I’ve been thinking about the repeal of net neutrality and Article 13 a lot the past few days, and researching the finer details of both. After looking over it, I’m starting to think maybe Ajit Pai was the good guy all along.
For one, one part of the fine print of net neutrality stated that the US has to follow all EU laws relating to the Internet, including the upcoming Article 13. Since net neutrality was repealed, the US doesn’t have to follow any rules that the EU makes up, and can continue to operate the Internet like it always has, rendering the EU powerless over the US Internet (or moot, if you will).
Another point is that by repealing net neutrality, ISP’s are going to become more strict on web traffic and data, which possibly means larger websites will slow down. If this happens, companies will have to craft ways of reducing bloat on their websites, thus creating a return to lightweight websites.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but if these two theories above are true, does that mean Ajit Pai pulled one of the biggest ruses of the Internet age by actually being good for the Internet?
Ajit Pai was the hero of the Internet all along?
kys
hmm...
now you're just looking for silver linings
kys
woah i'm feeling pretty sleepy, how about you?
>For one, one part of the fine print of net neutrality stated that the US has to follow all EU laws relating to the Internet, including the upcoming Article 13.
Source?
De jure vs de facto status aside, repeal of EU jurisdiction over American internet is not dependent on the repeal of net neutrality as a whole. The appeal of lightweight factor of websites is a matter of opinion and should not be dictated by any law set by any federal agency, nevermind the FCC - in the same fashion that while airwaves (the physical structure to distribute radio signal) is regulated by the FCC, the contents being distributed (audio or otherwise) should not be forced to undergo compression ("lightweight") due to the lack of bands offered to the public space (what the net neutrality deal is supposedly going to do according to the dickchoker known as OP).
kys ajit
user, how did it feel to have your father violently rape and cum inside of you each and every night of your childhood? I'm here to tell you it's your fault. Also trauma like that doesn't go away so easy- it's easier to just neck yourself. Good luck.
it's late, don't you feel like a nap? maybe we should just rest our heads for a bit
>No blocking. If a consumer requests access to a website or service, and the content is legal, your ISP should not be permitted to block it. That way, every player — not just those commercially affiliated with an ISP — gets a fair shot at your business.
It’s worded in a way where it implies you can’t block anyone from any country to use your site. As such, under this, companies would have to allow EU users onto their sites, and by doing so means that companies have to comply with EU laws.
Well net neutrality being repealed wasn't an inherently bad thing from my understanding. It was actually going to be worse for big companies like Netflix and Google than your average consumer. We just got fake newsed the fuck out and we were actually fighting for big companies either way because Netflix, Google, Hulu, etc. were against the repeal because it would be bad for their business but companies like Comcast were for the repeal because it'd be good for them since streaming sites would have to pay more freedom units for their internet bill.
That said, it is possible that the package system like tv could happen. I pray that it doesn't but it just depends on how much people care enough to fight for their beliefs.
>the fine print of net neutrality stated that the US has to follow all EU laws relating to the Internet, including the upcoming Article 13.
that's been the left's endgame the whole time, make America exactly like the hell hole that is socialist europe.
their tactics are as such: make the public focus on the glaring "issue" while their ulterior motive is hidden in the fine print. use ad hominem and smear campaigns against their enemies. when someone questions the basis of their position, they call them a nazi, and call their question hate speech.
This but unironically. Rampant shitposters hide several mental issues.
>one fine print in net neutrality states that it has to follow the EU's laws
Nice made up shitposting. The USA would never say "always listen to this other government we have no say in."
Plus there was no such thing as a written down "Net Neutrality." Net Neutrality was an effect to strive towards by making it legally impossible for ISPs to alter, mess and prioritize content/services/… to their customers. They had to make it a title 2 utility because otherwise companies could sue the fcc constantly. Fuck off with your fake as shit shill posts.
Also, EU's article 11 and 13 on that proposal should be totally reworked since it's total garbage.
Jow Forums out in full force today it seems. Celebrating your rights been stripped away, congratulations your spot in history will be under the "modern brainwashing and propaganda" section. .
Luckily I don't live in your shitstain country but its funny looking in.
>HURR NOW WE DONT HAVE TO COMPLY WITH EU PRIVACY LAWS HURRR EU BAD MIGRANTS BAD HURRR
That's not how it works. It describes that the ISP can't block access for their customers.
1. EU citizens aren't customers of American ISPs (unless they are there on visit, but GDPR doesn't cover outside of EU countries)
2. Companies, not the ISPs, can refuse to do business with EU citizens.
3. GDPR is not related to article 11 and 13 from the recent internet proposal at the EU.
>It’s worded in a way where it implies you can’t block anyone from any country to use your site.
Are you retarded? Why would a site request ISPs to drop european traffic coming to their site instead of handling it at their end?
Removal of Net Neutrality also bad for smaller companies. The big ones will take a hit but they can pay ISPs to keep prioritization over the ISPs own services. Small companies don't stand a chance.
>For one, one part of the fine print of net neutrality stated that the US has to follow all EU laws relating to the Interne
Fucking liar. Title II doesn't even use the word net neutrality.
>congratulations your spot in history will be under the "modern brainwashing and propaganda" section
OH NO NONONONO WE DEFINITELY DON'T SPREAD PROPAGANDA LIKE RETARDED FLAT-EARHERS LOL
>OH NO NONONONO
Stop forcing this cancerous Jow Forums meme on other boards. It was never funny and it doesn't even make any sense.
This is what Jow Forums has done to this site.
I bet you also think onions and amerimutt are from Jow Forums
Guess what never had bet neutrality? Your cellular data. Guess what never got hit with you faggots' reddit-tier "muhh throttling" moaning? Your cellular data. God you fucks are such sheep, all you do is listen to John Oliver to tell you what to think. Laughing at your retarded sheep asses.
Lol if any company did that they'd be shooting themselves in the foot and basically invite disruption for a competitor to step in and take all their business. Let them have the freedom to make dipshit mistakes and lay off the onions milk you man-baby.
THIS was your proof? What the fuck, that doesn't say at all what you're implying it says lmao
Sometimes Jow Forums has incredible insight. We can only hope that OP is not a faggot.
>but GDPR doesn't cover outside of EU countries
Except it does
The virgin free market market got BTFO by the chad corporations, and the reddit soiboi tears are making it twice as enjoyable. Just sit back and enjoy the show.
>now without this law they could do this X thing which is really nice
And they can also do this Y thing that is really bad
Think about both sides of who wants and why net neutrality. There were many more ways to fine big data companies on their bandwith consumption and repelling net neutrality was the worst way to do it. It may have forced netflix to pay more money for their bandwith but it allowed for monopolist companies to sell you internet into packges. Don't be a brainlet
As soon as any european walks past the EU border he's no longer protected by GDPR.
Anti-GDPR kike tears are the best. :-)
Sigh, this thread again...
>For one, one part of the fine print of net neutrality stated that the US has to follow all EU laws relating to the Internet
I can only assume that you're a retarded shill who needs a bullet to the head.
I think Ajit Pai is wrong still, and an obvious corporate shill for Verizon, but his point is taken.
People were rejoicing over the EU doing something "good" with GDPR, and gave the EU power over the internet, setting a precedent for Article 13.
Essentially a governing body that can't control itself will do things that are bad for the people.
If the US government could control itself and do NN and not overreach (unlike the EU), then that would be preferable to no NN.
>post about OP being a mentally challenged person due to his obvious shitposting gets deleted
Truth hurts. Ignorance is bliss.
>t. cumcast shill
I bet you post cancerous memes and think you are funny, you fucking underage faggot. Kill yourself.
The equivalent of certain threads being bloated with ads and captchas just to view content
Adulthood protip: Effortfully protesting that "I'm on your side" is how real-life bad guys announce themselves. And the guy getting demonized in mass media is always better than is claimed and might (but not always) be the good guy.
If he can take back ICANN from the UNiggers i'll be truly happy that he was appointed.
I think in this case the companies that get top spots in "Worst company of the year" year after year for their shit support and Up to* packages that can't be reached even during night, run DNS hijacking and script injection might actually not have my best interests in their might.
/thread
Set up wifi
Share with neighbor
Now I'm ISP
Now I have to accept forced peering agreement with Google
Now Google can flood my network with video traffic at my expense
Ajit is the hero the internet deserves
Trolling outside of /b/ is against the rules.
>>Another point is that by repealing net neutrality, ISP’s are going to become more strict on web traffic and data, which possibly means larger websites will slow down. If this happens, companies will have to craft ways of reducing bloat on their websites, thus creating a return to lightweight websites.
>my ISP reducing my speed is a GOOD thing
topkek
>Now I have to accept forced peering agreement with Google
No you don't you retard.
but actually, it is true
attpublicpolicy.com
verizon.com
nice try though, botnet shill
Mind quoting the part where they say that they're forced to peer and carry their traffic whether they want to or not?
Calm down you bootlicking libshit
2. Internet Traffic Exchange (also Known as IP Interconnection). ”The Notice discussed Internet
traffic exchange in a single paragraph, tentatively concluding that the FCC should maintain the approach
it had previously taken so that the Part 8 Open Internet rules would not apply to the exchange of traffic
between networks, whether peering, paid peering, content delivery network (CDN) connection, or any
other form of inter-network transmission of data, as well as provider-owned facilities that are dedicated
solely to such interconnection. Today, the Order follows through on that tentative conclusion and
concludes that application of the Part 8 rules to Internet traffic exchanged is not warranted.
But the Order then goes quite a bit further and adopts a regulatory backstop prohibiting common
carriers from engaging in unjust and unreasonable practices, subjecting Internet traffic exchange
arrangements like those mentioned immediately above to sections 201 and 202 on a case-by-case
basis. With this authority, the Commission can order an Internet service provider to establish
physical connections with other carriers, to establish through routes and charges applicable thereto . . . ,
and to establish and provide facilities and regulations for operating such through routes.
In other words, the Order classifies Internet traffic exchange as a Title II telecommunications service in
everything but name.
Proving you're backing net neutrality without ever having actually read it, the post.
s3.documentcloud.org
"With this authority, the Commission can order an Internet service provider to establish
physical connections with other carriers, to establish through routes and charges applicable thereto . . . ,
and to establish and provide facilities and regulations for operating such through routes."
No means no. My network, My choice.