FCC to fuck up your broadband

[showa58taro]

It’s happening. Your ISPs can finally charge you extra to get a functioning Netflix or Amazon, and slow to a crawl your other search engines not in line with theirs. Thank Ajit Pai for the convenience as the internet just became armed.

[Foo]

There is definitely a debate to be had when it comes to bandwidth usage. If it was a rail system subsidized by the government and Walmart was using a disproportionate amount of the available capacity, I think you would expect them to pay based on their consumption of that capacity, not just get the free service.

[Foo]

Today is the day clueless people on the internet act all outraged over shit they do not understand.

[Headhunter]

Why don't you explain how it's #actuallygood to us simpletons, oh wise Fooskey.

[Tiggnutz]

I have not heard a good or bad argument on this

[showa58taro]

The bad is about potential abuse by larger companies to prioritize speed for money.

The good is the deregulation to create increased investment.

I don’t subscribe to the good argument.

John Oliver did a fantastic piece on it that’s on YouTube.

[showa58taro]

https://youtu.be/fpbOEoRrHyU

[Foo]

Amazing how much innovation and growth online happened before net neutrality was forced upon us in 2015. How did we ever survive without it?!

Government interjecting itself into something and picking winners and losers versus letting it grow organically is what net neutrality is all about. I would rather see a big company that uses a ton of resources pay for bandwidth they consume rather than constantly subsidizing them. I would rather be able to choose from an array of services that suit me rather than having my service slowed by someone power gaming and farming bitcoins.

[showa58taro]

Yup. There are no downsides to repealing the neutrality laws. The whole thing was a liberal ruse to try and get money from the rich. Good thing you peeled that mask off.

[Foo]

It was actually a liberal scheme to regulate and tax the internet. Remember, liberals hate freedom.

[showa58taro]

It was actually a liberal scheme to regulate and tax the internet. Remember, liberals hate freedom.

Oh yeah. That’s what I forgot. Liberals out to ruin things once more by making them open and fair to people. What cunts.

[Jason]

Seb clearly doesn't grasp what fairness is.

[showa58taro]

Seb clearly doesn't grasp what fairness is.

What could be more fair than everyone having an equal right?

[Foo]

It was actually a liberal scheme to regulate and tax the internet. Remember, liberals hate freedom.

Oh yeah. That’s what I forgot. Liberals out to ruin things once more by making them open and fair to people. What cunts.

Hint: the internet was wide open before they started to try to regulate it. Net Neutrality basically ruled the internet could be controlled like broadcast TV. This opens the door for the same government intervention and censorship you see on broadcast TV.

You have mulitple internet providers. Should popular sites like netflix become the victim of throttling, you can move on to another. Also, Netflix could pay for the infrastructure to have a "fast lane" where they would stream better if being co-mingled with every other site is not providing great service.

[showa58taro]

It was actually a liberal scheme to regulate and tax the internet. Remember, liberals hate freedom.

Oh yeah. That’s what I forgot. Liberals out to ruin things once more by making them open and fair to people. What cunts.

Hint: the internet was wide open before they started to try to regulate it. Net Neutrality basically ruled the internet could be controlled like broadcast TV. This opens the door for the same government intervention and censorship you see on broadcast TV.

You have mulitple internet providers. Should popular sites like netflix become the victim of throttling, you can move on to another. Also, Netflix could pay for the infrastructure to have a "fast lane" where they would stream better if being co-mingled with every other site is not providing great service.

Mate, the horror stories before will all return because your companies are greedy and your executives love exploiting others. It’s your culture. It wasn’t wide open before and it won’t be yet again.

[Foo]

Think about toll roads. Toll roads help commerce and are subsidized by society (users and taxpayers). Companies like Wal-mart have many, many trucks on the road constantly using them. Not only does a truck often pay exponentially more than a car to use the same roads, but because there are many trucks, they end up footing a bigger proportionate slice of the bill.

Cars on the other hand, are actually subsidized. That toll road that costs tens of millions, is relatively cheap to use because taxpayers who never use the road are footing part of the bill and big companies who use it frequently pay a high rate.

By the logic of net neutrality, either the toll road is never built or the Wal-Mart truck pays the same as a car.

[Foo]

It was actually a liberal scheme to regulate and tax the internet. Remember, liberals hate freedom.

Oh yeah. That’s what I forgot. Liberals out to ruin things once more by making them open and fair to people. What cunts.

Hint: the internet was wide open before they started to try to regulate it. Net Neutrality basically ruled the internet could be controlled like broadcast TV. This opens the door for the same government intervention and censorship you see on broadcast TV.

You have mulitple internet providers. Should popular sites like netflix become the victim of throttling, you can move on to another. Also, Netflix could pay for the infrastructure to have a "fast lane" where they would stream better if being co-mingled with every other site is not providing great service.

Mate, the horror stories before will all return because your companies are greedy and your executives love exploiting others. It’s your culture. It wasn’t wide open before and it won’t be yet again.

You do realize that Obama's Net Neutrality was pushed by companies greedy to exploit others, right? Just a different set.

Think about Netflix and Facebook. They use an enormous amount of public resources. If they had to pay for their actual use, they would not be raking in cash like that. Instead of paying those that provide the internet services they require, which would lead to upgraded internet, they pay a fraction to have legislation drafted that says they don't have to. Everyone then subsidizes their service.

[showa58taro]

What is it about the Internet you don’t think I’d being upgraded and modernized daily?

[Foo]

What is it about the Internet you don’t think I’d being upgraded and modernized daily?

Putting it under the controlling thumb of government holds it back. The government does not have any need to know about what content is streaming everywhere, nor do they need to regulate it.

[showa58taro]

What is it about the Internet you don’t think I’d being upgraded and modernized daily?

Putting it under the controlling thumb of government holds it back. The government does not have any need to know about what content is streaming everywhere, nor do they need to regulate it.

It must be the US. Sucks to be you.