Net Neutrality (again)

well shit

Attached: heh.png (512x407, 26K)

>annoying Redditors
I thought Jow Forums were the ones shilling for a repeal of NN rules, reddit even made that thing where they posted pictures of their senators and showing if they had voted pro or con NN

>an extremely autistic interpretation of liberalism that doesn't even acknowledge monopoly/monopsony as a problem to the free market
I have some AnCap friends who are american and against NN, tried explaining that to them, but they kept on saying muh fucking freedom

Attached: redditNN.png (1920x1080, 236K)

Am I mistaken about the following: My service could become cheaper if high throughput users are charged more money.

>Net neutrality only benefits the top few percentile of bandwidth users
How is it bad that people actually use what they pay for to its fullest extent? That's like Planet Fitness complaining about people actually using their membership fully instead of just visiting once or twice like the rest does.

>I thought Jow Forums were the ones shilling for a repeal of NN rules, reddit even made that thing where they posted pictures of their senators and showing if they had voted pro or con NN
That's what I meant; dumbasses who base their opinions off of doing whatever most frustrates people they don't like and happen to not like pro-NN people; that is, our anti-reddit crowd.

Is anyone here worried about Net Neutrality going away, or is it just fear mongering?

Are we realistically going to have to start paying for packages like it's cable in a few years time?

Are we realistically going to be blocked from using certain websites because our ISPs decide they want to charge us extra?

I would think people would be rioting before this ever happened.

I believe they're already charged more even nowadays compared to people on lower tier plans with slower speeds/stricter data caps. That's the point of tiers to begin with.

alright, makes sense
thanks user

>Net neutrality only benefits the top few percentile of bandwidth users aka Netflix and pirates.

Wrong.

It will hurt small sites who can't pay for the premium bandwidth.

Netflix will end up paying, but in return they get a monopoly.

this

it hasn't happened so far, that's why no one is bothering so much

IF this shit actually gets repealed, then america will start seeing some dangerous riots

Not mistaken, that's exactly what SHOULD happen.
Unfortunately ISPs are greedy and high data using clients are flinging shit everywhere.
If data charges were more like how we pay for server usage, and less rigid (you HAVE to fill out 300gb because it doesn't roll over, or you HAVE to get an unlimited plan), then it wouldn't be this messy.
But again, ISPs have no incentive to do so because people are gladly paying (and arguing in favor of rigid billing because netflix says so) for a more expensive unlimited plan all because they might go over the regular data cap once in a while.

>Am I mistaken about the following: My service could become cheaper if high throughput users are charged more money.

Is metered internet illegal where you live? Fact of the matter is that it doesn't sell well. Low bandwidth users wouldn't bring in any money and big users would buy unmetered.

>Trust in ISPS Dips
What the fuck, people trusted their ISP in the first place? How do you trust someone that snoops on all your traffic all the time?

I trust my ISP
But them I'm not an American.

Are you talking about the ISPs or the government?

---post reserved for a parking analogy---

top kek

I don't understand anything anymore. Please post your analogy.

>Are we realistically going to have to start paying for packages like it's cable in a few years time?
Most likely not. Making a list of websites that can be accessed with a certain package isn't as easy as it sounds, as even something as simple as an e-mail package would be a nightmare to implement with so many e-mail providers out there that you have to include in said package, not even mentioning the truckload of subdomains, 3rd party scripts/images/ads etc. that a single website accesses regularly that have to be unblocked too for the site to function normally.
It might bring stricter data caps with either sites or costumers willing to pay to not count towards it (zero rating) or already big websites like Netflix willing to pay for a majority of ISP's bandwidth meaning that if you want to watch Netflix you'll have your 100 Mbit guaranteed all the time but for everything else you'll have maybe half of that as the "rest" of the internet could only use the "rest" of the bandwidth.

I've found the Trump supporter

Bandwidth, like parking space, is a limited resource and should be treated as such and should be rationed, even though it may be a pain for people, because pretending otherwise produces massive amounts of waste like American suburbia or clunky websites and exposes the system to risk of exploitation by "gluttons" through the tragedy of the commons.

This is an argument for data caps, not abolishing net neutrality, though.

bring back nn because you pay the same whether you'rse cars parked far from the mall or notok?

So people with 1 car can park for free but people with 3 cards should pay?

Also large auto makers like Volkswagen and Ford should pay a special fee because their cars take up more space than cars from smaller brands?

people had trust in isps?

auto makers don't pay for your parking space nutwit

it's america
don't question it

just take the bus dumbo
what the fuck is wrong with americans and buses

trust in this context means delivering the service they paid for
but isps have been slacking on the bare minimum now too

>what is an analogy

Because we have "parking neutrality".

People complaining about large sites like Netflix and YouTube "hogging the bandwidth" should also complain about big car brands "hogging the parking spots".
It is the exact same thing.

There's no reason readily apparent to you to use a bus instead of a car if cars and gas are dirt-cheap and your city is a sprawling suburb instead of a dense city like America, though.

Critique institutions, not individuals, as you can change the former but not the latter.

Hurr the company that pays for the bandwith they use is being subsidized by the consumers who also pay for the bandwith they use.
Want to know how I know you're a fucking retard who has no business posting here?

Attached: fuck you8.jpg (1294x478, 69K)

>corporations vs. "the people" narrative
>leddit wants us to think google and facebook are the good guys

Doesn't affect the average rioter, won't affect you either.

Instead of getting ass flamed by this, why don't you worry about inviting refugees into your house or something?

Attached: IMG_20180423_133004.jpg (176x263, 24K)

>as you can change the former but not the latter.
This is on all counts completely and utterly false.
BTW institutions are made up of actual people therefore if individuals couldn't change, institutions (individuals as a group) sure as fuck wouldn't be able to.

>I've found the Trump supporter

>wanting to ride with niggers and spics
its called freedom retard, sorry you've never heard of it before

Yeah I meant the public transports, not the people. I didn't think about the suburbs, though
as long as one isn't violent nothing gives you the right to change anyone anyway

Why would your service get cheaper? Netflix, youtube/google, these are all massive companies with a lot of sway. If anything your service will get more expensive.

Go back to fuckface no one cares about trump here

I think I understand now. I can be pro data cap and pro NN at the same time. It wouldn't be fair to be against NN because people pay for the same bandwidth.

Would you rather have ISPs censor websites or Google?

>literally afraid to take a bus
nice freedom you got there

How's it feel knowing you're never going to graduate from university?

>as long as one isn't violent nothing gives you the right to change anyone anyway
why do you have the right to change someone because they're violent?
besides, we're not talking about violent change, we're talking about changing/moving incentives which directly alter the way individuals behave/respond

>afraid
nope, dont like smelly fucks who ride the bus. You know people in America CHOOSE not to be around poor people, and only poor people ride the bus, and children but they also are cancer

>graduate from university
So uhh like, 6 years ago? You're the only underage here user.

>Would you rather have ISPs censor websites or Google?
i'd rather neither of them have that possibility but here we are, people willingly running into the arms of google to shut down all the 'baddies'

UPDATE: Fight for the Future released a Tweet thread: twitter.com/fightfortheftr/status/986993528503971841

What benefits will the lack of net neutrality give me as an individual? Net neutrality gave me the assurance that regardless of the content I consume I'll get it delivered without any discrimination or any asterisks.

wait, are you agreeing or disagreeing with me ()? because what i'm arguing for is also adjusting incentives, rather than micromanaging and moralizing individuals to do what we want, like is

individuals aren't dumb to not take a bus because american institutions don't encourage taking a bus; the solution to this is to alter american institutions, not to critique americans to take a bus anyway

I don't care about trump, but you're probably a retard if you voted for him and you're not part of the top 1%. Literally none of his policies are going to benefit you. But you probably just blame minorities for your problems when its really people like Trump taking advantage of your ineptitude.

Except Google isn't shutting down anyone, that's just Fox News Fake News.

>vote for the lizard-queen Shillary Clitton
You know people voted for Trump, the bumbling retard that he is, because Hillary could not be trusted with fucking anything? MUH RUSSIA. Fuck off Hillary you were shown being a corrupt fuck, who cares about who leaked it, you're a dumb whore! And Trump's presidency has only given me a better outlook of US government, because if he can be in office that long and the country doesn't burn to ashes, the system; as broken as it is, still works as intended.

The real problem with taking away net neutrality is now ISP's can legally block websites simmilar to how they do in the UK. Torrents? Blocked. Anything that doesn't agree with their agenda? Blocked. Of course you can make the argument that consumers can choose to no longer use that ISP's service (muh free market argument) but ISP's hold monopolies in many places, leaving consumers with no other choice. And people that would use the aforementioned blocked services are in the minority anyways. Though in reality it doesn't matter, nothing can stop the will of free shit on the internet, nothing.

Attached: waifu5.jpg (960x1280, 136K)

Jow Forumsniggers should be fucking hanged in public.

Not yet

As with reddit niggers, normies, etc. whats your point?

NN just states that every traffic should be treated the same, no censoring or slowing down

Data caps, just like on mobile phones, would slow down/stop all traffic after you used it all, depending on your plan

Sure, they are different things, but it's easy to mess them up

/thread

Shit, wrong post

>People complaining about large sites like Netflix and YouTube "hogging the bandwidth"
no one does
>complain about big car brands "hogging the parking spots".
people do

nice deflecting though
It is the exact same thing.

Attached: car989-400x298.jpg (400x298, 43K)

'big' as in popular, not as in physically large you moron.

>rather than micromanaging and moralizing
what the fuck, I never said that

>yet another sjwzilla grab for attention
pathetic...

Thank you for this, user

Now this seems like the final step in this process, we must make sure the congress repeals the FCC proposal

Net Neutrality cannot die.

If you're american, do everything you can to prevent this, call your senators, send letters, emails, tweets, anything asking them to vote in favor of Net Neutrality
You can start here battleforthenet.com/

If you're not american, spread the word to as much people as you can
Even if this is not affecting you today, just seeing how close we are to losing NN protections could incetivize other ISPs in other countries to do the same
If that happened, the internet would never be the same

This 100%. Removing NN just allows ISPs to make false advertisements about the actual network speed sold.

Australia has blocked the pirate bay, but if you google the pirate bay, alternative links show up straight away. There's always a way around that shit.

Where did you copy this meme from?

Attached: 1523942739804.jpg (1024x569, 109K)

>Implying any long post = copypasta

Fuck the FCC, the FTC should be breaking ISPs up.

Never trust a company.

>whataboutism

why?

>ISP's hold monopolies in many places
I'm tired of hearing this meme because it's literally incorrect. Every city, town, and rural area, I repeat, EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM, has more than one option for internet. Go to broadbandnow.com, punch in a zip code, and see for yourself. The ">B-B-B-B-B-B-B-B-B-B-BUT M-M-M-M-M-M-M-UH M-M-M-M-M-M-M-M-ONOPOLIES" argument is invalid.

>Don't trust monopolies
>Trust government control

Attached: 1330185990197.jpg (250x250, 36K)

The (((ABSOLUTE))) mental gymnastics of commies.

>no one does

You haven't followed the NN debate at all, huh?

>battleforthenet.com/
That site hasn't been changed since July. It's a dead meme being held up by a couple of autists, just like net neutrality.

Should rape be legal?

Why do you trust the government to enforce rape laws?

He means that in a lot of areas, there's only one choice for high speed internet.

>"M-muh commie boogeyman"

This is what the site looked like in july

Attached: bftnjuly.png (1920x931, 483K)

This is what it looks like now

Kill yourself

Attached: bftntoday.png (1920x931, 523K)

>I can be pro data cap and pro NN at the same time.
nobody ever claimed the opposite

>internet went up $10 a month for no reason
>Called them about it
>Well how about you switch lol too bad

ISPs shills will defend this for .01shekels

Except that's never the case. That's what I just said. Did you even read my post?

We don't, that's why women CC guns.

That's not even what net neutrality is about. The topic of local monopolies is a whole different discussion altogether.

Did you read mine?

>Murican dumped own human right for money (again)
Just leave it. its happen every fucking time.