Forums boogeyman in their first post without replying to any specific "Holla Forums" post
Really regulates my connection

Things will not change much no matter what happens.

So when is the vote on the repeal happening anyway?

Go back to cuck/pol/ you fucking nigger

Why is America braindead when it comes to internet? Seriously, how the fuck is your internet worse than third world?

tbh ive been looking for an excuse to have pirate internet access like the old days of pirate radio.

centralized jewish interests

Google, Facebook, and Twitter can't stop me from accessing Holla Forums.

Comcast can.

Why are you here if you have to ask that question?

4chan, and even Holla Forums, did just fine before the implementation of NN in 2015.

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but

Do I understand this correctly?

donald cuck can do no wrong

You don't seem to comprehend what's going on here.

Just because they aren't throttling does not mean it's not a neutrality violation. The argument your parroting makes no sense. They are treating data differently instead of treating all data the same.

The internet has never been "Clean water", you faggot - WE DON'T WANT CLEAN WATER! Clean water is a child-proofed internet safe for everyone and enjoyed only by normalfags.

Fuck off with your "utility" horse shit, the internet is a tool for free thought and dissent - government utilities don't condone dissent, look at TV and radio.

The FCC shouldn't even EXIST.

Really now?

That's because he doesn't want to be exorted by ISPs, but extortion and throttling will happen anyways, if not Netflix then some other streaming service will be paying to be the favored service in terms of bandwidth.

Seems right to me, but a lot of people are using it as an anchoring point for arguing that Net Neutrality is bad.

Yes, look at TV for the future of internet without NN, where ISPs have as much control over your internet as TV providers have over your TV.

And it's not like there hasn't been a massive shift in the public discourse in the two years since.

Because I don't have this bullshit happening where I live. The only thing we have from OP is site blocking, but that's extremely easy to circumvent. You don't even need Tor. But yes, I'm aware of jews, but I wasn't sure that they were the ones who completely fucked up your internet.

Because of people who are tech illiterate and say shit like enforced net neutrality is bad. They don't comprehend that the USA is divided like a pie for big corps to kike without the hassle of competition.

There's (((some))) other element we're not seeing

I hope, maybe if this does turn out to be a big kikery oppurtunity it'll alienate even more people from using the internet and help them start living in the real world again like what life was like pre-2000. Maybe it'll even lead to accelerationism and a uprising against the (((elites)))

Depends on how they do it, but I wouldn't be surprised if they used the mazy as fuck way and just DNS blocked it.

You forget that these are American companies we're talking about.
So full of Jews they'll make this shit a nightmare, make said nightmare a trend by conditionioning people cattle to accept it and then bring their kikery over the Atlantic.

This. It's such a weird topic.

im sure most reddit users would recommend against drinking bleach too

Sucks to be a burger I guess.

Be careful not to get caught browsing right wing extremist websites or posting your dog heiling Hitler, you might go to jail.

...

Please explain.
You want the FCC to regulate the internet.
The FCC already regulates television.

And you think that allowing the FCC to regulate the internet will make it freer and distinct from television…how?

So what I really don't get is why when SOPA and PIPA were up to bat and looking to play fuckery with the internet and threaten file sharing services it was a no brainer to push against it but now that the FCC is pushing to allow similar things to happen eby handing the internet to mega corps and even suggesting them to go full Jew we now have a very vocal group just saying lie back and let it happen?

I want them to regulate ISPs

It's because of people like you that we get kiked hard by tech monopolies. Oh the people on the other tribe are against this, that must mean you have to be for it, right??

Isnt it the opposite? I always see fucking retards support this shit because "net neutrality" sounds equitable like "civil rights" or "affirmitive action", pix rel
Tbqh it's basically the new KONY2012 meme

most third world countries have little to no NN regulation

We're one of the countries with the highest level of piracy and piracy circles around and the governmment does nothing about it and political discourse while heavily leaning to the left doesn't actually supress right wing discourse.
I'll be fine

FCC is regulating internet service providing, not what goes on in the Internet. Jesus Christ you are retarded, literally retarded.

M8, why do you think you have to buy water from Coca-Cola in the US?

No shit, why? What was so bad about 2014 internet through unregulated ISPs? Can't you say anything in your defense?

We're anons here, bring me your facts.

It has nothing to do with torrent sites

>Net Neutrality is the way the internet has always worked.
You know the book this reminds me of.

Nobody did jack shit back in 2011 when 4Chan was still been seen as a place full of nazi-pedophile-hackers, even till late 2014 when GG started.
Daily Stormer getting shutdown is the closest to such scenario, a site with controversial topics being removed because some real shit happened

How does this retarded shit even begin to make sense? The big companies fund their goddamned movements and parrot their rhetoric. They aren't the scrappy little freedom fighters who are rabbling against the powers that be. They are the useful idiots of corporations and governments.

Didn't that get shutdown because Cloudflare decided to ditch them?

my water company runs from a local spring. That is of course, >implying i dont just use my own well

Jesus how much Holla Forums can a person be

ISPs don't get a single more benefit than they already had before NN.

But in 2008 the FCC stepped in to investigate Comcast blocking BitTorrent and now pajeet is outright saying that they should just allow ISP to block torrent services now. This has everything to do with torrenting.

It's more of tip-of-the-iceberg in that pro-NN is being bankrolled by rich interests every bit as much as anti-NN is.

Get this in your stupid head: corporations are not your friend. The free market only works by itself if the people can PHYSICALLY HARM those who do profit unethically. As it stands, corporations just lobby all your rights away just so they can make more money off of you and you're defending them in this case because obama was the face of the regulations.

...

Okay, show of hands how many of you retards believe a law that has only really existed for ~ 4 years being gone is going to lead to the total destruction of the internet.

Please cease and desist in your ideas which are utterly untrue and useless.

Consider this a second warning. The ministry is watching you.

Its not just the laws being repealed, its also the slimy bastards greenlighting paid prioritization.

It's as if ISPs weren't really throttling service based on content in the first place.

Which would make NN legislation seem unnecessary. Also learn these words:

It probably won't change shit, especially because the normalfags finally paid attention this time around, but that doesn't mean I'm not filling my bunker drive with as much anime and vidya as possible right now.

The only reason that title is not true is because ISPs started throttling P2P traffic at some point because of anti-piracy shittery, but besides the exception, it is how the Internet works. The network does not treat your connection differently depending on the IP you're connecting to, or depending on different protocols. Besides P2P of course.

so how is it going to affect me as a nonburger?

It's not.

Given how many times this has come up, the foreseeable consequences of giving profit oriented megalith ISPs control, and in the dishonest ways it’s been presented, I don’t see this being healthy regardless of the arguments against government regulation and the monopolies it unnaturally creates. It feels like two different evils butting heads, private interests vs private interests, and no matter who wins, I lose sooner or later.

I wonder if we’ll see a renaissance of couch co-op if this gets really bad?

You get to see what it looks like before it comes to a server near you.

Here's a (you) for not arguing.

not an argument

A law in america that, may I add; only exists because the networking monopoly bankrolled most of the government at the time and wouldn't and mostly haven't been prosecuted for Violations of it, such as lying about service issues and deliberate roll outs of inferior hardware to consumers.

You do get to choose which dick will fuck you in the ass.

Oh no, you mean that the ISPs are going to the locked into a war with Silicon Valley that neither side can win, and normalfags are going to get segregated to corporate controlled segments of the shitheap we call "the internet", while people who have tech knowledge will fire up VPNs and TOR and I2P and OpenNIC and carve out their own proper segments of the internet, turning it once again into a gloriously free and open Wild West once more?

The only thing that could possibly make me happier would be if BBSs made a big comeback.

Can someone explain to me the pros of this?

see

Better buy the package that gives you UNLIMITED VPN SPEED :^)

There's already VPN masking technology retard.

thats just fear mongering. no company has ever done this. ever.

Except nothing can stop the ISP from black listing those programs in order to prevent that very thing from happening. This isn't the age of dialup and phone phreaking anymore you are using proprietary connections those companies have buried n the ground and they sure as he'll will start guarding what goes through them even more so should this go through in their favor.

...

There's more parties of Jews involved than the government and ISPs. Internet businesses running sites with huge amounts of traffic, such as video hosting websites, MMO's, and news sites will find themselves forced to subscribe to such a premium internet bandwidth subscription in order to maintain the amount of bandwidth necessary for their userbase, which only costs them even more than it originally did. Users with shitty basic internet subscriptions will experience a less pleasant browsing experience because of all the shit such as ads and the sizes of modern websites taking up precious bandwidth, and will probably find themselves blocking ads more which costs precious revenue for the hosters.

Alternatively, instead of opting for an expensive premium internet subscription, webhosts can opt to provide a premium service themselves in order to throttle what little bandwidth they can reliably afford while gaining some more profit in the process. Do you not enjoy having to watch videos at 240p30fps which buffers every 15 seconds? Then how about you subscribe to our premium service? This will become more of a problem if tons of major sites opt for this solution if they want to avoid unstable servers or running at a loss. But there's always a free alternative, no matter how shitty, and most people would rather flock to something free than pay a monthly fee for something they don't really need that much after all.

Not to mention all the cable connections that have to go through a router provided by the ISP.

except the customers that control their income.
no ISP wants to do this. and if one does, anyone that notices can just go elsewhere. there are tons of options. but you know who nobody can actually stop? the federal government regulation.

oh wait, thats not true. there are people that can control the federal government regulations. and they do it in closed door meetings allt he time. theyre called big business lobbyists.

No there fucking isn't.

only in cities

Allowing an ISP to control what I access is a good thing?

Obviously not.

give me a location. i guarantee i can find atleast 3 internet options. did you forget satellites and cellphone services exist?

NN

he asked for pros, what good can come of it?

get the fuck off of Holla Forums

Biggest deal might be the EU trying to stick its dick in our business. Even though it get ignored on stupid issues like this.

Satellite and cellphone service isn't an alternative to high speed internet you moron.

good argument, shill. i hope soros forgets to pay you.

No, you fucking retard, they go through a modem, and you can provide it yourself. If you're stuck with a combo modem/router, buy a cheap firewall/router box, drop it behind the modem, set the modem to bridge mode. You can even run a firewall off of an ordinary computer as long as it has two or more NICs, just throw PFsense or Sophos Home on it and configure as needed.

again. there are tons of options. and yes, many of those are high speed. enough for you to watch your interacial soap operas on netflix.

Good luck switching to a better service when there is no better alternative. This isn't Pepsi vs Coke we're talking about here, setting up an internet connection requires an entire physical infrastructure and the US is a huge place, the infrastructure is shit and ISPs don't have incentive to make more because they all agree to milk different parts of the country.

Getting to watch corporations be shitty to each other.

Look for the bright sides.

How is that ADSL working for you

You do know that making it so you need the "official proprietary ISP provided modem router" if yopu want your connection at all isn't exactly hard right?

A good percentage of the USA cannot choose their own provider, if they want internet they cannot take their business elsewhere and access to email and web services are quickly becoming a necessity for the modern work force so I do not really think they can take their business elsewhere if they do not like the one providers practices.

what the fuck do i care about normalfags?

Lootboxes for unlocking access to new websites?

as i said. name a place that doesnt have options and i guarantee i'll find some. but i find it hilarious that you consider a company that throttles connections to undesirable places the "best option nomatter what in this hypothetical situation"

name somewhere. stop using hypothetical fearmongering. you argue like a faggot liberal.

Sure that would be fun, but I'd rather not give that much control to ISPs solely for being vindictive. Considering the amount of shit that can come of it being removed, I'd leave those laughs aside.

I'm sure that if people could go on the internet without paying any kind of subscription for the ISP that companies would lobby the governments to crack down hard on anyone robbing them of their hard-earned money, as they are already doing (depends on the country) with piracy. Hitchhiking the neighbor's networks isn't always a dependable solution either. It's like with water and electricity, if the provider decides to jew you, there's rarely an alternative or a way to go without what they provide.

And many of those have either a datalimit or ridiculously expensive monthly fees for connections with no datalimit. On top of that you're paying extra money for having a satellite connection, and having access to the internet everywhere is not something you really need, nor is it really worth the money. Unless your job demands it for some reason.

youre not this retarded, youre just being a corporate cocksucking gay dragon

A quick Google search will yield the information you want. "ISP distribution in the USA"

Nah, more like some libertarians getting pissy and banding together to start their own ISPs and maybe seeing alternatives or people getting so fed up with it they no longer get enough bread and circuses to stay peaceful and decide to flip their shit on a major scale. Who knows. There's possible up sides.

Tech companies are notorious for colluding with each other to serve their own interests. For example, most Silicon Valley companies have an unspoken no-snipe policy for employees and actively work together to keep employee wages artificially lowered.
If you think you can trust the invisible hand of the free market to work in your favor, then you're retarded.

so neither of you can name anywhere in the united states that doesnt have options?
are you both giving up on that argument?

you argue like liberal reddit faggots. "im going to take a stand! to defend those i dont know and know nothing about! because someone, somewhere might get oppressed! but i dont know who! and i cant name how!"

good job.

The FCC requires companies to allow customers to use their own modems. That's not going to change.

How fucking stupid are you? Did you think coax cables magically plug into your computer?

Kek
In the future everything you buy will be a lootbox. Want the nice 500 dollar stove? Buy a 200 dollar lootbox. Get your 3rd 300 dollar printer and a couple of Star of David stickers.

If you really want a free internet you should be asking for LESS regulations. The US has stiffled new ISPs, and NN wouldn't aleviate this in the slighest. It would only raise costs for data lanes since what are now slower and thus cheaper lanes would have to dissapear.
If a tiny archipelago like New Zealand can have more than 3 providers, the US should be filled to the brim with providers. Guess what stops them
please use archive.is/information-technology/2014/04/one-big-reason-we-lack-internet-competition-starting-an-isp-is-really-hard/
Without laws allowing for a bunch os stupid requirements (that were probably included under a "sugestion" from the now dominant ISPs) those legal costs wouldn't exist.
Wherever there are less regulations busineses can prosper.

Also why the hell do you think it is a good thing to charge the same amount for different lanes? Jesus fuck how many of you are so naive o really think prices would go down if they were forced to bring lanes used by e-mail, messaging apps and etc to the speed of video streaming sites. Of course more demanding lanes cost more. No shit sherlock, it has been like that since forever. The reason ISPs don't charge you extra to browse youtubepoop videos is because it would be a major shot in their own feet. Not because they haven't figured a way to do it yet. Supply and demand laws can only be twarted if the government gets in the way.

t. Brazilian who has been experiencing net neutrality for almost 5 years now.
Costs have been UP since then, markedly because slower lanes are not allowed to exist anymore. ISPs could either slower the faster lanes to meet in the middle in order to keep costs down, or ditch slower lanes and charge more. Guess which option prevailed.
tl;dr: the internet has been a halmark of the age of information since it's inception, competition thrives more where there is less involvement from the government, and even though you don't trust most government services in almost anything else they do, for some mysterious reason you want the government to take care of internet of all things

nigger. i've used my own modem since the 90s. stop making shit up.

It's normalfags we're talking about here, look at the state of the video game industry. Once kikery becomes the norm, they keep pushing bit by bit until you're paying to unlock Darth Vader for 5 minutes.

Honestly, with how many Social justice net neutrality adverts there are, i can only see this as congress pulling a stunt to virtue signal when they slap the bill down for the thrid time. "Look at me my delegates! I totally work super hard representing you and protecting you from the evul corporations, vote for me next election!

so you admit the US (government) has negatively affected the ISPs. and you think the release of government control on ISPs wont alleviate this?

are you retarded? or is that a copypasta soros emailed you.

There are no lanes if the connection is neutral, that is the entire point you fucking hue nigger.

It's okay if you don't know there are other options user don't be embarrased. Shoot it's even okay if you didn't know about local wireless infrastructure, which is basically on par with a ground wire connection at this point and a fraction of the price of satellite for similar speeds

who do you guys think youre fooling?

...

How come robot fights are never as cool as they are in anime?

I'm not stupid because that's exactly what my ISP is doing right this instant
So yeah it's 100% possible for ISP to force you to use their official boxes with the official firmware.

>muh net neutrality that's supported by the little guys like (((google))) (((amazon))) and (((netflix)))

We were going to lose either way you fucking niggers.

Niger I'm the one here who doens't have english for his first language. Re-read my post dumbass, I'm against NN and pro de-regulation

Go back and re-read what you just quoted.

I mean as far as anyone gives a shit here would want. Low ping.

I'm going to get shat on for fenshitting but people were fucked either way.

Soon.

The biggest stumbling blocks are laws at state level as well as the previously mentioned lawsuits ISPs use to wear out newcomers. Relinquishing net neutrality does nothing to stop that and only harms the consumer.

Will people end up using atlas as a sex toy?

Oh my god the stupidity…
There are lanes right now you dumb fuck. Faster lanes cost more, slower lanes cost less.
If NN dictates that there should be NO difference between them, then I sure as fuck would bet that they wouldn't allow the same data used for e-mail, messaginf and everything else to have the same priority of video streaming (which would raise costs if we are talking about keeping the same quality we have right now) for free.
Making all lanes equal would raise costs you doofus.

They make a robot that hugs people yet?

No there aren't, you pay for a single internet connection, not for different types of internet connection. Your one connection can be limited but it is limited for global use, it is not limited just for streaming for example. To do otherwise is to violate the desired neutrality.

It's American network infrastructure, getting fucked either way is a given if you aren't in a not retarded state.

Does the shitposting in this thread "prove" that no one know what exactly net neutrality is?

...

literal pants on head retardation.

heres a question for you, little man.
when did the FCC start regulating ISPs?

literally dozens of satelite internet providers exist in the US. not including cellphone providers. not including phonelines, and not including cable lines.

Then you file an FCC complaint because your ISP is breaking the law.

First, these regulations affect all ISPs regardless of distribution method. Satellite, cable, and fiber-optic will all have the option to throttle your internet and censor cites.
You're literally retarded if you think satellite can ever replace cable. Cable can literally triple their price and it's still cost-effective compared to satellite, especially in non-rural areas. Let alone satellite ping times.
The FCC doesn't do any of that, and if they ever did censor stuff we have the First Amendment to prevent it from happening and to bleed them dry if it does.
The reason the ISPs don't want the FCC to regulate the internet is because private companies have the legal right to do certain things like censorship that the government does not. Look up regulatory capture. (((They))) still pull your strings, but since the entity doing it changed, now you're happy?
No actually, it's government regulation of the internet. Net neutrality does not nationalize the internet.

The point
Your head

Boycott how? The vast majority of people only have 1 landline option for internet, and there are maybe a half-dozen satellite ISPs total, which has a much higher buy-in cost.
Got a source for that? Other than non-compliant DMCA requests, the FCC has no right to legislate throttling of websites.

Yeah, crazy nonexistent. Only 22% of America has more than one 25Mbps ISP in their area, and 90% of the population either has only one choice for 100Mbps speeds, or has no access to them at all (and will never get it because the ISP monopolies have no interest in investing in infrastructure).
Yeah, because that's what happened with social media. Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, and Youtube all fought with each other, which is why none of them censor. Mmmmhm.
Of course not, which is why they'll pay the fees (or if they have any sense, they'll tell Verizon customers that the reason Netflix is lagging for them is because Verizon is throttling Netflix's connection, so that the customers complain until it stops). Smaller sites like Holla Forums, Gab, and Minds won't be able to pay the bribes if ISPs start throttling them or outright banning them, so they'll die.

I'm glad you labeled your post as bait. And if it's not, then go back to Africa and try to buy clean water there.
(1/2)

(2/2)

I agree, but with net neutrality, only those websites can censor your content, and you can just move to a different website. Without NN, now websites AND ISPs can throttle your content, and not only are you not allowed to post on the big websites, you get throttled if you wander off the ranch.

These repeals go further than how the internet was before NN was implemented. Also see
That's half the. The other half is that Netflix had a contract with Verizon to provide a certain bandwidth to their servers, and Verizon throttled them anyway. Repealing NN essentially makes this form of contract breach legal.

But it is. The only packet discrimination in America is throttling P2P networks due to the MPAA lobbying hard to allow it.

Daily Stormer got shut down by Cloudflare, GoDaddy, and Google Domains. No ISPs were involved.

It won't destroy the Internet, but it'll change things drastically. You won't be able to just buy a domain and spin up a server anymore to start a website; costs will be too high, especially if you're doing something high-bandwidth or making a multiplayer game that requires low ping.

I agree, but see above; the main reason repealing NN is bad is because now ISPs and websites can censor you, instead of just websites.
(checked)
Yes, but consumers are sheep and often don't have an ISP choice. See above.

Data lines on a cellphone are 3000% more Jewish than anything Comcast does. Shoot yourself.

You literally have no fucking clue what you're talking about. Employees at the big tech companies (e.g. Google, Microsoft, Facebook) easily make $250k a year: danluu.com/startup-tradeoffs/
(I agree that "the hand of the market" require a few million government-provided caveats, but your statement is false.)

NN doesn't remove slower lanes. You can pay e.g. $29/mo for a 30Mbps connection, or step it up to $59/mo for a 100Mbps connection. Both are allowed to exist. I bet there are even slower lanes for cheaper, but I wouldn't know because I don't buy them.

See
The current status quo is fucked, sure, but repealing NN does not fix any of the actual problems and makes the situation objectively worse.

But it fucking doesn't you worthless hueposter.

can tell in your first line that you have no idea what net neutrality is.
thank you for putting this right at the start so i didnt waste time reading your post.

name one place that doesnt have a choice. 1.

ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=de0ee827bf53c33bd7190687b81a35fb&mc=true&node=se47.4.76_11201&rgn=div8)

transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2016/db0510/DA-16-512A1.pdf

ISPs cannot force you to use their equipment as long as your equipment doesn't cause damage. The FCC has fined Charter for this already.

Saying "hurr durr I've been using my own modem for years" does not contradict this, it just shows that you can't read.

having a choice between 2 flaming piles of garbage isnt a choice

Are you actually retarded?

They were never going to get fixed in the first place. The internet was going to become shit either way. NN is now a fucking socialist farce that means nothing now. What activates the almonds is these fucking niggers suddenly becoming little useless activists for it.

and how long has the FCC enforced this rule?

Net Neutrality is retarded. The repeal is gonna pass, all you doomsday shills are gonna cry for a week, and then literally nothing will change. Mark my fucking words.

this is a wage-gap level argument. you should go back to reddit.

I'm not going to spoonfeed you any more. It's current policy, and isn't at all likely to change.

b-but without the FCC the internet will go back to the dark ages like it was before 2015

user, I'm anti NN but where I live it's either Verizon or Time Warner unless you want to get fucking godawful HughesNet/DISH satellite

Explain. Is it just that they're calling for more regulation on the market that you are calling it socialist? If so then you forget this is far from a free and open market and that argument shouldn't really apply in these circumstances.

What state are you in?

The Trump Reich will set the internet back 10 years!

New York

Ok if you aren't in the city I'm like 90% sure you have local wireless options there.

I live in the fucking capital of the state. There are no independents here unlike Jew York City. Even then I'm lucky because if you live down further you get fucked by Mid-Hudson cable.

so you think a throttled verizon or time warner is better than an unthrottled satelite connection? if thats what you believe, you deserve the hell you created for yourself.

nigger, they started requiring that like 1-2 years ago. i had my own modem since the 90s.
do some basic math and please explain how it was the FCC that allowed me to use my own modem.

YOU HAVE LOCAL WIRELESS YOU RETARD.

nigger, i've lived in east greenbush, albany, and saratoga. youre either a kid and assume your parents dont have a choice, or you dont know how find alternatives.

And what stops you from doing the exact same thing in case your ISP is doing the blocking?

Why would they throttle niche sites responsible for a minor fraction of the traffic, it doesn't make sense from any standpoint.

It I see much easier to repeal government censorship than it is to remove coordinated censorship from telecom companies. And telecom companies may censor having only shekels in mind, while government censor may benefit society more, like banning cp.
Our country is safe from your corporatocratic crap. TRAI rocks. And we have so many options that no group of companies can plan and totally regulate the internet based on their own wishes.
And one thing people forget is that government is far more inefficient in everything including censorship than private companies. China's firewall is easy to beat, for example.

Are ISPs a natural monopoly?

Nigger it's just them, TVC is Business only.

because naturally thousands of companies around the US would love to hurt their own business and income, to appease globalist jews that are coincidentally in favor of regulating ISPs.

what about fairpoint, windstream, and spectrum? and verizon? i havnt lived in albany in a while, but dont you have fios now?

Not really since ISPs themselves serve as a barrier of entry to prevent competition. They are more of an oligopoly.

You have no idea

They shouldn't be. The only reason they are monopolies is because the cables themselves are not considered a public utility.

kek, is that for real?

My neighborhood doesn't get FiOS, and that's the FCC map. Time Warner is owned by Spectrum now, and I haven't heard or seen anything about those other two you've listed in any map, newspaper, or commercial I've seen. but it's comforting knowing there's another user who's a local. rip Jerry D.

Yes, yes it is.

Wireless mesh network based upon a fleet of open source hybrid airship drones using encrypted laser communication to provide somewhat slow Internet to crafty Anons with self-built transcievers when?

Net neutrality is a set of regulations. I was specifically referring to the Title II utility regulations. I'm now 90% sure you're a shill.
Bedford, WY: broadbandnow.com/Wyoming/Bedford
Only option above 25Mbps is Silverstar Communications. This took about 30 seconds of Googling to find; I should note that this situation is not the exception, but the rule.

Google got fined nearly $3B for antitrust violations in the EU: archive.is/rZ1BM
You might think that's a lot, but it's less than 5% of their yearly revenue.

It's an exaggeration, sure, but ISPs are scum that always do scummy bullshit. They want NN laws to pass so they can throttle Netflix even harder they already do, and force Netflix to pay bribes to make it stop. That's how their current court case started in the first place.

someone i know was killed by the smiley face killers in albany. i used to live on washington street with the niggers. i didnt stay there long. you can imagine why. i moved to east greenbush. that was a mistake. so i moved to saratoga… that was pretty nice. expensive though. albany is the most souless city i have ever lived in.

those other two are DSL providers. i mean, time warner sucks, but you have other options. their infastructure isnt as good, but if time warner started being dicks, you can go somewhere else. and i know "DSL isnt high speed" but those ones are "new" dsl.. easily 10-15mbps. which is what most cable companies provide. even if you dont have fios, verizon provides "old" dsl… which is like 1-5mbps.

Havana of all places has had a meshnet for ages, complete with a Cuban Wikipedia equivalent and a private WoW server. And all that was built with equipment smuggled into the country, it's illegal to own networking kit.

We'll be fucking fine.

Yeah any DNS hosted in my country is legally obligated to not properly resolve sites on the blocklist, it's about as easy to bypass as you think it is.

what happens if you ping the site's IP?

Yo if we do this I want a city of heroes server not WoW

Yeah I mean if it comes down to it I'll switch, but they're not jewing me too hard for the time being ever since I cancelled my phone and cable.
its only getting worse nigga Albany Med's swallowing up everywhere down near Morris St. (they offered Lombardo's like 2.5 mil I think and he turned them down), the city's full of heroin, and the new even more retarded mayor wants to build a fucking gondola from the concourse down to those bike trails along the river nobody fucking uses. Pyongyang on The Hudson.

A gondola you say?

Not even the good kind

Works like normal.
It's a simple DNS block, the instant you use a good DNS there's no block anymore.

I don't know if you are making an effort to not understand it of if it comes to you naturally.
Costs are different between lanes. Right now your ISP spends a lot less money with e-mail and other less demanding services than it does with youtube and netflix. They do charge you the same, but their costs are different. Your internet bill is what they figured as an average necessary to cover them both.

Those are not the lanes I'm talking about
Within a certain speed plan different data have different priorities, simply because some are more demanding than others. If you browse yourube and use irc at the same time, irc data is spread in smaller packages in between youtube packages, that's good because you don't need irc to be as fast as youtube. What NN does is remove that difference. In order to keep the same quality all data lanes have to be more efficient. This has nothing to do with the speed plan you contract.
You don't know what you are talking about.
Ok, gonna research the text pre-FCC alterations, this response will take longer than usual.
1/2

2/2
Link for pre-FCC Net Neutrality. This is what NN shills wanted to happen
transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2015/db0312/FCC-15-24A1.pdf
201. In contrast, large broadband Internet access service providers assert that edge providers such as Netflix are imposing a cost on broadband Internet access service providers who must constantly upgrade infrastructure to keep up with the demand.510 Large broadband Internet access service providers explain that when an edge provider sends extremely large volumes of traffic to a broadband Internet access service provider— e.g., through a CDN or a third-party transit service provider—the broadband provider must invest in additional interconnection capacity (e.g., new routers or ports on existing routers) and middle-mile transport capacity in order to accommodate that traffic, exclusive of “last-mile” costs from the broadband Internet access provider’s central offices, head ends, or cell sites to end-user locations.511
Commenters assert that if the broadband Internet access service provider absorbs these interconnection and transport costs, all of the broadband provider’s subscribers will see their bills rise.512. They argue that this is unfair to subscribers who do not use the services, like Netflix, that are driving the need for additional capacity. Broadband Internet access service providers explain that settlement-free peering fundamentally is a barter arrangement in which each side receives something of value.513 These parties contend that if the other party is only sending traffic, it is not contributing something of value to the broadband Internet access service provider.

Imagine being paid to regurgitate excuses for Comcast on a Mongolian basket weaving forum.

And I thought my Internet was shit.

t. 9mbit DSL with shit signal and the govermnent stepping in to slow down expansion of Fibre infrastructure by small, local ISPs in favor of monopolist 50mbit VDSL expansion that doesn't work due to 300m range limit and copper wiring from the 1950s.
meanwhile (((they)))'ve invested so much into their 4G infrastructure they've started selling wireless routers with sim cards to remote villages with 300mbit mobile reception

i have optimum (cablevision) where i live now and do the same thing. just FYI if you put your incoming connection on a splitter before the modem and put one going to your TV and do a channel search, you'll get a bunch of channels. i mostly get the same stuff i would get with an antenna, except no antenna, and a few extra channels bleed in.

a fucking gondola? holy shit a fucking gondola. i guess i'd rather use those than be on the ground with my bike so bands of nomad niggers attack me and steal my bike. i bet i could even witness a few of those thefts if people actually used those lanes like the gondola rides at the bronx zoo. heroin is just replacing the oxycontin problem since its cheaper bc mexicans. i really just hate the feeling of walking down those streets and feeling completely alone. schenectady has the same feeling. as well as portland oregon. creepy fucking cities.

please try just using https… if it goes through on that i'm going to die laughing.

We should all be doing that.

Nah doesn't go through.

10-15mbps isnt bad. fios (fiber) claims to offer 100mbps but even at peak times speed test sites rarely go above 20mpbs, and even less at peak times.

also, 10 mbit is like 1 mb. so you probably have about a 30mbps connection. go to a speed test site and screencap it if you can.

aw. i wanted to die.

Won't work. HTTPS doesn't mask the destination domain, and it's being blocked by DNS anyway, so the request gets looped back to localhost. What HTTPS is good for is masking the contents of a request or reply, it can't be intercepted or subjected to deep packet inspection unless you've accepted the root cert of the intercepting device, and even then there are safeguards to prevent that.

at my workplace it blocks most sites, but i can get on here if i putt that little S in. i was just curious.

amerika.org/politics/net-neutrality-is-net-neutering/

>1. Parallax switcheroo. They are not going to charge extra for your favorite sites; they are going to give “fast lanes” to those sites, but in doing so, they are going to leave every other site at the unaccelerated speed. You will get your Facebook, but you are going to find it harder to get to smaller sites. Monopolizing increases.
>2. Higher costs. Your real problem is that you have few options. You have almost no alternatives in social media, and only one or two ISPs. Regulation raises costs, so this situation will get worse in the future. But heck, the FAANG (Facebook, Apple, Amazon, Netflix, Google) companies will have their position firmly established
>3. Government power. “We suspect your site of not being neutral, citizen,” said the inspector, crisply snapping his immaculate boots together. “Papers, please.” If government starts to investigate, step one may be that they confiscated all of your equipment as they have done for years upon serving clients. Those who want to stay in business will do what they ask.

Your workplace is likely doing content inspection on a page for blocking. They've implemented it poorly, because they should be using large blacklist of domains and relying primarily of that. They should also have pushed the web filter's cert to the root ca store on all workstations and done DPI on all https traffic.

Your IT guys are either shit at their job or have too small a budget.

Well you haven't actually brought fourth any arguments for the FCC ruling. btw the FCC ruling made ISPs equal to a phone service and at the same time didn't actually protect or promote Net Neutrality. Much like how patriotism isn't promoted by the Patriot Act.

[cont]

...

i work in IT. its both.

I do too. Same here. We all know that feel.

...

wireless is not a real choice

Sorry I didn't realize I'd have to spoonfeed a down-syndrome-afflicted baby today:
archive.is/S80h2
archive.is/vYhX3
archive.is/YEOf4
archive.is/NgkhR

Local wireless is dummy.
Niggga I ain't talking about shit like hughes net.

Whoever wrote this has some fucking chip on their shoulder.

I will say this does not address that the repeal paperwork green lights paid prioritization for websites. Also the guy seems to be saying that federal regulation is the thing raising costs for small businesses which sounds fucky to me, considering small business websites aren't being negatively affected by the FCC, and also he doesn't explain why paid prioritization, or 'fast lanes' are a good thing. I understand when he goes on about how the heavy hitters can afford to have dedicated servers within ISP infrastructure and essentially have innate prioritization because of that but I feel that's not what we'll be seeing more of should this be repealed as he wants. In fact it seems that he's arguing passing net neutrality is protecting these servers by not allowing other people to have similar situations?
Yes while they may be faster the others are not being throttled, while under Pais suggested system where people have to pay upright for better service it still wont hold a candle to those dedicated servers he's talking about so it seems a moot point.
Also he doesn't even touch on the potential fallout when ISPs start trying to axe things like BitTorrent again.

read

NN repeal doesn't greenlight anything new. NN increases costs.

Net Neutrality is a regulation for ISPs, not websites.
Consider this, almost every other nation in the world has dozens of different ISPs to choose from whereas in America all you have is Time Warner/Bell/Whatever the fuck megacorp you have.
While I wouldn't say that Net Neutrality is the thing that is preventing local ISPs from flourishing(it probably isn't), the fact that you have so few options compared to even third world countries despite paying way more on average should say a lot on its own.

That's basically the same as how a DNS revoking works in America (e.g. sci-hub.io had their domain revoked due to DMCA non-compliance, but now they're at sci-hub.bz and still completely accessible). Instead of resolving to localhost though, they just remove the entry from the DNS server entirely.

?????????
You seem to believe that 1000 pounds of bricks are heavier than 1000 pounds of feathers. The reason e-mail costs less than Youtube is because the messages are generally smaller. If I sent a 16MB e-mail it would cost the ISP just as much as if I uploaded a 16MB webm.
the proper term in english is packets, btw
That's more of a software issue. If I wanted a chat client that had as low latency as possible, I'd do the same stuff Youtube does. I'd probably be even more aggressive than Youtube actually, because they do a lot of BS to try and minimize bandwidth from unwatched videos and video segments. There's no way to mark your packet as a video or an irc message; their different behavior and request frequency is entirely software-bound.

The two paragraphs you cited are literally the official statements of the ISPs, aka the anti-NN shills. See "In contrast, large broadband Internet access service providers assert."
That entire paragraph is literally "How dare we be required to improve our infrastructure in response to increased demand!" followed by "Each side receives something of value: we get your money, and you don't get throttled in breach of your contract with us!"
Video packets are no different than any other packets. Do you think that there are two different pipes to your home for shower water and tap water? The only reason video streaming needs "faster lanes and exclusive upgraded infrastructure" is because of increased demand, not because of anything intrinsic to video protocols. Streaming basically hasn't changed in a decade; if anything it's become more efficient and faster with new formats.

See that's what I'm saying, but in the article that guy says
Unless he's talking about ISPs, which again are strangled out by local legislation and wouldn't be affected by FCC rulings for the most part when it comes to trying to get their foot in the door.

THAT IS LITERALLY WHAT NN PREVENTS COMPANIES FROM DOING HOLY SHIT
I'm not going to bother point-by-point responding to that whole thing, whoever wrote that is delusional.

That was years ago. Back in 2012 when this was happening, senior SEs made $140k; now they make nearly twice that because bidding wars are no longer being suppressed.

The consumer is fucked one way or the other. In one route the consumer is giving up the internet to government regulation, on the other hand regulated by private industry.

On one side, internet based megacorps can use up 20% of the known internet for their own use and pay no more than you or I. On the other hand, ISPs can overcharge even further for just decent internet.

This reality fucking blows. How can I join one where the people actively involved themselves with politics and industry?

Why do you think they would stop just because of a single lawsuit? You are extremely trusting if you think they wouldn't just keep doing this behind the scenes. I personally know two people who work at Microsoft and Google, and while they each make six figures they aren't pulling the quarter-million-a-year that you're suggesting.
This also isn't the only way tech corps are keeping down wages. They all support immigrant worker programs like the H1B visa because they'd rather import cheap streeshitter labor than hire American.

Just realized the threads been bumplocked. I wonder i the cake eater is behind this.

He doesn't want to goy to know.

Probably because it's not video games.

Get your fucking mods in order, Mark

I suppose you're right, but salaries have doubled, to the point where startup compensation just can't match it even with a billion-dollar unicorn buyout.
I'm talking about total compensation, not just salary. Salary is about $160k according to Glassdoor: glassdoor.com/Salary/Google-Senior-Software-Engineer-Salaries-E9079_D_KO7,31.htm
Also, how long have they worked there? Those SSE $250k payouts are generally only given to employees who have been there 5+ years. I really recommend you read that blogpost, Dan Luu has been around the block and he helped design Google's TPU, among other things: danluu.com/startup-tradeoffs/
I apologize for saying you have no clue what you're talking about by the way. That was rude of me.
This is true, but I think that some things like code.org, coding bootcamps, and pushing for CS curriculum in high schools is far more harmful to artificially increasing supply of programmers than importing pajeets.
You probably know more about the internal situation more than I do, but what sort of work do pajeets do at Google/MS? Are they doing more grunt-work stuff like customer support and system monitoring, or is management trying to pass room-temp-IQ numbskulls as Just As Competent As Everyone Else And If You Disagree You're Racist?

Doesn't matter too much anyway, we're only 3 posts to bump limit.

Costs is the US are still lower than in third world countries.

Not at all what I said. High volume of data require better infrastructure. And that is improved on demand of those other services.
It would cost more because more speed is required from a video service, their packets literally demand priority. You won't complain if once a day when you need to open a large e-mail it takes you a bit more time than usual, but if your videos lag constantly you would be pissed.
The entire document is a back and forth discussion. Those paragraphs are not declarations by the ISPs alone but contain counterpoints made by them.
There's way to prioritise data coming from a certain address
That's a strawman you're making. ISPs already improve infrastructure as demand goes up. Not because they are angels worried about the common good, but because it's needed of them.
How does taht disproves what I said? The amount of data that video requires is huge. If every user opened their e-mail at the same time it wouldn't be a tiny fraction of what would be required if everyone opened a youtube video. Of course it's a demand issue. Greater demand requires greater infrastructure, and that is tailored to usage of those more demanding services.
Of course the final pipe is the same. It's teh handling of data berorehand that changes.
Something they can already do without NN >and it will be resolved by an FCC investigation rather than the courts
How is this a good thing?
How adding regulations isn't contrary to demanding less regulations?
It still bogles my mind that people will trust bureaucrats to judje for anything entering their homes. You need more options in ISPs, not for the government to tell you how you can be serviced, because it will be fucked by lobbyists and corrupt politicians.

soros ngo's are pushing for net neutrality hard, saying reversing this is raysist and shit. And, honestly, anything mudslime bongo pushed I dont trust.

FUCKING THIS
True competition is the true enemy of monopolies, otherwise the government can be bribed and companies can just make a trust and later lobby or bribed to add (((exceptions))).

Nothing is preventing the corps who own ISPs to also own their own internet based services. Without net neutrality regulation, nothing is then preventing these corps from throttling competition in those internet based services markets so the customers all flock to their fast service. The internet being regulated by governments makes sense if you're not an old cuck who doesn't care about the freedom to share information with other people. I like my Internet fast for anything I chose to do and not just for the things my ISP wants me to do.

My stance on this is we need a buffer to stop ISPs from running wild, because once they start getting free reign it will do nothing but lower quality of life when it comes to using the internet, and they will STILL stall out anyone trying to enter the market keeping us trapped in the current situation but with them having even more power over the consumer.
The FCC is a necessary evil in our current situation, far from ideal but the best we have at the moment.

So i was memed?

Yep. Beware of normalfagbook political discussion.

user, mbit/s and mbps are the same thing.
The biggest joke in all this is that there's a multi-gorillion dollar scientific research institution half a kilometer away from my residence.
The country barely has anything resembling a fibre backbone outside of certain (((cities))), which is a travesty considering the gay kike ISP doing all this had established several small fibre networks with speeds of 40mbps back in 1991 due to (ironically) a lack of proper analog Telephone wiring in parts of the country.

40 mbps. In 1991.

Not only did they abandon it entirely in favor of ADSL(economically sensible at the time considering they owned and still own 99% of the telephone wiring in the country), but they stopped expanding/upgrading their existing physical infrastructure for the most part after 2002, when broadband availability had been extended to practically every household.
If they hadn't, not only would mainland Europe have had potentially East Asian-tier Internets by now while everyone else in the Western Hemisphere would've probably adopted Fibre far quicker than they did ITTL.

youre being memed right now. what makes you think theyre not playing for the same team?

Quality post user, thanks for all the hard work.
Debating shills is too hard for me.

Its just desinfo to get people to hate Trump, for the wrong reasonsif theres any big one, beyond touching the jew wall and having jewish grandsons
It smells bullshit, funny how Obongo starts this shit and leave a culprit to end it, while this shit is shilled with fear mongering and blame Trump making it even more suspicious, since there wasnt all this havok and rampant censorship when NN didnt exist

Come on, nigger.
If there's proof, leaked or documented, no need to stretch with bs.

how do you prove to a normalfag that theres a not so secret hand controlling this meaningless puppet show?

The 00's were the best era of the internet. No fagbook, no twitter, no Jewtube. Good riddance.

yes, i loved jacking off to tiny thumbnails because internet wouldn't load a screen sized picture in less than 15 minutes. i also loved when downloading a 3mb mp3 took 3 days and ended up having a virus embedded because anti-virus was non-existent

Hue, reminds me of back when using Limewire was a thing. Far from ideal that was.

wow you must have had shit internet

>itt fags fall for the (((NN))) meme

In most cases you dont, not without first watching them get embarrassed over and over. Even then many are so impervious to the truth that even after having been memed on 100 times over they will still call you the mad man.

South Korea has State sponsored Internet access that requires doxing/social security ID…

This