Monthly reminder that it has been 10 days since the repeal of net neutrality took effect and yet no harm has been...

>laws and regulations just instantly spring into tangible real-world effects the moment they're passed

Attached: 1498207413603.png (480x270, 174K)

1. Google Fiber was a retarded idea. Few people actually need fiber.
2. Google's failure to enter the market shows that ISPs are not overpriced.
3. Net neutrality was taking away from profits that ISPs deserved for making the initial investment.

>expecting changes immediately

Do you have any idea how these companies work? They have massive PR firms. They know how people work.

They'll wait a while. They'll wait until it's all settled. Until it's all out of peoples minds. Then, they'll start slowly chipping away net neutrality from their services, selling them to consumers as "features" Need an example? Look no further than mobile data, which started selling unlimited access to certain services.

>Bu-but user! Free market!!

Doesn't work that way dumbass. Just over half of americans don't have more than 1 choice for ISP. But how will the free market save you if all the major companies are doing the same thing? Internet is largely a monopoly in the US. Remember, they are going to try to sell this to consumers as a good thing. So basically only tiny ISPs that exist in like 1 city will respect net neutrality.

>user! user! What about starting your own ISP?

Holy shit, you really think that's going to work? You need infrastructure to create an ISP. How the fuck are you going to get that? All of it is owned by big telecom companies.

>BUT IT'S ONLY THE SERVICES THAT I DON'T LIKE

Wait until they start throttling or blocking Jow Forums, and every other fucking imageboard out there.

I love how everyone here hates big corporations and LOVES freedom, but this time they're buying up all the shit that these companies are peddling because it'll piss off "the left"

Remember when this wasn't a partisan issue?

Let me guess though, I'm a shill, right? or a SJW? I'm waiting. Go ahead and call me a shill while your internet gets worse (and so does our economic competitiveness seeing how much our economy depends on the internet)

>Remember
>Remember
>Remember

Nice try retard

Great comeback right there. All you can hit me with is my use of the word "remember"

Ah, the wonders of Jow Forums.

Makes me wonder why I even come here sometimes.

>Wait until they start throttling Jow Forums
Oh no! How terrible! My favorite kilobyte sized will take 0.1 seconds instead of 0.01 seconds to load! So terrible!

Let's say providers decide to charge ridiculously high prices for access to Google. If investors think people are being overcharged, they will enter the market to try to get some of that money. This brings prices down. Google's failure to enter the market shows that providers were not overcharging.

It's more like

"oh no! My ISP has blocked Jow Forums and every other imageboard due to the employees not liking it!"

This isn't just about throttling. You're also giving ISPs the power to block sites. Do you really want that?

>"oh no! My ISP has blocked Jow Forums and every other imageboard due to the employees not liking it!"
>hire another ISP
>previous ISP loses revenue
>they see it's a bad strategy so they unblock Jow Forums
Wow!

Let me quote that guy for him.
>Just over half of americans don't have more than 1 choice for ISP.
They can't hire another ISP.

>Nothing is preventing you from launching your own ISP to compete.

Alright, let's get a bank loan and throw down some wires! Oh wait, some part of that is illegal.

Alright, let's just use the public's wire- wait, it's owned by those companies? Okay.

Let's rent out that infrastructure and resell it! Oh... I am now absorbed and become a subsidiary.

M-m-maybe we can launch a rocket and give everybody satellite dishes! Oh... performance is shit and doesn't hold a candle to current competition... except a couple of ruralfags.

T-that open, free, unregulated market, right guys? He did it guys, he made America great again!

The initial investment of letting the taxpayers pay for the infrastructure?

>Nothing is preventing you from launching your own ISP to compete
The existing ISPs that own the infrastructure are stopping you from creating your own ISP.

I love this faggy fairyland you kids live in where you think everything is magic.

Public money was given to ISPs to creat Internet infrastructure.

The ISPs spent that money on the network. But lied and didn't spend it on things like faster access.

Now, instead of offering you a service for a fair price on a network your taxes already paid for, they are Jewing you straight up the ass.

And little retards like OP are telling you that anal rape is good and you should like it. Just as the Jews told him.

it is exactly because he's clueless that he rightfully posts on Jow Forums

>Nothing is preventing you from launching your own ISP to compete.
>AT&TimeWarnerComcasterizon(TM) sues for $5 billion in your path
Heh nothin personnel kid.

>they can't hire another ISP
The (((ABSOLUTE))) state of Jow Forums. Every place in the US, no matter how small, has more than one ISP. Guaranteed.

then verizon is going to ruin me legally somehow

Reminder that GDPR has been in effect for 27 days and it's already caused major harm for European customers.

Attached: gdpr.jpg (1068x713, 38K)

>Net neutrality was taking away from profits

>le trickle down meem

see you in a year, burger

and they have the right to do so
Netflix wastes tons more bandwidth than your crappy blog

>Want to start my own ISP
>can't because local municipals were bribed to only allow one ISP and get shutdown
Pssshhh.... nothing.... personal.... kid.

>not passing economics 101
go back to your gender studies degree user

Based! Do we have a virgin free market vs chad corporations pic? Reddit soicaps got BTFO.

Except that starting an ISP is illegal and that in most areas there are only two options for ISP's you fucking brainlet.

2/10 made me complete a captcha for this

>illegal to start a business
ok retard

>This. It's a free market. Nothing is preventing you from launching your own ISP to compete.

Literally you are saying "now if you want to compete with Netflix you will have to build a parallel Internet first."

How do people still fail to understand that free markets are not "natural", they must be created and actively defended against forces which seek to undermine them for profit. Monopolies are just as bad for them as communism. NN is about preserving the ability to compete based on the quality of products, not the size of wallets. Everybody wins.

Nice reading comprehension.

what?
Do you even read what you type?

>ignoring externalities
>ignoring the impact of product differentiations
>ignoring natural monopolies
>ignoring social issues
>ignoring wealth accumulation
>ignoring information asymmetry
>ignoring the paradox of innovation under capitalism
>ignoring dumping
>ignoring predator-pricing
>ignoring private media manipulations
>ignoring the necessity of a state to enforce private property
>"haha, did you not pass econ 101?"
Yeah, it's noticeable you just took econ 101 and already consider yourself an "economist", user...

>>ignoring externalities
inevitable, be it in your commie world or in a free market
>>ignoring the impact of product differentiations
yes, free market adds more product differentiation, that's a good thing user
>>ignoring natural monopolies
yes, those happen, and with net neutrality they were more likely to happen due to less competition

>>ignoring social issues/wealth accumulation/the paradox of innovation under capitalism/the necessity of a state to enforce private property
AAAH you're a commie yes I see,
go to venezuela/cuba/ussr/china user and see for yourself what the policies you preach are causing
>b-b-but muh Denmark and northern countries
You know why no one buys cars there? cause car taxes were at 160% until recently, no one can afford them.

Also stop throwing random keywords around, I doubt anyone falls for shit like that

Your bait is too obvious, nobody hates free markets this much.

do you know how to read?

unfortunately, that post made me wish I didn't

This

>inevitable
Wrong, but besides the point. The point is not whether they're avoidable or not, the point is externalities must be taken into account. You're just showing everyone you're ignorant of economics by making such comments.
>free market adds more product differentiation
Most of the times, it does not - but again, that's beside the point. You're just collecting red herrings.
>due to less competition
What?! Are you deliberately spreading misinformation or just plain dumb? Competition skyrocketed like never before under net neutrality! See pic related. Also check this article: theverge.com/2017/7/13/15949920/net-neutrality-killing-small-isps
>you're a commie yes I see
Caring about social issues is communism? Now you're just being childish.
>go to venezuela/cuba/ussr/china user and see for yourself what the policies you preach are causing
I haven't preached any policies yet, but I'm not interested in hearing an economically-illiterate idiot like you tell me about what ruined Venezuela.
>people can't buy cars in scandinavia
What? The market's been up for almost 10 years straight in Scandinavia! Can you please start getting your facts straight and stop posting opinions as fact?

Attached: 1528865054559.jpg (700x583, 146K)

Based Verizon. Netflix fags make everything slow for every one good to see we are getting rid of them.

>the internet is a series of tubes

Attached: maximum_brainlet.png (199x236, 26K)

I too go on the internet daily to spread lies, fellow redditor!

Daily reminder OP is a faggot.

If investors thought they could compete with providers, they would build or buy the infrastructure. Easy.

The providers are offering service at a fair price. That's why Google failed. They had all the lawyers in the world to overcome the regulations and still failed because it wasn't profitable enough.

>Oh wait, some part of that is illegal.
Just because you're too poor to bribe officials doesn't mean its not a free market.

>Use up 500mb of blog
>Use up 500mb of netflix
>These two are somehow different
???

"Us Consumers"

Attached: shillstrytobelowkey.jpg (1200x800, 160K)

I wrote a dick post for 10 seconds then I deleted it, but please don't make OPs until you've read some literature. eff.org/deeplinks/2018/06/bleak-future-internet-without-net-neutrality-and-what-you-can-do-stop-it

Attached: 1501850096800.jpg (1200x600, 105K)

Please tell me how I've been harmed.

Calm down Pierre

Unironically yes. Investors will see that providers are more profitable now and consider investing. If they enter the market, then they will drive prices down.

Vote your politicians out of office or run for it yourself.

>it's harmful to NOT have your personal data sold to the highest bidder

Attached: Ad_Shills.jpg (586x578, 40K)

Vote your politicians out of office or run for it yourself.

Why do small businesses have to suffer just because you're a moron who didn't read the ToS? If you don't want your data sold, then just keep out. No one's forcing you to use those sites. You are not entitled to anybody else's content. Learn some economics, you bullshit ass nigger.

My internet speeds are 4 times faster. I’m not fucking kidding.
I pay for 10mbps and would be lucky to get 1mbps before. Today I clocked it at 9mbps.
Fuck NN you hoes are the reason my internet has been slow all this time.

>small businesses suffer because they are no longer allowed to store data about you they aren't supposed to store in the first place
>small businesses are more important than people's rights
If your business model is selling personal information to advertisers, then your business model is reprehensible and you should be dragged out in the streets and shot. I have fucking no sympathy for jewish cunts like you.

Small businesses can still provide ads the way ads worked before.

>gets fucked by his ISP for months
>'gosh durn this is the government fault'

>ISP regulations repealed
>Connection suddenly faster
I wonder

We've already seen multiple ISPs offering gigabit internet since a month after it was announced. The repeal has already brought us progress as a society, as most of Trump’s policies.

Meanwhile, I've had 1 Gbps/1 Gbps fiber connection for 7 years now, without some major cable company throttling Netflix and requiring me to pay streaming premiums and forcing their shitty cable-TV + internet + landline combos on me.

Stay cucked, America. It's what you do best anyway, since you literally invented interracial porn.

>just start your own ISP lmao
>just vote out corruption at every level of government lmao
>do it overnight lmao
>don't think about how you're getting fucked in the meantime at every level lmao
Why do you facebook niggers insist on leaving your containment zones? You have to go back.

>can't even sage a thread anymore

OK user. What is your solution? Seize the means of production?

How about regulating an obviously skewed market? Or at least stop subsidizing cable companies while at the same time removing what little regulation there is preventing them from screwing everyone over.

>just add more regulations lmao
>surely this time it will work

I will never understand why cucks like you argue that regulations that are aimed to protect customers and citizens are bad, and at the same time remain totally fine with the fact that all major cable companies and mobile providers receive millions in subsidies from your tax money.

>a natural monopoly, such as internet service, should be a state run utility
>contract out maintenance/expansion/setup to a quality bidder
>full transparency of how money is being spent at every single level, down to the cent
>consumer protections in place, such as data caps, filtration/shaping of traffic, any sort of tempering with information by a state or corporate/business actor being illegal
>instate net neutrality, all traffic is treated the same and equal peering
>allow for licensing of right to provide infrastructure to private firms, for the best of both worlds, while enforcing all regulations across the board

And anything else would be gravy, like:
>hold private companies responsible for fleecing the American public out of their tax dollars (twice), hopefully seizing all of their assets and destroying the companies in the process
>hold representatives responsible as well
>hold individuals responsible for their actions in the aforementioned fleecing; it would sure be a shame if someone were to find their locations and lynch them :^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^)
>dismantle garbage like DMCA, or anything else that is grossly abused and overreaching

yeah stop coming here and stay on reddit

>500mb
>blogging

Well sure if you do it for 10 days straight. Meanwhile it'd only take you an hour to use that amount of data on Netflix

Attached: 1527431576416.jpg (320x320, 28K)

Net neutrality is bad because it discourages investors from entering the market. People like you make the problem worse by putting up unnecessary barriers for companies to make a profit. Also, where did you get the idea that I think companies should be subsidized?

>Net neutrality is bad because it discourages investors from entering the market
Nope. Cable companies owning ISP subsidiaries is the force that prevents investors from entering the market.

>People like you make the problem worse by putting up unnecessary barriers for companies to make a profit.
Defining a cartel of companies as common carriers do not prevent them from making a profit, especially considering how Comcast, Verizon and AT&T all have considerably higher revenue than Facebook and Google combined.

>Also, where did you get the idea that I think companies should be subsidized?
The fact that no one ITT is shouting for their billion dollar subsidies to come to an end, but think that removing consumer protection is the best thing since sliced bread.

Stockholm syndrome from being anally raped by the jews, poor fools actually think they love jewish cock.

The government is usually inefficient and can be exploited by contractors because they have nearly unlimited income. See the defense department. Internet providers have shown they can do a good job running themselves so there's no need for more government intervention.

The companies that took money and offered nothing in return didn't break the rules of the subsidy. It's the government's fault that they made a shit deal with no accountability.

>pre-GDPR
>enter webpage
>it instantly drops cookies, fingerprints your device and sends it to ad networks without any warning and without consent and without even telling you that it did all of this
>navigate the entire site to find ToS/privacy policy
>"if you dont want your data collected please leave the page"
>unironically defending this underhanded shit

>The government is usually inefficient and can be exploited by contractors because they have nearly unlimited income
So literally the exact same situation as it is today then? See infrastructure subsidies paid out to Comcast, AT&T and Verizon.

>Internet providers have shown they can do a good job running themselves so there's no need for more government intervention.
Are you fucking serious? See above?

subsidytracker.goodjobsfirst.org/parent/comcast

subsidytracker.goodjobsfirst.org/parent/at-and-t

subsidytracker.goodjobsfirst.org/parent/verizon-communications

This is not about GDPR though. This is about Title II regulation.

Some of this is false, none of it is an argument.

>>>/facebook/

>putting up unnecessary barriers for companies to make a profit
Then why do you fags want to prevent Amazon and Google from making money?

I wasn't saying net neutrality was the only reason to not enter the market.

I was talking about net neutrality. You are opening a different can of worms by talking about common carrier classification.

OK. Businesses shouldn't be subsidized.

>nothing has changed, check mate NN defenders
>actually something has changed
>w-who cares? I-it was shit anyway

>small businesses suffer because they are no longer allowed to store data about you
They suffer due to all the new costs they'll face to comply, retard. Regulations always burden people with costs.
>they aren't supposed to store in the first place
If it's voluntary, they aren't doing anything wrong.
>people's rights
Positive rights don't exist.
You can configure your browser to not accept cookies from sites you do not trust, user. Stop exempting yourself from all responsibility. Businesses create jobs, what do you do?

>I was talking about net neutrality. You are opening a different can of worms by talking about common carrier classification.
Except that's literally what the entire debate has been about. The repeal of Title II, aka what OP is referring to as "the repeal of net neutrality", was the very regulation that ensured net neutrality through defining cable companies (note, /not/ ISPs, cable companies) as common carriers.

>They suffer due to all the new costs they'll face to comply
How hard is it to just stop gathering data the user didn't consent to, you flaming faggot.

>If it's voluntary, they aren't doing anything wrong.
It is voluntary now, when companies are forced to provide you a detailed list of what data they want to collect about you and allowing you to opt out.

That's how voluntary works.

>Positive rights don't exist.
The right to privacy is a negative right, fuck you jew.

>Monthly reminder
>it has been 10 days

He's not wrong, though, we've had anti-NN shill threads for several months.

You don't see how creating a state run utility would lead to more government waste? Are you arguing in good faith?

Your argument will surely convince me. Prove that a government wastes less money than a business. Pro tip, you can't.

>You don't see how creating a state run utility would lead to more government waste?
I'm not arguing agains this, I'm merely pointing out that several billions in subsidies to those companies is not a great argument for why private companies are always better than government.

The repeal of NN doesn't have any benefits for consumers and has lots of opportunities for big companies
Why would someone shill in favor of it?

>Why would someone shill in favor of it?
I wonder why indeed.

Attached: merchants.jpg (3500x2497, 517K)

We're both talking about idealized implementations in a vacuum, but the public utility implementation works better in the end (idealized or not). When's the last time you felt the need to seek out private power supply because your state run power company fucked you?

Step up your shitposting.

Being classified as a common carrier means the government can mandate net neutrality without going through Congress. It's possible to be pro common carrier and anti net neutrality at the same time. You can't use the terms interchangeably.

I wasn't using subsidies as evidence that businesses generally run more efficiently than the government.

There was also no benefit

>I wasn't using subsidies as evidence that businesses generally run more efficiently than the government.
You literally said that Internet providers have shown they can do a good job running themselves so there is no need for government intervention (this post: ), but that's demonstratively untrue seeing how they are massively subsidized and have been bailed out multiple times (see links in this post: )

>Being classified as a common carrier means the government can mandate net neutrality without going through Congress
That's not what it means. It means that they can not charge premium rates based on source or destination, i.e. they can't demand that Netflix pays more money simply because they are Netflix, in the same sense your mail carrier can not charge you more money or refuse to deliver your mail simply because they don't like you.

This is not about net neutrality, this is about common carriers.

>It's possible to be pro common carrier and anti net neutrality at the same time. You can't use the terms interchangeably.
That is because we aren't discussing net neutrality, we are discussing the repeal of Title II which defines cable companies as common carriers.

Why should I trust the government to run efficiently or not eventually abuse its position? Let's say the government ran power stations as a utility. What's stopping a corrupt government from shutting down power to all people who oppose them? Businesses would normally avoid doing that because it wouldn't be profitable. But all the government has to do is stay is appeal to the majority of voters such as Democrats or whites.