*big sips at you*

press s to sip

You do realize that network neutrality was regulated since 2005, right? And ISPs were basically Title II before that?
Good job being a fucking retard.

Smells like endless September in here.

I didn't say that, you fucking retard. I said that they were Title II common carriers before 2005, and after 2005 "network neutrality" was a regulated thing, een they they were deregulated under Title I.
Go suck cocks on Holla Forums. You are a fucking moron.

Don't even bother. These people are either shills and/or subhuman pond filth.

Faggot.

It's Holla Forums, and you are a cocksucker.

go back to reddit faggot.

Title two was 2015

...

Have you ever considered that it might be their detractors shitposting juts like with legitimatley every other topic everyone complains about
Meanwhile it's just someone trying to get a rise out of either side for the attention.

Well first of all, no one said that. Second, the internet was NOWHERE NEAR mainstream in 2005. It wasn't until smart phones came around that the internet became mainstream.

Uhh. The internet was certainly mainstream before then.

wut. The Internet went mainstream around '95 or '96. That was when the various dialup services gave up and let their users onto the real internet. If you're going to argue that AOL wasn't mainstream I'm going to have a giggle.

I came here to laugh at you.

S

You are a complete newfag. I imagine you even voted Clinton amirite? owait, has to be 18 to vote. nvm

Nobody in the entire topic was talking about the jews, cocksucker. But I'm sure it was real in your mind.

Seem a little touchy that you got wrecked in two sentences, sodomite.
>>>Holla Forums

I think you're confusing mainstream as "widely available" with mainstream as "normies love this shit and interact with it constantly as a huge part of their lives and literally can not function without it" It wasn't until smart phones came around that gave them access to the internet at all times that it became mainstream in that way.

lol

You don't seem to remember the millions of people on AOL that could not live without email. It was definitely mainstream in the '90s.

No.

kys hooknose

DESIGNATED DRINKING STREETS.

DELET THIS NOW!

Well now you're just being retarded. Was the question about internet being mainstream, or about social media being mainstream?

...

You'd be right if there was no evidence that Holla Forums niggers ever acted like this, but then you go to Holla Forums and realize that this is, in fact, how they think, and seem to be the only people applauding this, and alluding to Jews while they do it. If these posts are satire, there's no way to tell.

The internet. Having basically one single thing that people use it for is not enough of a market for ISPs to jew out and charge extra for certain services like we have now.

Oh yeah it was. The whole topic of NN came up in the '90s regarding threats by ISPs to block messenger services like ICQ/AIM/MSN. The fear was that ISPs would block semi-peer to peer protocols by DPI where they aren't carrying traffic sent by the organization that they're targeting - a very new situation for the '90s. But then everything centralized so it didn't end up mattering.

Big sips right back you Chairman

that dot-com bubble was too underground for you in 2000?

...

END NN, NET WAR NOW

The Title II classification was made in 2015. While the title did techincally exist before then, the old version only covered phone companies and the traffic that went over their lines. These companies were "title II" before this because there were phone companies that expanded into ISPs. The reason you say "most" is because you don't want people to think about all of the small ISPs who were never phone companies and never had to undergo the classifications.

Get your head out of your ass.

The concept of net neutrality has been present even back at 2005. ISPs attempted to do shady shit back then through loopholes in Title I. Even ISPs admitted they couldn't pull off more shady shit because of Title II, you fucking dumbass.

lul

...

< can't message friends in the city because that costs $50 / month

...

>>>/reddit/

POO ON THE TUBES AJIT

You do realize that a majority of those companies (everything involving AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile) were already regulated under Title II, correct?

Hopefully 2018 will see the end of NetFLIX and jewtube taken down a few notches. Maybe webdevs will have to start paying attention to page sizes again.

...

*blocks ur netflix*

Are you retarded? Netflix and Google (Youtube) are the most likely companies to survive this. ISPs offering heavily metered mobile connections have already 'unmetered' Netflix. Small independent sites (especially conservative leaning ones) aren't even going to get the opportunity to dump buckets of money into being saved. NFLX and GOOG have truckloads of money to give to Comcast, Verizon, et. al. to not get their shit fucked.

Remember during gamergate how SJW would just scream "RACIST SEXIST" to get people fired, get articles taken down, get people banned from social media? Your ISP used to have a great excuse to let you keep browsing to Drudge Report or Inforwars or Holla Forums. But now SJW can just scream about how Comcast is racist if they don't block those sites. Now those sites get killed. Companies buckle to left-leaning affirmative action style pressure, your ISP is not an exception.

Those sites and Holla Forums could have been pulled down before Pia. Just look at DS, SF, and the rest. NN did nothing to save them.

Netflix doesn't have endless money. . They are already fucked with the Disney/FOX deal.They will have to raise their rates which will just drive more people to piracy.

Video entertainment will end up like music. No one fucking pays for music anymore.

So when is clapistan going to make use of its second amendment rights for their original intended purpose? It's time to put lead in these corporate cucks.

Twitter 7 days ago
Twitter today

She's cute, post moar

Netflex themselves backed out of the NN debate and outright said they don't care anymore. They think they've reached the critical mass required to survive.

I think the risk management people at NFLX have a better handle on their situation than a random imageboard poster.

Netflix was bleeding subscribers last I heard

Netflix is about to be btfo.
wired.com/story/disney-fox-streaming/

Yeah, he should've called them Shitflix,

Netflix didn't back out, they actively opposed NN and paid ISPs to zero-rate their traffic. The reason you see netflix in all those screenshots of 'deals' like binge-on is because they partnered with them to do it. They agreed to pretend to support NN along with other massively anti-NN companies like faceberg because they wanted to stir you up to get you to vote in senators that will block construction of the wall.

Title II didn't apply to the internet until 2015 (unless you are talking about DSL, of which this only applied because it was over landlines, a place where title II was already in place). Stop pretending to be an expert.

Title II did not apply but the Bush era ruling sure as fuck did. There's a thing called "regulatory direction", you fucking moron. The first Open Internet Rules were under Title I, and it was only when Verizon cried and shit their pants that they had to use Title II.
Argably, the FCC does not have the authority to use "forbearance" on Title II rules, but what is Verizon going to do, sue them and have the judge say all the rules have to apply?
No, they want to be completely deregulated and be able to shit on customers and engage in rent seeking.
Stop pretending to be an expert. Network neutrality has basically applied since 2005, because of regulatory direction.

how are fiber optic cables not 'landlines'?

Most ISPs backbone are under Title II, it's the last mile that's an "information service" because they don't want to unbundle their dogshit infrastructure.

Oy!

Oy Vey! ISPs have your best interests in mind!

See

The services in particular were not regulated under Title II, no. AT&T's landline is Title II, not its DSL. One is an "information service" and the other is a "telecommunications service". Despite the fact that both are telecommunications.

I'm sure the majority of these have been solved by the FCC or the FTC without having to resort to giving our internet to the government

congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/2943/text

Link is for the bill this post talks about btw

Probably the way to actually fix the american internet is to separate the companies that lay the cable and the companies that provides internet.
Basically comcast/AT&T/Verizon etc get their monopolies on the basis of "the city don't want a shitton of different cables running thru it".
So if you enforce that the company that lays the cable must allow any other company to use it, you still get monopolies on the cable laying services, or a socialist solution where the government itself IS the cable laying company, but the actual service have competition, as you can switch from an ISP to another as easily as just changing your home router IP.

Not facebook messenger, that's for sure.

lolI don't listen to racists

...

Face it, he single handedly trolled the whole John Oliver whiny fags and made America great again with single punch.

I would go as far as to say that he is best troll of this decade.

...

wheres his dox? The fags at pastebin removed it for being 2extreme4u

what do Holla Forumss conspiracy theories have to do with NN?

Yeah ISPs totally won't make deals with each other to ensure customers get assfucked

ya sure.

Yea yea, ur dumb buddy

IMPLYING that isn't already happening
More market competition -> more companies getting in on the game -> less the ISPs will make deals with each others

No market competition or stagnating slow and small market will lead to companies "not going on each others turf"

When you have to fight to survive in business world you will do anything to get bigger market share
Same with ISPs and tech companies

tell me, why does he drink the peanut butter coffee?

Out of sheer smugness. One can only dream of achieving the levels of smugness of this man. I one day wish to be this smug

How will the repeal create more competition among isps?

Imblying isps aren't granted literal monopoly charters by cities and counties with zero competition until there is a new form of infrastructure the city needs built dsl > cable > fiber.

Imblying ISPs didn't have absurd profit margins and were using that to infiltrate other even more profitable industries. See TWC 97% profit margins on high speed internet and their growing dominance in media.

If there is anyone you should be mad at it should be your local government. They are the ones who sign the franchise agreements. They are the ones who renew it every time it comes up.

I am. Honestly couldn't give less of af about nn. Just posted that shit because user went full retard. The only genuine solution to protecting free speech on the internet in my eyes is a constitutional provision for privacy and local ownership of ISPs. Then atleast you'd get decent service like that offered by The People's Rural Telephone Cooperative in Kentucky.

Also user you have to realize it's a natural monopoly, it would exceedingly inefficient to have multiple companies digging trenches and laying down fiber in the same area. Sort of the same as sewage or water systems. Local governments don't really have that much of a choice besides signing a monopoly charter or starting their own ISP to serve the local community.

Nothing, but all that Nimble America trolling money has to go somewhere.

literally poo

He's gone from shitting in the streets, to shitting on your internet