Net Neutrality

With the inevitable Congress date looming for burgers, I thought it would be a good time to discuss Net Neutrality and ask some questions about it here.

1. When do you think that the effects of the decision to overturn NN regulations will be fully felt in the US? Will it be overnight?
2. Realistically, how bad will this turn out? Will it be as bad as everybody's been saying?
3. How will non-burgers visiting US websites/using US streaming services be affected?
4. How will VPNs be affected by this?

Other urls found in this thread:

It won't affect any of the tech giants. They will simply work out better deals with ISPs if/when they implement tiered services. It will raise the cost of entry for tech start ups, which might harm SV.

I need to learn how to get on mesh networks. Wild West sites like Holla Forums aren’t long for this world.

1. Hard to say. I suspect that we'll almost instantly see some of the bad shit start to occur - IE overpriced "packages" which are actually sold by walling off parts of the internet and then overcharging to access them. That's what they're most likely going to start with, and it's the kind of shit they're most excited to sell.

There could also be some lowkey censorship that will go on (but especially blocking and throttling of competitors like we saw with what AT&T did to Facetime), but it's going to be a bit under the radar at first. I assume.

They're likely banking on waiting to implement more things until they feel the public has forgotten about the issue.

2. Depends one when we say it has "turned out." Allowing ISPs to block, throttle, and charge for content they don't own is a policy with an unending potential for clusterfuckery.

First off, reversing it when it gives the government more power (by way of allowing them to legally censor that content or pay ISPs to do it for them), pleases moneyed interests, and solidifies a corrupt relationship will be extremely hard. Any of the shenanigans ISPs got in trouble for in the past and want to return to will come with this, and they'll go at it even harder because they know they've got the people who are supposed to stop them in their pocket.

Now to some highlights of the unending potential for clusterfuckery. When chopped up, the internet (which, recall, was created with public funding) will likely be treated more like TV and consumerized - participation in it will be harder, access to it will be limited, and it will be more expensive to access if you can still access the internet itself (and not walled-off portions) at all.

Furthermore, once ISPs and the government are legally allowed to wall off the internet, the political class can gain more capacity for censorship. Melania's own first lady crusade is against 'cyber bullying' - funny tidbit. Giving ISPs control of web content effectively puts the internet in a position to be regulated like TV and officially censored the same way.

3. The US tends to set a precedent. I recommend you watch your fucking asses and fight them before they fight you.

4. I can't really answer this one. I looked it up - at first glance, my impression is that VPNs could help you access blocked content but are still susceptible to fuckery.

This is the thing I’m wondering about as well. I mean, theoretically, the only thing that would be different is that niche sites would take far longer to load. Correct me if I’m wrong through.

And this was when the FCC was willing to take action on these things. Theoretically, once given the go-ahead to block and throttle how they please, they will behave a lot worse.

Shit. So that's it? In just a few days, everything will just be gone for burgers? Resources like pdfs, gone? Movies? Every other website that doesn't get heavy traffic? Niche sites like these? It's all going to be gone? The internet is going to be gutted into a shell of its former self, and nobody can do anything about it?

Given what I heard about companies needing to "bid" for bandwidth, doesn't this also essentially mean that people are only going to be able to see what Porky wants them to see, and nothing else?

Jesus Christ. This truly is some dystopian shit.

Websites with big traffic (YouTube, Netflix, torrent websites) will be asked to pay money to ISPs to get full speed.
Alternatively, the customers will be asked to pay. You could get a cheap Facebook internet for $20, or you could get the Netflix contract for $30 per month.

Torrent and data sharing websites that operate in the gray area will be hit the worst, since there'd be no moral outrage for the ISPs banning or downgrading these, and they can't bribe their way out of it as they are low or non-profit.
I don't think the *chans have enough traffic for ISPs to care, but some may say "subscribe to us, we make it impossible for your kids to browse evil pedo websites", and this may purge kiddies. Or if that ISP is the only one in your area, I guess you too.

t. glad european

That's not precisely what I'm saying.

I assume it will take a while to get to that point, and I don't think that immediately after the vote ISPs will instantly roll out even all of the more basic (still shit) stuff. Putting up blatantly strict, massive walls immediately after the vote and going "full throttle" would be weird. I suspect they pay PR people a massive amount of money to keep them from doing something like that. No, after the vote, it's going to be worse, but they'll try to pass it off as benign (they'll still be tone deaf, but that comes with the territory) before gradually increasing the amount of shenanigans. I don't know if it will ever be as bad as this sets precedent for, but you know it's a mistake to assume that when you give someone a power over you they won't use it.

There are things people can do about it. But it's going to be harder after this.

>No, after the vote, it's going to be worse

To clarify, I mean worse than now, not worse than the absolute worst it could be.

some people say "net neutrality didnt exist before and the internet was fine" but they ignore how much the internet has exploded in popularity and how much its focus has changed.
they ignore it intentionally of course. only a shill would think its okay to lose it.

Oohhhh. This might not be such a bad idea after all!

actually, it's always existed, but it existed under the general communications rules Net Neutrality under Obama became it'sown independent thing in order to prevent further abuses, etc. Net Neutrality is ALWAYS how the internet operated by

God i hate this country. When will people learn?

Times like this where I seriously reconsider being against Gulags.

they dont have time to learn! theyre so damn busy just trying to get by every day, when they do have free time its all they can to do relax with something mindless to try to get the ringing out of their head.
the only people with time to learn are the fuckers at the top of the food chain.


The "we didn't have net neutrality before Obama" thing is pure fiction. Before Obama, nobody tried to portray it as a partisan issue (because it actually isn't), but Obama using it for cool points gave them an opportunity for that. The FCC was blocking ISPs from throttling back in the Bush administration.

Jimmy Dore says we need to push for municipal broadband

It would allow them to ban VPNs because it gets around ant other restrictions they make.

Hey fellas, it’s gone

Are you kidding? The burgers are leaving!

21st century Sewer Socialism.

It still has to go through the courts and congress. I will say that if Congress doesn't protect it, the GOP will have given the Democrats another bullet to kill them with.

If the Dems were smart, they would plaster Ajit Pai stupid face on billboards outside collage campuses. That would guarantee the millennial vote.

This, if the ISP's don't bend to the big tech companies there'll be at least 5 years of lawsuits and courts to wade through

This would be hilarious. Giving more power to liberal megacorps to own the libs.



I'm glad, you wanted free market, there you fucking have it. Hope it'll teach you a lesson this time.

big thanks to the classical liberal koch shills for turning this into a "reasonable debate" instead of the obvious power grab that it is.



>>>Holla Forums13983368


what's new

As much as I don't want to be swallowed in the societal collapse we're far overdue for, I guess I wouldn't mind much. I'd at least be comforted in my last moments knowing America no longer exists

Can someone explain the "NN didn't exist before 2015" meme?

There was neutrality, it just wasn't regulated

Netflix sued comcast or whatever because they were stealing shit from on-demand's views, so Comcast basically slowed down the site so much that it would take nearly half an hour to load a movie (because of it people were leaving Netflix in favor of on demand since everyone hates a wait time). Comcast got caught with their pants down due to it and a law was basically forced in. Although it took till like 2015 for a law to come into affect.
This is a vague summery but it's the best one I got since I'm out of town.

The Obama-era regulations that are on the chopping block seemed pretty poorly enforced (throttling still happened without repercussions) in the first place, so realistically, I'm not sure how much worse things would really get.

Its going to be poetic when those same "butthurt libs" that Holla Forums is mocking can now easily pressure ISPs into blocking websites simply by targeting their advertisements.

We'll finally be free of this hellsite, comrades!

Holla Forums's main concern has always been simple, blunt contrarianism. They're emotionally stunted children that only understand shouting contests.
Killing chan culture would give them the ultimate "last word".





I'm going to get real comfy with the man command, get my aliases right, and go singleplayer for a long time. There's already mesh and GNU/Suicide nets in place for the American worker. poltards on every board are shilling 'own the libs', entirely oblivious that they are the ones getting screwed. but they will probably enjoy the fucking xbox tacobell monster hellworld package.

Can you give pointers for noobs on how to find and get on these mesh networks?


Does this mean we will finally be able to witness a burger-free internet?

I have witnessed hell

Which is funny because the Trump era has seen them go from being edgy Nazis to being normie, dad-tier Republicans.

Where the fuck are the gamergaters? This will actually affect them but Ajit Pai is just doing whatever he wants.

Why would you be glad? Assuming that whatever happens across the pond will never happen here seems like a risky proposition.

Kinda tells you something about them and their shit "movement" doesn't it?

You can say hi to them.
>>>Holla Forums13980775

Libertarians are legitimately delusional enough to think this will make things better for everyone.

they're celebrating because they think that net neutrality invented sjws or something.

bigger pic

More is needed.

More ARE* needed you fucking iliterate cuck

t. non-native speaker


My God, they're completely obsessed with social media, aren't they? I remember when we used to mock fags who actively used that shit.

wow I was just kidding ok no need to get agressive

Oh, this is such a tired excuse. Many people have a perfectly acceptable work schedule and plenty of free time to research the society in which they live. They just don't care to. Is the liberal middle class who think Drumpf stole the election and that capitalism rewards innovation and is lifting people out of poverty any less fucktarded than the starving ghetto criminal? Fuck no. Give people free time and they'll just spend it on irrelevant little pleasures. They don't care about this world, and never will until it comes crashing down.

It really will kill of Twitter and Facebook though. I'm not sure how they'll survive without it. I know they can charge but everyone that uses those things regularly is a mouth breather that isn't going to pay. See YouTube Red.

Oh my fucking god imagine being this retarded

I hope every single one of those MAGApedes celebrating the death of net neutrality get hit with huge fees for logging on Steam and shitposting on imageboards that their autismbux can't pay, so they have to start going outside, hopefully to get the bullying they obviously lacked and needed in school.

Don't let our current backslide blind you to your own predicament

Reminder that public opinion is overwhelmingly in favor of net neutrality, among Democrats, independents, AND REPUBLICANS. Also that both corporate lobbying and use of bots/shills is overwhelmingly greater on the anti-NN side. The only "debate" is with a handful of corporations, their shills, and a tiny hardened core of contrarian classcucks.

the EU for one are pretty strict on the regulationist shit, it probably won't happen here
This video needs to go FULL VIRAL so hard!

There's already been a Humanist Report video about it.

Anyone know of a good assassination market? I just want to check Ajit Pai's price. Honest.

It will just become rich burger Internet user.

This is what incites you to violence, not all the previously existing monstrosities inherent in capitalism? Sort your priorities out my dude.

Be the change you want to see in the world, user. Imagine if all the people here who seek validation to kill themselves would instead die attempting an assassination attempt.

Liberals truly have a one-track mind.

We ran out of things to do over a year ago.

I knew they were shit, but no that much shit.
There are MMO generals on /vg/ who are less circlejerky.

Okay, two years ago. Damn it really has been a while.


Repealing NN is good for free speech? What?

the corporations dindu nothing comcast is based now.
t. Holla Forums


Ironically Twitter and other big sites will be fine, since they can pay any fee the ISPs throw at them for full speed service. Smaller sites aren't as lucky. But "muh free market" right?

They have bought into the idea that NN means government controls the internet or something.

Nah, they're just so retarded that I'm willing to bet at least some of them might chop their dick off if one of their talking heads convinced them it would trigger sjws or something.
Don't give them too much credit, it's fucking Holla Forumsyps and gamer gaters we're talking about, they're incapable of rational, independent thought.


because they are cucks

As long as we have email we can use mailing lists.

kinda hoping this happens. shit's comfy

At least they aren't quite 100% cucked by lolbertarianism, as the idea of using anti-gambling laws to fight against pay2win has a generally positive reception, last few threads I've done on Holla Forums. That said, the fact that even several morons out of a thread with a few dozen posters in it are dumb enough to fall for "muh gubmint! muh invisible hand!" on such a clearcut issue is depressing.

If Obama did it first they would probably be against it. Cuckservatives really hate him for some reason, even though he is a right-winger.

because cuckservatives think he's a left winger.

it honestly probably is because he's black

Yes, companies will pay so you can have their service for free…

how dumb are you?! the end user will be charged for it one way or another.

It's all about what the ISP wants to do to make the most money. They can charge both the sites and the end user.

Other poster's point was that while big websites would suffer somewhat (need to pay zero-rating extortion to ISPs), it's a manageable burden, as opposed to the completely unavoidable barrier it will enforce against both consumers and small startup websites.

Better pirate every book, software, game, resource, OS distributions, obscure specialized shit youll never use like radiation calculators and ham radio firmware etc just in case you cant soon.
Then take it all and host it on a piratebox so people can download it.



A lot of it is bots and shills.

Are you really shocked.

Right-wingers need to be gassed.

that was on infinitechan

Imagine if this seriously fucks up people's daily lives. It could actually causes massive unrest. Everyone uses the Internet these days.

Is this satire? Can't twitter/facebook still ban whoever they wan't after the repeal?

They don't care.

Price of internet goes up for family barely making ends meet? Who cares.
Price of healthcare goes up for family with a sick child? Who cares.

These people are sociopaths.

Literally the only thing I can imagine making Americans angry enough to go out into the streets is someone fucking with their Netflix and RedTube viewing.

It's already causing massive unrest. The only thing holding it back is hope in the courts and in congress.

If those fail, all hell will break lose.

What times we live in.

no it's serious. Trump shills honest to god think that net neutrality is a government plot so that social media can ban people for criticizing sjws

So uhm, a huge majority of people support NN, what the fuck happens if it's indeed legit repealed and passes? Do I go full doomsday Hoxha or what?

4chan is dead.

It's been dead for years, where have you been?

Not on it tbh. Just got into Holla Forums a few months ago.

the tea party itself was a pretty fucking embarrassing revolt too. It makes sense when you think about it.

Well actually the tea party (in the sense of the 1775 one) was dumping property of the Crown into the water, so it makes sense.

The new one is fucking retarded and only led to congress becoming more reactionary.


Who is "they"? The bourgeoisie? Of course they don't care, but the average person definitely does. The internet is everything at this point, it is the primary and often exclusive method of entertainment, when you fuck with already unhappy people's entertainment you're not only pissing them off, you're also giving them a chance to look past the circus and see how shit everything is. People will be fucking pissed if they now have to pay more for no reason, along with having their sites fucked with.

google throttles me all the time since I'm using adnauesum. Can see it chugging along anytime I encounter google ads.

Internet utilities aren't some evil menace. They have to continually maintain and upgrade networks stretching across a continents as netflix and google get to use their networks to send ever increasing amounts of data. Net Neutrality was made to protect not the consumers but these multinational tech companies from having to deal with internet utilities in contract negotiations over the amount of data that is being used by them in money making operations. it makes sense for anyone who hates tech companies to view what is happening as a good thing. I certainly do. I fucking hate these parasites.

unstickying, the latest liberal idealist panic over illusory freedoms is not worth a sticky. leaving the cycle cuz why not?

As much as I wish for Holla Forums to try to figure things out beyond LMFAO LIBERALS BTFO, I wish for leftypol to try to do more than LMFAO POL BTFO. The internet is not a resource that is ours in anyway now with or without Net Neutrality. It is owned by the powerful who are fighting amongst each other for the larger scraps.

You are such a useless sack of shit. Just kill the board so we can get a better BO.

Comcast isn't an internet utility.

I really don't know if you're trying to make a joke or not.

How to do this le one does not have the space and already have a 10gb data cap?

based BO

Seriously, we've never stickied anything unless there was a major announcement or a raid, or something, it's very possible that't's a new or a rogue mod.

Tbh, some Nazi's are actually with use on NN.
They want the dailystormer back up and so do I (for containment).

google interesting enough still is maintaining (illegal) control over the domain

All they're doing is overturning Obama's regulations from 2015. They were only in effect for 2 years. Internet was fine before that. Why the outrage?

because calling it Obama's regulations isn't accurate. All the Obama administration did was codify into law what was already being done.

Ah, the classic "everything I don't like is liberal".
How the fuck are enforced laws or the absence of them idealistic? Do you even understand what idealism is?
I didn't know not being throttled, gouged, or censored was illusionary.

If you thought the sticky was unnecessary, then so be it, but you had to go and add your ignorant, abrasive opinions.

Get the dick out of your mouth.

Ah ok. Do you happen to know what court case that was in 2014? Would like to see it directly.

With help and suggestions given by major tech companies who derive large amounts of profit from such a framework

You are already being throttled, gouged, and censored on your shitty Burger internet, there are third world countries with internet way faster for half the price.

Netflix v comcast

this is America, that's a given. The only choice available right now is tech companies who want net neutrality vs even greedier tech companies who don't want net neutrality.

Basically netflix traffic was overloading the capacity of comcast in certain locations that meant that all traffic was being degraded but netflix has a god given right to use as much as the network as they want to make money so they whined to Barry with other tech companies and with donations given got their law just how they want it.

Look into the profit margins of internet utilities versus netflix/facebook/google

remember that time google made a huge deal about how they were going to BTFO comcast with google fiber and then it went nowhere. Well turns out running cable and infrastructure to every fucking house in a metropolitan area and then maintaining and upgrading it actually doesnt make that much money


of course the answer to this whole thing is that internet utilities shouldn't actually be private businesses and should be the entirely government ran but America

If netflix/facebook/google win they keep making their profits but if comcast wins then everyone in the US gets screwed and millions of poor americans are suddenly priced out of the internet.

shhhhhhh stop talking sense to the Americans.

BO's a girl.

Why do you say that?

They'll do nothing. Government took billions of people's tax dollars in 2008 and gave it to banks. Nothing happened. There is absolutely nothing the public won't put up with.

Personally I've seen prices go up and data limits being introduced in the last few years even with Net Neutrality so not sure why you think it was key in preventing people from being priced out. Net Neutrality has nothing to do with how much ISPs charge their customers btw. It only has to do with how profit is divided and as we know the relentless demand for more growth in capitalist businesses means that no matter who won this struggle things would become worse for the normal person. I just think it's absolutely naive and ignorant to pretend that Net Neutrality was of any benefit to normal people and should be something to be praised or fought for.

also it's always a disappoint to see how some people would rather make self-indulgent posts that add nothing to a conversation instead of trying to have a constructive conversation. Maybe that's the reddit effect on society at work

net neutrality as it is is better than letting telecom companies arbitrarily charge people more money or slow down the internet when it comes to using certain websites.
Hell that's what they were caught doing in 2014 before the rules were formalized.


they absolutely can do that under Net Neutrality and have been doing so since it was put into law.
this happens anyway since internet infrastructure is not infinite and has data limits in throughput. Instead of specific hogging services being targeted (netflix/youtube) it instead reduced everyone's speed.

What do you mean by that baiter.

So if NN didn't do anything why did it need to be repealed?


Yeah, this is a bait thread.
But no BO this isn't liberal idealist panic you dumbass

for the few people going to fuck in the ass, our freedom for the people and the poor who don't have shit is gone for now

the point is that repealing net neutrality makes it easier for telecom companies to do this. You're naive if you think corporations won't immediately take advantage of this, especially when Comcast is getting a giant tax break now under Trump.

NN allowed major users of internet traffic (google/netflix/facebook) to use existing internet infrastructure without paying a premium. The reason it's being appealed is because the internet utilities have bribed Trump/republicans more than major tech companies did in campaign donations. It was just a law meant to protect major tech companies. No matter what happened internet service was going to get worse since demand is exceeding supply (internet infrastructure).

best outcome

Like I said before Net Neutrality did not stop internet utilities from charging more. It's odd you are calling me naive when I've made it clear that no matter what happened things were going to get worst for the people without any power (us the consumers). It's ridiculous to think that there are any "good" or "bad" guys in this struggle between internet utilities and major tech companies. Under the current economic condition we will always be preyed upon.

no ones arguing that this is about good guys or bad guys. But you seem to be saying that getting rid of net neutrality doesn't matter when its a clear attack on the poor and a big handout to comcast.
true. And keeping net neutrality would mean slightly more protection from being preyed on. Getting rid of it is objectively bad for everyone except telecom giants.


So what is clear is that you don't seem to believe me when I said that Net Neutrality has no stipulations or power over what ISPs charge their customers for service. Comcast could charge (as long as they dont discriminate) $100,000 a month and it would be legal under Net Neutrality or without it. Please look into the specific law in question and find for yourself that the only entities it ever benefited were the major tech companies who were the ones to draft most of it with their lobbyists.
Under Net Neutrality I saw my monthly bill go up in price and found myself subject to a data limit with charges if I went over it.
Your argument is one that could be seen on reddit by a typical liberal who fucking LOVES science. If that's where you got that argument then rethink how you arrived at it since the Net Neutrality shit going on over there is no way organic.


My ISP just sent me a pamphlet in the mail highlighting their new packages for social media browsing.

scan it broski


And of course getting rid of Net Neutrality is a huge handout for ISPs because the law in question was a huge handout for major tech companies. Don't fall into this trap where you start to cheerlead one set of capitalist forces over a different set. Though to be clear the major tech companies have done more to damage the average workers than ISPs ever have.

Let's try this again:

This. Also never forget that a lot of support for neoreactionary shit comes from the tech sector. Let them fucking die.

Screw you guys, I need job! It's hard enough getting one without all the classcucks getting suckered by startups.

repealing net neutrality would allow them to repackage the internet in order to make people pay more in order to access specific sites. In other words, you'd pay extra to visit the same websites you visit today for no reason.
Enjoy more of that happening because you didn't buy the imageboard expansion pack.
the fuck is that supposed to mean? no seriously, the fuck does reddit have to do with this

this. something to remember. Liberals could easily turn this whole thing into a rallying point for a different set of corporations.

*a job, durr.

ISPs can charge their customers more. ISPs can charge their customers more. I can keep saying it but Net Neutrality offers no protection to consumers of internet service in price protection. Under Net Neutrality internet prices increased nationally. Without Net Neutrality internet prices will increase nationally. I hope you can see the connection and understand this is how capitalism works and why it sucks.
You seem to think I am a proponent of either side of this corporate struggle. Things were always going to get worse for the average person no matter what as the internet became more valuable of a resource.
you argue like a redditor and try to equivocate whoever you argue with whatever you are against. This can be shown by you somehow thinking that because I think Net Neutrality was completely useless to the normal person I am somehow pro internet consumers getting a worst experience. Overly emotional really like most liberals.
They have. As have you in this thread by somehow thinking that I am pro ISPs and using that as your guide post in your argument.

Form a coop startup.

we need a leftist darknet, ladies n gents

Man, I ain't got no cash. And co-ops in Capitalism are a less-than-ideal solution anyways; all's they do is let the workers exploit themselves.


really reaching there user.
accusing other people of being overly emotional for disagreeing with you on an imageboard sounds like a pretty liberal thing to do imo.
no, I just think your wrong to suggest that empowering ISP's isn't going to make things worse for americans.
We're both in agreement here, I'm just saying that repealing net neutrality will make capitalism suck more.


Where do you even organize your Labour union meetings?

See this is why I called you overly emotional because you so easily have lied with it being so easily disproved. I'll say it for the third or fourth time that of course things are going to get worse. But they always were no matter what happened. The more valuable the internet becomes the more exploitative access to it will become as well.
Usually when someone starts using personal attacks like calling the person they're arguing with "naive" usually shows how emotional they're getting especially when their argument could be copied completely from a site like reddit.
Yeah I guess from your perspective capitalism sucking more or less is entirely reliant on if your favorite corps had lost or won lately.

Q.E.D.: video gaming forums are the most classcucked places on the internet

"Heh, nothin' like burning down the internet to own the libs."

you call me emotional and say im using personal attacks while accusing me of supporting corporations that i don't.
You do realize that net neutrality is about more than just profits right? That ISP's can slow down certain websites if they don't like them? And that means that leftist news sites can inevitably be targeted, meaning that pro-capitalist propaganda will be more easily spread around?
That's what i mean when I say that getting rid of net neutrality makes things worse. All you've done is say that both sides suck so it doesn't matter.

The first article neglects the costs for internet data are specific to internet data and ignores that the internet data requires the infrastructure that also carries phone and cable. It's impossible for internet utilities to have 98% profit since coverage requires them to deploy massive amounts of infrastructure and connections to each residence.
I have no idea how they figured this figure out since in the linked pdf it's not mentioned anywhere. I'm just going to assume it's a tech illiterate person misunderstanding something like how this kind of thing usually goes.

You are emotional because you tried to belittle the person you argued with, lied about what they were saying, and argued as if they held a position they didn't have.
If you are entrusting your enemies to treat you kindly then you are a fool. Also ISPs may slow these sites down but the real worry you should have is major tech companies and their ability to silence them as they've just done recently to the dailystormer or previously when google blocked 8ch from showing up in searches.
Anyway you seem to believe that trusting capitalist companies to allow lefitst thought to flourish isn't actually a bad thing so I can only imagine you didn't think this through or you're completely deluded.

oh I searched 3 percent and got better results

June 2008, 45 percent of Japanese and 39 percent of South Korean broadband connections were
fiber-to-the-premise, compared to less than 3 percent of U.S. fixed connections. See “OECD
Broadband Data to June 2008”, table 1, (June 2008 OECD Data).
this should no be surprising giving the size of our respective countries and the relative density of populations.
portion of their capacity to broadband, on the order of 3 percent.
In 2007 there were other ways to connect to the internet than just broadband. Also this is very outdated and not accounting for how internet traffic has exploded with the widespread usage of youtube and netflix.

welcome to imageboards, the home of serious discussions.
no I didn't.
Are you implying that I'm not worried about that?
I don't trust capitalist companies, which is why until capitalism ends something like net neutrality is needed to prevent capitalist companies from censoring the internet.
Just saying "you can't trust the capitalists maaaan" in this scenario is like saying you shouldn't support minimum wage laws or child labor laws because even though they help the workers it doesn't solve all their problems overnight.

if you don't give a shit about having a conversation just post an anime girl and stop. It's my mistake to treat you genuinely when it's obvious this is just a game to you.

I never made any suggestion and even made an argument that things would get worse. This is why I'm saying you are a liar but perhaps you don't even realize it. You're too caught up on self-indulgence that you pay no attention to what the person you're talking to is even saying and instead invent arguments in your ahead to argue against.
I have no idea how unaware you are but this is already happened, is happening now, and will continue to happen. It's fine to be for laws that benefit you but it's also ignorant to think that they are eternal. Look how quickly laws protecting unions died. The more you rely on the capitalist law system the more vulnerable you are.

Also you seem to think that the internet=ISPs. There are many more players in it than just them. Net Neutrality never had any power over the other players.


Read the tables. The costs specific to Internet service are broken out separately, according to Comcast's own accounting.
Infrastructure that is fully depreciated, and whose costs have been fully recouped, and which are not being upgraded, as cable & especially DSL providers are currently forcing subscribers onto "4G" cellular for residential "broadband" connection.
Censorship on the Internet is annoying, but can be bypassed with some difficulty. Destruction of the Internet in favor of its old competitors (AOL, Compuserve, Prodigy, etc.) would be a killshot against online freedom, especially now that open non-computer networks like POTS no longer exist. Pics related are what will happen if 3 decades of net neutrality are destroyed.

Most of the stuff about Japan was quoting the prices for their own DOCSIS upgrades, illustrating the totally unjustified pricegouging burger ISPs charged for the exact same thing.
The facts aren't on your side, prove it.
ISPs have always wanted to shill their "in-network" services over those coming over the Internet, and as such have dedicated as little bandwidth within the networks (largely subsidized by Internet subscribers) as legally permissible.


Which country after US do you think will follow suit? Will we have the worldwide abolition of Net Neutrality soon?

here you are again accusing me of lying about you while you make assumptions and lie about my position. I am fully aware of this, My argument from the beginning has been that since capitalism isn't going to disappear overnight something like net neutrality is necessary to stop the worst abuses from happening. I already know that capitalists will be trying to make things worse no matter what, constantly pointing that out accomplishes nothing when every party here already agrees.
I don't think they're eternal and nothing in this thread indicates that I or anyone else was arguing that. Are you against trying to use the law to your own advantage? Unless you can produce a communist revolution overnight some measure of reformism is necessary in the short term.
which is why the left should try and protect unions, just like the left should try and advocate for a free and open internet. Logically the death of net neutrality should be a great talking point against capitalism because of how blatant a corporate takeover of the internet it is.

Somewhere in the Anglosphere. We've always been the most classcucked outside of Asia.

No fiber is still current.
fire article was about time warner and I did look at the tables and at the time internet was being sent over the phone/cable lines so it seems time warner did not associate the costs to deploy and maintain that infrastructure to the broadband accounting.
bad idea to throw all the eggs into the government's hands as if they aren't going to fuck you over. But here is a hint things would have gotten this bad even if Net Neutrality was maintained. The gate keepers in that case though would have been the major tech companies instead of ISPs.
the article is talking about pre docsis 3.0 internet from an article written about it in 2007. It's outdated also I think the author wasn't quite clear on what he was writing.
we are using 33,648 PB of data per month in the US. The throughput of service providers is strained and there is not 97% of capacity not being used.

Data limits of 500 GB a month and increases of charges that could be 10% or more were happening DURING net neutrality. I have no idea why you think it benefited anyone besides the major tech companies.
Domain registers have complete control over the internet currently and they are all corporations. If they want to they can take your domain. Net Neutrality does not protect against this. ISPs in power or scope pale against the major tech companies. I think my main problem is that you are screeching about ISPs taking over the internet while ignoring the much greater figure who already basically controls all content that people see or interact with. This is mostly why I called you a liberal and I'm pretty sure you are since it seems you believe that Google, Facebook, or Amazon are not much much much bigger threats than some ISPs who might make it a bit harder to go on your favorite social media site.

UK or Canada. I'm willing to bet UK because of all the censorship that seems to be going on in media. Canada just because it's basically America lite.

So please answer me fully then. When I made an argument that Net Neutrality is not actually a magical law that is perfect but something that benefited major tech companies at the expense of ISPs and consumers I made sure to state that the withdrawal would lead to a worse experience for internet users too. I even made an argument that internet users would have a worse experience if it stayed law. You then green text my argument into saying that I don't think things will be worse for americans if ISPs are empowered.
Truthfully asking are you incapable of arguing honestly and have to resort to lies constantly that you no longer recognize it when you do so or did you not understand my previous arguments and decided to argue against what you thought I was saying?

Would be too surprised if imageboards were turned into discord-like servers, if this happened world wide.

wouldn't be*

Are you really going to go with "muh gubmint", as though government regulations imposed on the market are some sort of coup, or as if an unregulated market wouldn't turn into a monopoly so ironclad as to be worse than any imaginable government tyranny?

Jesus Christ, "all the eggs into the government's hands" would be publicly-owned last-mile Internet access. Get some perspective.

Such data limits are universal, as opposed to being unequally zero-rated in a way that locks in anticompetitive norms.

ISPs pose a greater threat than Google or Amazon without NN, specifically because it is theoretically possible for competitors to arise against websites, but if ISPs have killed the Internet in favor of their own intranet services, that becomes completely impossible.

I didn't say net neutrality is necessary I said something like net neutrality meaning obviously I would want more protections than just what used to be in place. again, dishonest.
this is a thread about the repeal of net neutrality and you're wondering why i'm talking about the repeal of net neutrality?
I had no idea you could read my mind user.
which has huge implications on corporate power to regulate what information people receive.

completely ridiculous and out of touch. I have 3 different wired ISP services at my location to choose from. Not to mention satellite. There is no alternative to Amazon nor the power it has in our society or their wishes in shaping our buying habits. Google is more of a threat to any of us than fucking Comcast who are inept and driven by greed. Common Carrier laws are still existing too so it's a bit much to believe that we are facing a new hell world because one fucking law (drafted by major tech companies) is now "gone". Last I heard many state governments want to implement their own Net Neutrality laws and many suits are being filed.
And yes expecting the government to protect our ability to learn and network is retarded when you wish to get rid of capitalism. Net Neutrality's end is going to mean that people might pay more for their shitty television shows or facebook feeds. Barely anyone leaves the major websites.

This is a thread where people are making fun of Holla Forums for wanting NN to end out of spite and ignorance while showing very little knowledge of how little NN did to protect the common people or the fact that ISPs are not the sole power in the internet. To try to paint ISPs as the greatest threat and most ruinous wielders of corporate power is so incredibly out of touch I feel insane. The major tech companies are already regulating what information people receive and have been before Net Neutrality was a law, while it was a law, and after it finishes being a law. The only fucking answer to this question is that EVERYONE IS BAD but to ignore how massively a boon NN was to major tech companies is outrageous.

Also it's not hard to "read your mind" when your arguments are copied and pasted from reddit.

Nice one.

based on your inability to read the thread this isn't surprising.

Reread my post
With NN still in place, as it has been for decades, giant websites are certainly a bigger threat than ISPs. My point is that eliminating NN would create something far worse.

I've responded to every argument you've made. Now you invent new lies. A broken man who can only fight shadows. Be careful of yourself.
The way you exclaim the danger that ISPs will have on our society, breathlessly, while ignoring the damages the major tech companies have done so far and the massive benefit they have received from NN that outlaid so many of their costs to these supposedly evil ISPs is one quite prominent there. If you aren't visiting reddit every once in a while to see what the neoliberal tech class is thinking then you surely should. Their viewpoints are what is popular in the most powerful companies in the world (did it come from top down I wonder).

You are ridiculously overstating the capabilities of these ISPs. I totally understand how it's going to suck if they divide up major websites into plans. I never argued against that. My point this entire time is that the power they have is so little at this point compared to the major tech companies. They do not have the manpower or capability to create a great firewall like your worst fears are. Nor even the inclination.

different user. just for clarity's sake are you saying isps aren't capable of censoring or throttling internet content?

jesus christ man hire a new writer.
This is a thread about the repeal of net neutrality, hence people are going to talk about the negative implications of that repeal. Saying that ISP's taking over the internet is bad does not mean ignoring the already existing corporate monopolies.
and you accuse other people of supporting corporations

A great firewall can be bypassed, because you're still connected to the Internet, that's not what I'm talking about. What I'm worried about is ISPs literally DISCONNECTING FROM the Internet, in favor of their intranet services, after they slowly throttle it to the point of unusability and herd all the normalfags out, maybe with a little moral hysteria thrown in.

This is literally what happened to USENET.

What was USENET, comrade? I've seen it bandied about whilst trawling the annals of internet history, but I was but a wee bairn when it was in full-swing.

They're driven by greed and nothing else. ISPs want money. The major tech companies want your attention and to influence your beliefs. Which of those is evil. But of course you are too keen on finding a way to insult then to find any common understanding. This is why I said you were very emotional.
Yeah and we're discussing why it actually was never to our benefit.

ISPs are indeed capable of that. So is the government. So are domain registrars. So are DNS providers. To think ISPs are the only ones to worry about is ludicrous and yet is too common a belief.
ISPs also already throttle internet connections and have before and during NN. What they aren't supposed to do is throttle specific content. But demand is way ahead of supply (the infrastructure) so there is no way around internet throttling during peak times which are becoming longer as more and more data is consumed thanks to things like Netflix.

that is an incredibly irrational fear. It would also be the best thing possible since it would crater the world economy and give a revolution a really good shot. Let's hope it happens huh

Actually they all want to do the same thing. You sound pretty spooked about muh tech companies though. Which is strange because this won't affect them much at all. It will however harm competition, which ironically will hurt a lot of Holla Forumstards' autistic attempts at fighting google.

I honestly think I'd rather just bomb verizon.

They also have an ideological motivation to shut down leftist ways of thinking.
Yes and so do verizon, comcast, etc.
both of them?
If minor shitposting offends you maybe you should go to reddit, you seem to know a lot about that place.
are you autistic
And your wrong for saying that. We already agree that tech companies are bad and they shouldn't have control over the internet, but the loosening of government regulations on the internet will allow corporations to have even greater control of the internet. I still don't see why you're so concerned with the tech companies vs ISPs dichotomy when we've already established that neither should be supported.

cool just making sure

Well no one's saying that but you already know that. Though…

they are pretty scary though.

Boy, you're retarded.

Imagine a mailing list (if you're too underageb& to know what that is, it's a discussion forum run through eMail by an automated botscript), but instead of being centrally administered by some cocksucking mod by point-to-point protocols like HTTP or POP/IMAP, it's fully distributed through a special protocol called UUCP. As such, it was split into "newsgroups" that were available in a decentralized fashion.

In other words:

Its main downfall was the coming of spammers, since CAPTCHAs were invented far too late. As population dipped enough, ISPs eventually seized on the tiny amounts of child pornography being distributed in binary groups as an excuse to completely discontinue USENET access as a standard part of their services.

HEY its a start

Dont criticise when people wake up.

I'm not from Holla Forums. It shows how fucking pathetic you don't agree with has to be some other. But no the major tech companies are the greatest threat to us as people and any dream there is of revolution.
Google operates too many business at a loss (like Youtube) just for the data. That data gives them tremendous control over how to target us especially considering these companies are at the forefront of AI research.

see this is the problem. You think NN is helping us but it was just giving control over the connection line to the major tech companies. Then you say that when it ends it will allow corps to have even greater control of the internet. THEY ARE FUCKING TRADING. At no point do we the people have control over the content. NN was a contract between ISPs and tech companies.
The man with the same opinions of reddit declares that anyone who disagrees with such opinions should go to reddit. Cute. I have no problems with shitposting. I have problems with someone lying just to try what score some points in thread on 8ch? Sounds pathetic to me but maybe that's what you consider shitposting. Destroying your own self-respect.

They want control. They don't need help getting money at this point. You need to fucking wake up.

Yeah. Domain registers can shut down websites. Major search sites can hide results. None of of it is good but to pretend that ISPs are the biggest danger is ridiculous.

It is exactly what happened from the '80s into the early '90s, before decreasing backbone connection fees and the freedom of the landline telephone system allowed people to set up cheap dial-up ISPs. The Internet is living on borrowed time.

If people were forced off Netflix or Amazon, and back into the waiting arms of XFinity/U-verse/etc., would normalfags really be that disrupted?

The world economy would implode if internet ended in the US. I think that's a good thing. I also think that the US government would not allow ISPs to destroy the world economy. You called me retarded for worrying about Google but I think you're delusional for thinking comcast secretly wants to end the internet.

I also think these tech companies with a trillion in offshore accounts will probably buy out ISPs and embrace total vertical integration in the coming future.

Other bad things are bad, therefore we should help bad thing become more bad

Are we in member of the FCC? Are we elected officials in the house or senate? Who the fuck is helping here? Just because I refuse to whine tears for Google having to go negotiate and lose some of their profit with ISPs doesn't mean I am in anyway supportive of any of this. I want all these companies nationalized. I want the government to provide internet service. I want the government to invest in 1st world internet infrastructure across the nation. Stop arguing like a fucking child and wake up a little. You keep saying you don't go to reddit but every time I try to read one of their news threads I see disingenuous posts just like yours everywhere. They are all the fucking enemy but to try to pretend NN is the end of the world is ignorant and has been shown in this thread to be something few people look into. The end of the world is already happening and was during the times of NN.

no, I think NN was a minor regulatory fix on a greater problem. You keep harping on about the major tech companies when no one is disagreeing with you that they shouldn't control the internet.
this is completely true and does not contradict anything said previously. The point is that with NN intact you get fucked by corporate monopolies like google (shocker, i'm criticizing google now-funny how you kept accusing me of supporting them) but without NN google still has the same monopoly plus Americans also get screwed from behind by ISPs.
taking a joke seriously? guess you do have autism. Reddit would love you.
No lies, only disagreements that you're framing as lies.

Captitalists, if they had the power and technology, would comodify the very air we breath.

I never called you delusional for worrying about oversized websites (the harshest thing I condemned you [it was you, right?] for was suggesting that NN was a government powergrab), that is certainly a problem, pic related, one among a great many. But pretending that NN isn't vital for the very existence of the Internet, in todays broadband age, that is foolhardy.

Again, NN can't solve every problem by itself, but eliminating NN would cause many more problems to pop into prominence.

again, no one is doing that and we both know it.

In other news here's so info on how title II relates to infrastructure.

not super relevant but interesting

when are you going to take things seriously? World is dying and every day our the most powerful companies in the world grow richer and smarter. Maybe it's time to stop acting like a kid throwing insults like autist around and start to act like a real person. It's not fucking wonder I'm having to argue in a hard against NN because people like you actually think it was made for us. Obama was not our friend and the NN regulations drafted by corporate lobbyists weren't looking out for us when they made it. I'm just struggling at how this is so difficult for you to figure out. Or given the general rampant defenses NN gets on major websites why most people.

I keep seeing this argument that the end of NN will see internet access become more expensive but it did over and over and over when NN was a thing. Download limits were introduced when it was a thing. Throttling still happened when it was a thing.

first link

im not aware of making that argument. NN was a christmas present to major tech companies. Also your image is for ants

I was referring to this post:

Oh, also, I accidentally posted a thumbnail, durr. Here's the full-sized version.

Ah I wasnt talking about government powerrgrab at all. Just how pointless such regulations are since they change at the whims of whatever group of companies has donated the most lately

You've been saying that a lot. I actually forgot to ask for a source. It dosen't really make a lot of sense anyway. the whole point of net neutrality is that it reclassifies broadband Internet access as telecommunications service rather than an information service and this places it under the purview of Title II a monopoly regulation from the 1930's and Section 706 of the The Telecommunications Act of 1996

Why are you so passionate about defending this damn ruling then? Unless (surprise surprise) your objective here is to sling enough mud to discourage us from taking action to protect net neutrality (which is still eminently possible). these are the guys who wrote it. a lobbyist group for most of the powerful tech companies. The main effect of Net Neutrality is that it prevents ISPs from prioritizing or blocking specific traffic from the major tech companies who are the ones that are pushing the most data out. As the chart shows

the major tech companies have become an increasingly major part of all web traffic. I posted the number earlier but US monthly web traffic is like 33k PB. The major tech companies comprise half of that. Now the issue is that they are receiving the most benefit of the internet presumably but they are not paying at all for the infrastructure that runs it. These costs are instead placed upon the end users. The problem is that infrastructure cannot keep up with content consumption. So when the ISPs started to bite back and try to demand payment from the major tech companies who benefited the most from their networks. NN quickly became a thing which led to costs raising again to meet demand for ISPs which say internet costs increase. That's my read of what has happened and who benefited the most. I think the power of Google or Amazon is much greater over information control than the dozens of ISPs across the nation.

It's a paper tiger. But mostly it's because I don't think most people realized the ones who benefited the most were the major tech companies and any action must be taken with knowledge that they are the main winners from NN. Some of the arguments I saw in this thread was that NN ending would increase the cost of internet. Which seemed silly to me since the cost of internet has risen by quite a bit during the time of NN and bandwidth limits started to be introduced as well too. I also don't believe that ISPs are going to create a dozen different firewalls to block specific content outside of the big websites that most people use. The only reason I'm "passionate" is because I've barely seen any competent criticisms against NN. I'm fairly sure Holla Forums is only against it being LIBS BTFO kind of mentality while others will accept whatever Trump does. I also dont think the purely libertarian free market argument is a good one either (or ever). I think there are many sweet words in NN that mean nothing to normal people while the big juicy meat (who pays) was won by the tech companies who I think are the greatest threat we face in society.

> these are the guys who wrote it.

how? like a just said net neutrality is a reclassification that places broadband Internet access under different already established laws. so what specifically did they write?

You colossal porky dicksucker, NN was "created" in an official sense in direct reaction to abusive behavior at each individual step, one lawsuit at a time, see:

And really, all your rhetoric about websites "not paying for it" or consumers "being forced to pay for it". JESUS CHRIST, ALL COSTS EVENTUALLY TRICKLE DOWN INTO THE HANDS OF CONSUMERS WHETHER THROUGH ISPS OR WEBSITE SUBSCRIPTIONS.
I think you are being disingenuous in how "easy" it was to turn it into a regulation. But as I am not a member of the FCC or a lobbyist I do not know what specific parts they wrote. Please read through all of that.

Why are you calling lawsuits between corporations abusive behavior? This is how they function. They are parasites. The conflict was over money in regards to who paid for internet infrastructure. I've made it clear that the consumer always loses in these kind of exchanges. If you've read what I've written previously you would know that belief. Why then attribute naive thoughts to me? But internet access is more of a priority than website subscriptions obviously right? Let's imagine that Netflix had to pay part of the bandwidth cost they use over the internet infrastructure. They would of course raise costs but people would be more willing to stop using netflix than to stop using the internet.

See I think this is a pretty easy thing to figure and logic through. But you instead try to simplify completely then use it as an attack. And as such you've totally fucking glossed over how NN has yet again given a huge benefit to the major tech companies.

Instead of being a cunt and learning nothing but some self satisfaction you could have spend a minute trying to see it from my perspective and realized that hey maybe he had a fucking point. You need to work on killing the ego since it's clearly detrimental to how you socialize with others.

sounds a lot more than a simple reclassification. Were you totally unaware or were you hoping to win an argument in the hope that I wasn't aware of how the process happened?

calls someone "porky dicksucker"
NN has only seen the cost of internet access rise while the major tech companies saw huge profits over guaranteed access to internet infrastructure they did not help pay for. Fuck you. You are the type of cancer that drives people apart and scatters groups. I fucking hate how punks like you are so fucking mouthy online but in person you won't say shit but will only go away to backbite like a coward. You shill for the most powerful, more wealthy, and most technologically advance companies in the world seemingly in ignorance and yet through out vile insults to those you can't understand.

As brainless as any fucking liberal who sees anything that goes against their previously held beliefs (gained through access to MSM and the largest websites) as an enemy who must be the most hated. Go to Holla Forums and see men who have your similar mentality call out anyone they disagree with a kike. Or have some self respect and treat others like humans if they've made their point in good faith as have I.

I thought you were a shill, turns out you're really just this autistic. Go channel your obsession towards reading some leftist theory instead of Comcast lobbyist talking points

Those lawsuits are how the extent and limits of public regulatory power are defined, through the creation of legal precedent.

The only reason NN even became a legislative issue was as a precautionary measure against the possible threat of courts ruling against the FCC's ability to exercise restraint under existing law.

To who? An ISP? For infrastructure their competitors also use? The current predominant arrangement, the one that has ruled over the Internet from its earliest days until recently, is that ISPs grant access between their customers, and their customers (whether individuals, or businesses) pay for access to each other through ISPs. That is the arrangement around which the Internet is structured.

And repealing NN would be good how? If it doesn't do anything, why are ISPs out-lobbying everyone else (who are in the vast majority united against ISPs, both across industrial sectors, and across partisan political lines) on this issue?

Look, you spouted talking points straight out of the ISP shill handbook, pivoting from "it's bad", to "it doesn't do anything", to "bad people want it" as the argument went on. If you're not a shill, you sound way too much like one.

???? Net Neutrality was done by the FCC which is part of the executive branch. There has been no laws passed by the Legislative branch at all for this. See this I think you're just trying to win an argument and you don't fucking care at all.
Yes and it is odd that the most powerful companies in the world get unlimited access to this very lucrative resource. But I must be an ISP shill for daring to notice this.
I guess you've read nothing I've written. It's not good. But it wasn't good either. It's not hard to recognize what a huge amount of power it allowed tech companies to keep (unrestricted unlimited access and data over internet infrastructure) and yet know that things will get worse. But EVEN if we kept NN things would get worse. This is not hard to understand unless you are willing to ignore everything to "win" a fucking argument.
See it's weird right how NN passage implies that ISPs weren't out-lobbying everyone. But when a new administration came in it suddenly shifted. Maybe in this corporate fight for power the tech companies sided with one party and the ISPs sided with another. It's not a matter of "out-lobbying" its just how these wars are fought at the expense of us the people.
why. Because I think NN has on the whole provided tremendous support to the most powerful and richest companies in the world? That's not even controversial. Why would I be a shill when it seems that you are the one defending these companies in this argument? Have you ever spoken to an ISP shill? Do such people even exist. Do ISPs hire people to post on the internet in 8ch? Instead of doing the typical thing Holla Forums always does and throwing around shill (or kike) maybe try to understand the argument.
Then again maybe you're just a shill for Google. You seem to place their benefit at the forefront of all of this.

Like why should I worry less about companies the most profitable companies in the fortune 500 instead to worry about shit like my shtity ISP that just had an 88% decrease in profit. I'm not scared of them. I'm scared of alphabet, apple, and amazon.

You're also missing the part when the users are benefitting from NN.
If two shitty competing corporations support two different otions, it is logical to support the option that also benefit me.

The ISP can now potentially prevent you from accessing to non mainstream thought, even more stealthily than any GAFA shenanigans.

/liberty/ is retarded as always:
Like what the fuck these people are thinking? They have no idea how about all this works but apparently they are experts in everything because they've read basic economics or something

That's not the problem, though. I have had unrestricted, unlimited access and data. Not only in my own sites, but in using the internet in general. And why is that? Because the only reason to restrict or limit it is extra profit, and in order to do this an ISP actually has to effectively sabotage their own system and artificially prevent it from connecting to certain things. The infrastructure was developed through public research, and up until now no one has told private entities that they should be allowed to wrench it in this manner.

Telling them they can doesn't level the playing field. If anything, it wastes resources and makes everyone involved below a certain income level worse off. There is no silver lining.

Are you even arguing with them?
There are all kinds of ways things can get worse. We can talk about war between the states and Best Korea - things will get worse regardless, so who cares? Oh shit, Americans and Koreans who would be dealing with the consequences would care? Well, maybe some guy in the DNC is opposed to a Korean war sequel, and he's a bastard so clearly anyone who supports or opposes such a war is just a puppet of one or another evil rich guy.

Unironically good question.

Bumplock this thread already, he's obviously a shill and even if he wasn't this discussion isn't going anywhere.

Nationalizing ISPs is a much better solution to go along with taxation of any data sent from a major company in return for money. Much better than NN which has basically allowed tech companies to run rampant without paying a cent to anyone.

I prefer the option I listed above. I'm not going to support anything gives more power to the richest companies in the world. I'd rather the internet become unpleasant to use.
so can the domain registar. So can DNS server owners. Why are you not worried about them. In terms of censorship the major tech companies have done more in their portals than any ISP in history. There are many ways to get around a blockage an ISP can perform. None if a domain is stolen.
ISPs can prevent easy access to a website you know of. But for discovery? That is the domain of the tech companies and as I said before they've performed more censorship there than anyone bar China.

So here is my main points.

The worry for ISP censorship is fair but their ability is less than domain registars or DNS servers. Discovery of information is (almost) entirely in the tech companies hands at this point and with advanced AI they can do it at a scale unheard of.

The removal of NN benefits ISPs. The implementation of NN benefited tech companies. In terms of revenue/profit/future growth potential the set of companies that are most powerful in this domain are the tech companies. If you are against capitalism I believe that tech companies are and will be the greatest barrier to ending it.

That price of internet access will rise with the removal of NN. Of course. But during NN the price of internet access rose. Bandwidth limits were even introduced to previous no limit accounts. NN had nothing in it to stop price raising or any implement to stop unfair price increases. It's been entirely useless in this regard.

So far the arguments I've seen have been mostly those 3. About 1/3 of the rest were attacks calling me a shill. I think that is intellectually lazy and almost par the course to how discussion goes on Holla Forums which is sad. I think I find the complacency the most frustrating. The thought that NN is the best deal for the normal people. That's false. We could do so much better but it's so easy to just keep the status quo. What the fuck has the status quo done for us? Are we any better off than when internet access became mainstream? I think it's not good to adopt the liberal "free" internet = extra good idea without any observation. If we look at who is has been best for the only conclusion that can be raised are the tech companies. They have thrived under the current framework and have destroyed so many jobs in the process while pocketing the profit. This is how I see "Net Neutrality" and I think if you are at all honest you should see my point as well.

No you don't. You have a max download and a max upload speed. You are lucky to be paying enough to not have to deal with bandwidth limits. Your consumption pales to the output and input the major tech companies commit. Linked earlier the top sites consume 50% of the data of the net in NA.
The infrastructure was paid for by the internet utilities who have charged more than they should since they are parasites. In truth we the people paid for it. And we grant free access to ourselves and this infrastructure to these vulture tech companies. I don't think that's smart at all.

How am I a shill? I really don't fucking understand how anyone could be so dumb to not see how much money the tech companies have taken from all of us using this infrastructure built from our blood. And you want this to continue forever since this is how it's always been done? Why are you even here if your ability to process information is on the same level as someone from Holla Forums whose go to response to anything is kike shill.

I'm aware, but laws were repeatedly proposed (and in some cases came close to passing) in order to shore up FCC authority and unequivocably fend off legal challenges starting from the mid-00s. This was the highest among many arenas in which a battle was being fought between the FCC and its allies attempting to enforce regulation on ISPs, and ISPs attempting to nibble away at regulations imposed on them.
Really, upstarts like Google and Facebook are more powerful than decades-old conglomerates?
Is that any more "odd" than everybody getting access to the roads and waterways of the country? Why would you want to restrict access to the Internet, the central idea of which is to act as a master "internetwork" between disparate networks?
Bingo, but would they worsen as quickly? The tens of millions of dollars spent by ISPs, and absolutely nobody else, to pretend this is some sort of "debate", a debate whose opposite number are spending 3-6 times less on it, indicate there is something very substantial up for grabs by one single group of powerful and universally hated corporations.
Bottom line: Do you think NN is worse than no NN, if not, why do you even care? Are you, perchance, a sour-grapes turbo-armchair LeftCom, or an "enlightened" apolitical centrist fence-sitter?
I can't say Holla Forums for a certain, but the overwhelming majority (in excess of 95%) of online shilling and botspam on the issue coming from the anti-NN side is a known fact:

Sure, but regarding NN itself, that's a "the ACA sucks compared to socialized medicine, so I want to repeal the ACA"-tier nonargument.
Nobody said they aren't, many in this thread have said exactly the opposite
Key word there: ISP. Compared to what the old non-Internet BBSs like AOL & Compuserve did, that's peanuts.
With NN in place, as has been normal for all of Internet history.
>The removal of NN benefits ISPs. The implementationPRESERVATION of NN benefited tech companies.
And everyone else other than ISPs, which is why literally nobody other than ISPs is against NN.
And the FCC was the only conduit through which it was fought, with actions proposed to eliminate caps.
Not quite entirely, some DPI-based throttling and excessive caps have been challenged by the FCC.
And a strawman, nobody is saying we should stop at NN. Again, "muh single-payer, muh Osamacare"-tier nonargument.
W-w-what!? Now that's outta' left field, I'm not sure exactly you're proposing, censorship or something?

Nope, paid for mostly by public endowments, the majority of which was pocketed by ISPs without actually building most of the infrastructure they agreed to as terms for recieving it.
You appear to be complaining about the fact that people like using lots of bandwidth to stream video over the Internet. How is that tech companies' fault? What alternative is there to people using lots of Internet bandwidth?

What you wrote (and I was responding to) was about net neutrality, though. I assumed that your commentary was on topic when I responded, but you're veering off here into another issue (and one which has also seen online companies voice opposition, if you were implying something about that).

A process which also involves paying for and maintaining servers. This is bandied about a lot to make a false case for scarcity, but I don't really see it as relevant.

See post above mine.

Yeah and I have no idea how you can't realize this. Either you're out of touch or trolling. I;m going to bed. Also I don't buy the whole 2 choices kind of deal that led to republican/democrat kind of deal. Seems you're stuck in that mindset like a soccdem which is odd for an anarchist. I don't think our current internet system is good in how it allocates bandwidth. Corporations are in no way paying their share for what they use. From what I'm aware public endowments were for mainly rural internet access while cities were left to figure out their own thing. I know in my city centurylink didnt receive a public endowment to lay out fiber.

are we fucking ignore how throughput works? I don't know how the fuck you think data storage is anyway equivalent to data usage

Not as bad as people say IMHO. The Tiered shit won't happen. It didn't happen Pre-2015 so it won't happen now. But it is bad for website hosts like 8ch as the repeal of Title II allows ISP's to play kingmaker.

For example They could make Whatsapp data not count for your Data cap. But make Telegram count for your Datacap.

Why don't people just jump onto NN-friendly ISPs? What problems come from that?

Net neutrality is the historical norm, regulatory actions by the FCC are merely about preserving that status quo. See

I'm on about the Tiered shit won't happen.

The point is that repealing NN will put us into uncharted territory if it goes all the way through

In the current case, regional monopolies are a problem. A lot of people just don't have that choice. The current ISP giants are also notoriously hostile - Comcast, known for shit-tier service, are also (and this is not a coincidence) known for aggressive hiring practices towards employees of smaller companies and cutting the cables of small ISPs. Repealing Net Neutrality is likely to make this problem even worse, as it's effectively welfare imposed for the benefit of the largest ISPs.

Have sweet dreams of a world where bandwidth is an actual srs issue.

Haven't ISPs in Portugal suggested something along those lines, though?

Opening up the possibility is shitty enough that it makes it a concern - because it could be profitable. And I think the point poster above you makes is perdy valid - the violations that got ISPs in trouble pre-2015 were usually things they thought they could hide or test the waters/bait the FCC with. If they didn't come out with tiered "packages" (loaded with items they don't own), it was probably because it wouldn't have lasted and they would have to basically confess to what they were doing in order to sell it.

Due to physical realities of networking (except for directional wireless, which is uncompetitive with normal connections), competition among ISPs can only happen at the software rather than hardware layer. Sadly (unlike copper telephone/ISDN/DSL) none of TV cable, cellular, nor fiber-optic allow other ISPs to use their infrastructure:

i love how the only arguments against net neutrality are

outside of more developed areas youre likely to have few options available to you. for a while, all i had available to me was verizon, comcast, some horrendous wireless service and dial up.

It sound like whatever you want but if you can't actually explain why it's not what does it matter what it sounds like to you?
Were you totally unaware or were you hoping to win an argument in the hope that I wasn't aware of how the process happened?
I think I did you didn't refute anything. I think you're implying that because because a bunch of websites mailed him about how Paid Prioritization is bad that means they wrote it?

Just use Facebook Messenger!

Also the internet association isn't named anywhere in any of the links you posted.
The closest thing I could find is the Telecommunications Industry Association.

Which kind of undermines your accusation that it "wrote" net neutrality (wrote the FCC order itself?)

Literally this. If Obama did this they'd be screaming their heads off for him to be strung up by his balls. But because it's their big daddy in charge it's suddenly "le based FCC chairman drinks SJW tears xD".

Totally NOT a cult, nope!

Fuck tribalism!

I really can't get my head around how someone can buy into ISP shill talking points about parasitic tech software giants vs workhorse poor ISPs
google pushes costs of maintaining and upgrading physical networks onto ISPs, ISPs push costs onto their customers
this is how it always works, all the costs trickle down to the end consumer, same shit with corporate taxes
the trick is, google just provides a platform, there's an objective demand now for streaming video and audio
so someone needs to pay the bill regardless if youtube is still there or not
so from the end consumer point of view it really doesn't make any difference
except, you know, ISPs have orders of magnitude more leverage over their customers than any google could dream of
you can bypass google, just don't connect to their servers, but you can't bypass your ISPs

the only argument ISP shills can gauge out is "muh competition"
but look around you, and look at the past
telecommunications industry is especially prone to monopolization
just look at the fucking AT&T
it was so entrenched that it required more than ten years of lawsuits to balkanize it into baby bells
if not for the government regulations prohibiting AT&T enter into computer market UNIX would've been copyrighted now

Believe it or not it's not an insult

Laser data link network when?

No the case that led to reclassification was a Verizon one

Sorry but it turns out the Mercers aren't shelling out for this one. Wonder why

so this is our future lads
regression into disconnected local networks
fuck this gay earth, I want off this ride

Cuckerberg and Jack would gladly pay to give themselves the upper hand over future competition, I wouldn't worry about either site

That was just this one guy's setup. I'm sure it could be farther. I know there have been wifi parabolic dish links of several miles.

Yeah but every internet contrarian gets their opinions from retarded comics ever since Carlin convinced everyone that comedy is real activism somehow, and they're all on the anti-NN train now either just to be edgy or because they're too retarded to know better. My own lolbert friends on social media did a 180 on NN when all the Rogan clones decided it was bad actually

Meme Magick is real!

Where do you think we are?


Mailing lists are out backup. And if that doesn't work, chain letters.


The main, biggest criticism that people have is something you don't "believe" will happen. No wonder you're anti-NN.

Whether you "believe" something will happen or not, it is supremely fucking unwise to give that power to corporations. I don't "believe" that apple would launch nukes if they were to be given the launch codes and access, because there's no logical reason for it, but I don't see why the fuck I would support them if they suddenly started campaigning to be given the rights to have access to nukes. I don't care if that arrangement will also hurt microsoft somehow, my main concern is not giving the nukes to fucking apple. This is hyperbolic, but still. "Believing" that a company will not use the devastating power given to it is a really fucking poor idea.

wow, really made me think

Will they be able to block encrypted email?


In a worst case scenario, they might block ALL network traffic except for the few exceptions of the handful of utilities they provide. If you want to send any email at all, it has to be through AT&MAIL, the featureless web interface that can't be encrypted because you have no real access to it.

Again, this sort of thing would be a worst case scenario, but it is wise to suspect and expect the worst case scenario. If not now, then eventually. I would be seriously surprised if all of the providers switched to a walled garden approach like AOL immediately, but with the laws wide open, over time they may well start to consider it.

Why can't you encrypt/decrypt using a program on your computer, and then copy/pasting into the mail program?

Why must this happen user

You know, even if they shut down the fiber backbone all together, we could still use modems to relay messages around over the phone lines.

ISPs can simply block all encrypted traffic
there were attempts already in some countries on behalf of intelligence agencies
they can always use terrorism boogeyman to justify it

Well I suppose that's possible. It makes it really fucking difficult to expand any sort of community that's doing something like that, however, since all participants have to already have the codeword/decryption program on hand. I don't know how well leftypol would transition over to a shitload of people sending cyphered emails to each other over AT&MAIL.

God I hate that faggot

Maybe we could encrypt in a clever way that doesn't look like encryption. Like, where the encrypted text is actually another set of readable text.

It would be a serious setback, but a possible solution.

They like to talk about that but they can't do it, the economy is too dependent on encrypted traffic.

well, i2p traffic tried to masquerade as some streaming data last time I checked, don't know how successful it was
ISP 100% can identify and block tor traffic tho

Theoretically, I think you should be able to cypher any given text into any other given text.

Retarded theory but I have one.
Thoughts on my retarded conspiracy theory?


Only work computers with the Premium^tm Work^tm Upgrade^tm which costs 60 dollars more per computer and government agencies would probably be the only ones allowed to use that

Aren't there hardware backdoors in all the chips? The Man will always be able to spy on us, but as long as we can communicate, we have a chance.

am I the only one who finds BO behaving more and more like pic related

t. Porky

R.I.P. old Internet.

Oh the days of one letter boards on Half chan

could work? I'm not even close to tech literate enough but I do know you can have buy a amazon EC2 server instance with elastic IP use that as a "disguise".



that's what happens when you don't pay attention to your reifu anymore
/a/utists forgot their ways, forgot the art of reiposting
now we atone for our sins


they jump through hoops and take huge leaps of faith to assure me that losing net neutrality is going to save me money because its going to save isps money, since netflix is apparently oh so terribly expensive to host.
ignoring the fact that data transferred is already paid for by the customer

Pre-Trump, I recall 4/pol/ being really pro-NN. In another 6-7 years they'll probably support open borders and multiculturalism.

theyll support the abolishment of the bill of rights by then

One of the earliest shilling points for Trump back on the early primary days was "he is against TPP unlike clinton or the other rep candidates, so he won't fuck the internet"
That went well.

The problem with Holla Forums is you only see the people who stay. Some of them are dumbshit true believers who'll gladly swallow anything daddy trump jams down their gullet so they can totally own those fucking libshits, but I wonder how many people left Holla Forums and reddit over this? They can harbour murderers, nazis and the KKK, but surely the smarter ones are realizing that their internet anime titties are on the line now and that'll definitely push them away. This has the side effect of making the true believers even louder and more visible as the reasonable (or "reasonable") voices leave. so even as they lose support they seem to only get louder and more dedicated. But I really do think they are shrinking as they keep compromising and working against their own goals just to take the contrarian stance.

Does this provide an opportunity for leftist groups to win people over? Pic related, leftist groups could come in with underground secret internet services.

Between this guy and that BDS smear thread a while back it's been increasingly hilarious to watch them claim to be communists and then inevitably slip into a "but muh job creators" talking point. Still triggers my paranoia though, one of the reasons I originally gravitated to chans was I felt I could trust the opinions expressed to be genuine.

One thing we need to do IMO is to get Astroturf / Porky's shills on the mind of the movement to restore NN, real protection is doubtful due to NATO's propaganda force but getting people to question the financial forces behind ideas is always a good thing.

Rei a shit.
Asuka best girl.


yeah but theyre not organizing because if they stayed this long they already swallowed all the propaganda about their "enemies" (you guys, who are really just fellow truth seekers in the end regardless of perspectives)

its literally just shills. comcast and the gang are out in force because netflix is stealing their customers from their trashy, ad ridden, glitchy fucking tv """""service"""""

The only way to avoid ads entirely is to pirate.


the only thing im implying is that theyre mad that peolpe dont want to buy their garbage.
people are doing the free market thing and theyre pissed about a superior service existing.
remember when retailers bitched about digital distribution? ask some australians


Anybody else here old enough to remember how this played out last time?

Anyone got images or screen caps of Holla Forums & Holla Forums on 4 & 8ch being absolutely retarded over this. Preferably hot takes would be nice

its because he's black. they see him winning the presidency as the ultimate affirmative action handout. the intensity of this effect was only heightened when he won the nobel peace prize for existing and not being george bush

i cant say im that fond of him overall. our presidents dont seem to be for the people. the bank bailout happened.
still, its beyond fuckin retarded to hate something good he may have done just because it was him doing it.

Y'all two are adorable, y'know that?

That's just IDpol in general. Most folks aren't taught to think in terms of policies and economics, so they just see politics as a perpetual outrage machine.

Honestly man, you're spoilt for choice. All across the net, conservatards are coming out the woodwork to defend the repeal.

Oh, he sucked, I'm definitely not saying anyone should like him. Hating him because he's black is just some dumb racist shit though

this is correct

oh and p.s. this is also correct, none of them are

No way!?

this has to be a samefag
two retards straight out of a liberal la-la land
what are the odds

being a neet who uses the internet all the time is going to get really expensive.

the way you browse the net today, just watching any video you please and doing whatever you want is going to be a thing of the past as isps pull some bullshit out of their asses about bandwith being "more limited". it's going to suck.

oh and say goodbye to torrents

that's why it will be done slowly

Born too early to explore the stars,
born too late to explore the earth,
born just right for the age of internet shitposting

Good. It'll force all of you onto the streets, where real change can begin at last.


Anyone got sources for the 5 major talking points for ISPs going to throttle shit as soon as possible (the last one being Verizon basically said NN is the only thing holding them back), I actually would like to use this in a debate tbh

I don’t give a shit abort netflix because there is nothing important on netflix (only pointless degenerate enterteiment) if it all vanishes nothing happens. Only normies care about their degenerate entertainment.

The real danger is losing communication like forums, IRC and youtube (putting video on YT is important for communication).

Definitively not overnight.
It will take time because it would be political suicide to instantly fuck everyone internet after the vote.

Also remember most customers have a 2 year plan so they might not have the legal capacity to give the “new internet” to their customers.

Personally I say winter 2018 to start.
2020 at best.

Depends are you talking about VPN in America for Americans?
None-American VPNs for Americans?
Hard to say see below.

VPNs for none-Americans outside of America? Because this will not be affected.

I give you my scenarios, keep in mind all of them are legal to do now.

10) Everything like today only costs more for the same thing.

Because ISPs discriminate based on protocol
$50 for basic internet (text only no images)
+$50 for e-mail
+$50 for images
+$50 for video
+$50 for streaming video
+$50 for FTP (extra business package!)
+$50 for UDP/IP (game use this to play multiplayer) (gamer package!)
+$100 for torrent (linux download package!)
+$500 for VPN (because you can use them to circumvent all of the above restrictions pay more!) (Super web 1337 hacker package)

This is trivial to implement, you can get everything you have today only need to pay extra a lot of extra.

However the free market idiots will scream

This is the optimistic scenario.
The effect outside of US
Torrents that have US IPs in their swarm will get worse because the people will need to pay for the torrent package and some people will simply not pay extra.

20) Protocol and website blocking no way to pay to get them back regardless of money.

I say it will be a mixture between 10 and 20 (about 25) where torrents and VPNs will be banned. And ISPs will actively block VPNs while Americans will constantly buy new VPN subscriptions until the ISP finds this IP and bans it. Shity American internet.

30) Comcast the app ™ basically subscribing to a ISP = you get a separate network where you get about 10 app/services that are created and maintained by the ISP.


Everyone will be in one ISP and what “internet” you get depends in what region and what ISP you have.
Discussion like

It will be normalized like it is today with facebook

And your point is …. ????

Do you even have a point?
The point of NN is that if you pay $100,000 a month or whatever you will get the full internet.
This means you can connect to whoever you want.
If you don't have NN you pay $100,000 a month and can never connect to some websites.

The worst part is you might never see this because you will simply not see these websites ever.
And I'm not talking about not in google searches.

I'm talking if you get a URL form someone in 2016 you can type it into the browser and get to the website.
Regardless if the website is banned of google results or whatever.
After NN even if you get a URL you will not connect to this server because the ISP is blocking it.

Boomers are a fucking disease trying to turn the internet into cabel I pity you burgers I really really do


This is a good idea.

We should really set up our own ISPs.

When we're challenged (which we will be - many places have effectively enforce communications monopolies) we can point out that the reason people's service is shit is because their politicians and ISPs have a corrupt relationship which is directly affecting the constituents' lives.

By golly I can't wait for 2027

The vanguard party of Trumpfags invaded the internet in 2011.