[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/co/ - Comics & Cartoons



Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.



File: latest-5.jpg (44 KB, 722x541)
44 KB
44 KB JPG
THE FELLAS AT THE FREAKIN FCC
>>
>>97336901
did something happen yet?
>>
>>97336901
............sexy
>>
>>97336940
Vote is in a week. Pajit continues to be a smug shit about it.
>>
>>97336901
...perhaps
>>
>>97336901
What's with all the Net neutrality shilling recently? Do Americans hate the concept of a free market this much?
>>
>>97337216
I'd agree if there was any competition. In my area, it's Comcast or nothing.
>>
>>97336901
I want to fuck that baby.
>>
Everyone forgot about this because an open lolicon is about to become a senator. Ironic that Bigteeth will probably stop us from viewing loli after next week.
>>
>>97337216
It would be a free market if 90% of the media wasn't controlled by six companies.
>>
>>97337216
>What's with all the Net neutrality shilling recently?
>recently
The only shilling taking place here is the anti-NN shilling. Speaking of which, do you get paid by the post or is it an hourly thing?
>>
>>97337216
>what gives? aren't you willing to give powers to big monopolies that you would never in a million years give to governments? do you have the free market?
>>
>>97337257
But anon, Dr. DOOM in the MCU!
>>
File: 1208812155301.jpg (49 KB, 198x198)
49 KB
49 KB JPG
>no guys see we gotta get rid of NN so the monopolies go away and the free market can thrive
>you can't see their 4D chess but the ISPs are funneling millions of dollars into lobbying so they can destroy their own monopolies and save the US with the glorious Free Market (tm), all for the good of the customer
>we'll just get our congressmen that are bought out already by the very same ISPs to vote for breaking them up! they'll definitely listen to our desires over those of the lobbyists lining their pockets
>>
>>97337231
deal with it. i have comcast too. having competition is actually more inefficient in this type of market.

if you want to shill about nn, reddit is that way --------->
>>
>>97337216
there is no free market, it's either shitty internet through phone\ satellite, or slightly less shitty internet through the one cable company in your area. either way you are already paying too much for what you get.
>>
>>97337216
Liberals want NN so naturally I'm against it.
>>
>>97337393

*naturally I'm retarded
>>
>>97337356
but you see if people can just choose their companies in a free market there can never be any problems ever! just like how in a democracy people will just not vote for misbehaving politicians so it all just magically works out.

Oh no wait that second one never works and only naive idiots think so. But you should totally give all the power to companies which of course always ends up being perfect because FreeMarket™
>>
File: 1500218690501.png (460 KB, 582x535)
460 KB
460 KB PNG
>>97337385
>"Don't you like the free market?!"
>There's no market in my area.
>"Why does that matter?! It's better than free market!"
>>
>>97337356
>If I repeat the things MSNBC told me enough, they'll become true!
>>
>>97336901
Maybe if we're lucky normies won't find the internet worth spending time on anymore.
>>
>>97337421
whoa there, partner
you can't just be running around without an argument like that
>>
>>97337216
People want to give the internet to the state for some reason.
>>
>>97337257
>It would be a free market if 90% of the media wasn't controlled by six companies.

The costs for entering the market ensure that there is only so many companies there. Not everything is the fault of the big bad corporations. It's just how the market is. In theory if you do end with a monopoly, in the long term it actually will increase efficiency and overall consumer satisfaction.
>>
>>97337411
...ya, less regulation and smaller goverment is better.
>>
>>97337495
not in all cases, and this is one of them. I wouldn't trust the goverment with reading my mail and deciding what i can and cannot read, and "muh free market fixes everything" is not going to make me trust companies with the same power.
>>
>>97337495
we never actually had a small government or less regulation. but given how periods of lesser regulation = more economic growth and countries with less barriers to do business have better economic growth, it certainly doesn't hurt to try.
>>
Can we go with one year without something attacking the Internet
>>
>>97337730
Nope. That's the long term plan, wear down resistance. Outrage fatigue and all that.
>>
>>97337385
Get the fuck off of my internet you lobbyist fuck
>>
>>97337829
I feel like that is a bad strategy seeing as the internet gets outraged as a hobby.
>>
>>
>>97337356
Congress isn't voting on this one
Just pajit and his boys
>>
>>97337481
It's almost like the free market is a good concept initially but needs regulations due to corporate greed over time
>>
>>97337882
This guy literally can't be any more scummy
>>
File: 1447606851009.png (875 KB, 968x745)
875 KB
875 KB PNG
>americans vote in a jew loving new york city real estate scumbag with more billionaire friends than sexual harassment lawsuits
>loudly wonder why they're getting royally fucked in the ass by corporations
>>
>>97337964

No you don't get it, despite being a billionaire who has bankrupted businesses in the past, this time he genuinely has the interests of working-class people at heart, for real. You don't think we Americans would vote for someone who doesn't have our best interests at heart, do you?
>>
>>97337385
>only has one choice of ISP, free market will not apply
>"f-fuck off reddit! this is the best choice!"

please go back to pol holy shit

alright buddy
>>
>>97337841
Outraged online. People will post about how they're angry or like a post saying the FCC is shit, but that's where it ends. Internet is all minimum effort activism.
>>
>>97337385
kys
>>
File: excellent qualitybait.jpg (8 KB, 249x250)
8 KB
8 KB JPG
>>97337385
So, having several different internet companies(Some major and some of them smaller) compete with each other by them offering better/less expensive deals to get the consumer on their service is bad? And therefore, one big corporation that has no competition or incentive to please the customer because they know they're the only business in the area is perfectly reasonable.

Look man, if you want to be fucked in the ass by Comcast or AT&T, good for you, you seem to be enjoying it. But don't tell me that it's fucking ok for the rest of us.


This has to be bait, no one can be this much of a corporate whore, and a Comcast one to boot.
>>
>>97338102
That is true, I forget most of the people on here are not my friend who has both of his congressmen on speed dial and has already called them 15 times about this issue.
>>
File: whenyourhandsarecold.png (6 KB, 501x585)
6 KB
6 KB PNG
>>97337216
That's right goy. They want net neutrality to stay because they hate the free market. We're the good goys here so support us.
>>
>>97338133
>This has to be bait, no one can be this much of a corporate whore
These people can be anything if you pay them enough, anon.
>>
>>97337474
>government has largely NOT fucked up with the internet so far
>there's observable evidence of monopolies fucking the internet in countries without NN
>>
>>97337495

I'm generally for a hands off government when possible but I hate this fucking ideologue stance that government has no place ANYWHERE. Ffs there is not a single style of governing that works for everything across the board. It's not black and white. There's room for nuance and compromise.
>>
>>97336901
Where's that Helga when you need her most at this dire timeline?
>>
>>97338277
Get this radical centrist outta here!
>>
>>97337964
I blame the frogposters.
>>
>>97338227

The US was under the assumption that net neutrality laws applied for 30 years going. It wasn't until Verizon won a lawsuit about it that the rules no longer applied to them. They promptly began fucking everyone over:

2005 - Madison River Communications: Blocked VOIP services before the FCC put a stop to it.
http://cnet.co/2jeYWrI

2007 - Comcast: Caught forging packets to interfere with user traffic
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2007/10/eff-tests-agree-ap-comcast-forging-packets-to-interfere

2007-2009 - AT&T: Blocked Skype and other VOIP services which competed with their cellphone plans
http://for.tn/2Apcr35

2011 - MetroPCS: Tried to block all streaming except YouTube
https://www.wired.com/2011/01/metropcs-net-neutrality-challenge/

2011 - Multiple ISPs: Caught hijacking search traffic to increase affiliate revenue
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/07/widespread-search-hijacking-in-the-us

2011-2013, AT&T, Sprint, and Verizon: Blocked access to Google Wallet because it competed with their bullshit
https://www.freepress.net/press-release/99480/att-blocking-iphones-facetime-app-would-harm-consumers-and-break-net-neutrality

2012 - Verizon: Demanded Google block tethering apps on Android because it let owners avoid their $20 tethering fee. This was despite guaranteeing they wouldn't do that as part of a winning bid on an airwaves auction.
https://www.fcc.gov/document/verizon-wireless-pay-125-million-settle-investigation

2012 - AT&T - tried to block access to FaceTime unless customers paid more money.
http://nyti.ms/2zZ5Dbk

2013 - Verizon: Literally stated that the only thing stopping them from favoring some content providers over other providers were the net neutrality rules in place.
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/07/on-net-neutrality-verizon-leads-push-for-fast-lanes/456891/

2017 - Verizon: Caught throttling customer data in direct violation of FCC Net Neutrality rules
https://www.theverge.com/2017/7/21/16010766
>>
>>97337189
>implying he’ll live after voting day
There are a ton of nutty people who are more fucked up than the chingchong who did Virginia Tech
>>
>>97337393
i heard they're also anti-suicide, so you should kill yourself to piss them off
>>
>>97338335

But anon they promised they wouldn't this time
>>
File: 1512361909131.png (80 KB, 800x600)
80 KB
80 KB PNG
>>97337216
>What's with all the Net neutrality shilling recently? Do Americans hate the concept of a free market this much?
>>
So, Oldfags ?
How did the internet work for like 10 years without NN?
>>
>>97338324
He's a neutral, we don't need their scum here.

>>97338372
I know you're joking, but there are people that seriously believe that these companies actually care for them and won't fuck them over for profit. I honestly don't get how they became that complacent.
>>
File: IMG_20170908_224935.png (317 KB, 507x746)
317 KB
317 KB PNG
>>97337239
Goddamn, me too
>>
>>97338358
Are they really? It sounds like something they'd be for actually.
I mean they're already Anti-life for babies, why wouldn't they be pro-suicide?
>>
>>97338406
There literally has never been a time without NN.

The Telecommunications Act was expanded in 1996 to include web traffic.

Verizon sued the FCC in 2011 saying that they couldn't regulate internet traffic as it was title 1.

The FCC then immediately switched the classification to title 2 so that it could be regulated.

Now the head of the FCC wants to switch it back to title 1 so that big telecom can fuck people over.
>>
>>97338446
. . . . sauce?
>>
>>97338328
Well actually you should probably blame the blue collar people in blue states.
Frogposters probably didn't do much more than shitpost loudly.
>>
>>97338335
None of the /pol/tards and assorted degenerates who are shilling for NN repeal are going to reply to this you know.
>>
>>97338133
Telecom industry is just one of these natural monopolies due to the high costs of entry and operation. Fragmentation and competition creates more inefficiency and waste in the long term when their natural state in being a single firm will only be beneficial in the long term for both the company and for consumers..
>>
>>97338482
>Facebook says 10 million U.S. users saw Russia-linked ads
>NEW YORK (Reuters) - Some 10 million people in the United States saw politically divisive ads on Facebook that the company said were purchased in Russia in the months before and after last year’s U.S. presidential election, Facebook said on Monday.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-facebook-advertising/facebook-says-10-million-u-s-users-saw-russia-linked-ads-idUSKCN1C71YM

Whatever you say friend.
>>
>>97338335
it's their right they own the infrastructure and are stakeholders. they have a right to do what they want. it's like someone owning a house having a vote in their local homeowner association because they own a house and pay dues
>>
>>97338498
So... Having one entity, devoted solely to generating money, having unrestricted control of something everyone requires for daily life will be beneficial for consumers.

Literally how
>>
>>97338521
What's more likely anon, Hillary Clinton failed to reach millions of people in key states because she had nothing for them and didn't really care about them or people were swayed by frog memes?
>>
>Letting silicon valley tech and hollywood entertainment companies control your access to information even more.
>>
>>97338481
https://e621.net/post/show/1342681/animal_genitalia-anthro-brian_griffin-canine-cloth
>>
>>97338498
>Fragmentation and competition creates more inefficiency and waste in the long term
Are you telling me one big company that controls everything in that area is better than having competing companies actually fight each other for getting the consumer is a bad thing? So, you just want Comcast to fuck over the customer because they're bigger and know they can get away with it?

Goddamn you are fucking retarded. Please tell me you're just trolling and you don't actually believe that shit that you're typing?
>>
>>97338546
>devoted solely to generating money,

That is yet to be proven. If we look at past history with AT&T, being the dominant player in the nascent telecom industry of the early 20th century this actually was a good thing and created some good unintended outcomes with the creation of Bell Labs and the company dedicating itself to public service and the public good instead of just making money. If anything big government in breaking up AT&T in the 70s is to blame for the current mess.
>>
>>97338406
>this shitty argument again
NN has existed since 1996
>>
>>97338683
The telecommunications act leashed AT&T though, and prevented them from blocking certain phone calls.

The vote is just taking the leash off and letting them do whatever they want.
>>
>>97337249
>stop you from viewing loli
This is the best anti nnargument I've ever heard.

I support Pajeet now.
>>
>>97338656
Your comcast problems is probably a direct result of competition. If there was just one ISP there wouldn't be problems or very little.
>>
>>97338685
until 2003 the technology that allows for discirimating packets based on the content and not just headers while routing (DPI) didn't exist, so the kind of shit the ISPs want to pull has never been truly legal and technically possible before, they still tried to do it a lot and the ensuing legal battles ended with the 2015 regulations. So it's really funny whenever the shills try to argue that the internet was fine before and therefore it's going to be fine when the ISPs starts reaming you.
>>
>>97338787
>Your comcast problems is probably a direct result of competition.
What competition there is only comcast.
>>
File: april-27-2017.jpg (210 KB, 1698x902)
210 KB
210 KB JPG
Enjoy no more torrenting, DDL, and ''''''''''obscene'''''''' content.
>>
>>97337291
>The only shilling taking place here is the anti-NN shilling
This. For more than a decade, ever since the site's inception, net neutrality has been the one line that almost every single anon has stood behind. Now I'm supposed to believe that we're actually severely divided on the issue, on an issue we, on multiple occasions, stood in solidarity to support and protect?

I don't buy it. Not for one goddamned second. Authoritarians get the fuck out.
>>
>>97338787
There’s actually nothing stopping new companies from starting or older companies from improving
America, surprisingly, doesn’t have the fastest internet in the world specifically because none of the innovation and investment at ISPs goes into making internet the fastest
Yes internet has improved, but you’d be hard pressed to find a real reason a billion dollar industry that literally all modern people rely on cannot come up with faster internet

Getting rid of NN really only lets companies make everything more expensive
A free market doesn’t really mean everyone gets a better deal because competition
Why don’t you find Comcast or Charter in all areas of the United States? It’s because the free market they are asking for is really an unregulated clusterfuck where all the companies agree to not steal customers from each other
The country has pretty obviously been divided up into various sections where each ISP reigns
>>
>You don't need regulation, you can trust in the free market!
>The free market isn't free
>Competition is for suckers anyway! You can trust the monopoly!
Why does anyone take this goalpost moving seriously?
>>
>>97338449
>foetuses
>babies
>>
>>97338874
It's pretty blatantly obvious he's a paid shill. Though, you'd think they'd put up some more money to at least get people who aren't so obvious about it.
>>
>>97338857
Basically you have to pay for a porn packet and prove you’re over a certain age
Which means porn sites will lose like 20% of traffic


But also important issues too
>>
>>97338895
I think they are contracting the guys Hillary had during the election I guess their advertising budget is higher than their shilling budget.
>>
>>97338564
I'd say "millions of people with little critical thinking or internet security skills, who were either sitting on the fence or uninterested in voting, were outraged into voting for a candidate that promised to solve all the evil nasty no-good bad things that they were seeing on their facebook machines and twittererers"
>>
>>97338048
That's not a /pol/fag, that's a paid shill.
/pol/fags may be mouth breathers, but I don't think even they are stupid enough to fall for this shit.
>>
File: 2314.png (440 KB, 639x475)
440 KB
440 KB PNG
>>97337216
People haven't bothered actually reading what the Net Neutrality LAW is, which is different from the CONCEPT of Net Neutrality. Furthermore, no one has even read the Government documents that is publicly available that states that throttling will not be allowed and FTC will also be able to join in and actually fuck companies up if said companies are suspected to trying to create a monopoly (which the FCC cannot).

Furthermore, privacy laws data security laws will still be in place and if by any chance that all of this wont go the way FCC wants to, they will roll back to Title II regulations and reinstate ISPs as common carriers again along with the regulations that come with it.

https://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2017/db1122/DOC-347927A1.pdf

Of course, since people are fucking retarded and just see the name "Net Neutrality", they shit their pants and doesn't consider the fact that it's a fucking law called Net Neutrality, not actual literal Net neutrality. Furthermore, they don't even consider the fact that companies are shilling and pushing propaganda for Net Neutrality as well. There's companies that benefits from NN just like there's companies that doesn't.

But hey, why bother doing some fucking research and understand things when you can just sperg out and just shout that people are retards for not blindly joining in to "Protect the internet".
>>
>>97338787
I don't have Comcast, I had AT&T. They sucked ass most of the time and my phone and internet bill(which was dial-up) always increased. They actually got high-speed internet recently, but it would have cost well over 100 dollars, just for satellite internet.

There were no competitors in my area until HughesNet came to the area and they offered high-speed internet and phone service for much cheaper. Now my bill is around $80 dollars instead of over $130. Hughes has it's problems, but they are cheaper and more reasonable
>>
>>97338869
Only because they realize the threat of government action has resulted in a natural oligopoly with severe inefficiencies. Without government putting its hand on the scale you'd have real competition and the resultant being one firm dominating the market not necessarily at the detriment of the consumer.
>>
>>97338965
Nice copypasta shill
>>
>>97337385
>having competition is actually more inefficient in this type of market
>tfw living in third world shithole eastern yuropean country
>tfw getting 12mb/s download speed for 15 eurobucks
>tfw can choose from 10+ providers
>tfw they're kissing our asses not to switch
>>
>>97338965
The internet not reading legislation. Color me surprised.
>>
File: 1506727112228.gif (2.47 MB, 491x374)
2.47 MB
2.47 MB GIF
>>97336901
Ajit looks like a sex offender. I know because 3 or 4 of people I encountered in prison were in on rape charges. It's like all of 'em smile similarly.

If the internet was my kid, he looks the sort that would lie to my face about his intentions, then claim there was an accident and that she went missing when in truth, he just sold her off to a Chinese whorehouse to be beaten and raped by high-paying industrial hustlers.

Before you ask, I did 5 years for assault. Some jackass driver did a hit & Run on my aunt and he lived close enough to collect an ass beating.
>>
>>97339070
Nobody asked, internet tough guy.
>>
>>97339070
maybe you should go back to prison faggot.
>>
>>97338995
You didn’t really explain how government interference limits competition
You didn’t really explain why we don’t see Cox in more northern areas
You didn’t really explain why the US can still have relatively slow internet compared to plenty of first world countries
You just said, government prevents competition and monopolies aren’t necessarily a bad thing
There are no laws that prevent any ISP from investing in faster connections
>>
>>97338996
>Take time to write up a post
>"Nice copypasta shill"

Why don't you go back and suck your employer's cock if you're not even going to bother trying to be subtle about it or even attempt at giving me a rebuttal?

>>97339035
And same happened when people stupidly fell for the "Politicians are selling your internet history" bullshit and gave a shitton of money to a guy that said he would "Buy the politicians internet history" without anyone realising that privacy laws already protect your browser history regardless. Don't get me wrong, I think there are some valid concerns regarding the NN repeal but nothing is going to be as bad as people make it out to be. I just hate how it's impossible to have a discussion outside of 4chan about this.
>>
>>97339147
>it won’t be that bad
The fact that several ISPs have on many counts committed crimes that NN blocked should tell you what they plan on doing if NN gets repealed
This isn’t speculation, we know what they want, see >>97338335
So saying it won’t be that bad is idiotic when all we’re doing is describing what the companies have been trying to do illegally for as long as they have been
>>
>>97338965
You say that, but AT&T is suing the FTC right now saying they can't regulate them.

So, if the FCC can't regulate them, and the FTC can't regulate them... who does?
>>
>>97339147
>"take time to write a post"
Oh yes, Ctrl+C, Ctrl+V takes so much time.
>>
>>97339217
>The fact that several ISPs have on many counts committed crimes that NN blocked should tell you what they plan on doing if NN gets repealed

Well, aint it good that they plan on letting FTC get involved which makes it easier to punish ISPs? You know, like I fucking already mentioned previously. And again, throttling will still be illegal.

So no, it wont be that fucking bad. Net Neutrality right now is just a shitty slap on the wrist, at least with FTC being able to get involved and smacking the shit out of ISPs for trying to create monopolies can have some more serious consequences at least. The retarded fearmongering where people post the propaganda images of "This is what ISPs will do!" but leaving out the fact that said images stem from mobile internet where the amount of data you can use is limited and there's "Deals" where you can pay extra to use specific apps without it counting towards your limit.

>>97339410
They can't regulate them at the moment because of the laws currently in place, hence the planned introduction of new laws and regulations which will allow FTC oversight over ISPs and to step in , especially since FTC regulations would affect ISPs.
>>
File: c7uKCe.gif (314 KB, 320x180)
314 KB
314 KB GIF
>>97339107
>>97339134
I'd fuck your ass raw and split you like lumber just for backtalk.
...and I'd leave you begging for more after.
>>
>>97339410
Wasn’t it Verizon that sued the FCC saying they couldn’t regulate them in the way they current were?
We’ll find a way as long as our politicians don’t serve anyone else’s agendas but their citizens
>>
File: 1452526118112.gif (3.49 MB, 300x225)
3.49 MB
3.49 MB GIF
>>97339493
At least I'm not a nigger.
>>
>>97339545
Shut up, nigger
>>
>>97339479
Creating monopolies isn’t the biggest problem, it’s a problem, just not the biggest one

And you’re right, those images are from mobile plans, but that doesn’t mean that companies aren’t considering doing that
It’d be easy for them to do so, so what’s the problem with wanting to stop them from being able to do that
That’s where the primary worry is, Companies being able to control every aspect of the internet experience

There’s no reason to be this mad about people freaking out over Net Neutrality, which blocks a whole lot more than media specific data plans
>>
File: 1493326269464.png (360 KB, 750x713)
360 KB
360 KB PNG
>>97339568
>Creating monopolies isn’t the biggest problem, it’s a problem, just not the biggest one
It's the literal reason why ISPs can fuck people over to begin with.

>And you’re right, those images are from mobile plans, but that doesn’t mean that companies aren’t considering doing that
Well, it's a good fucking thing the new regulations and laws will allow FCC and FTC to step in if throttling, restriction and so forth happens, isn't it?

>There’s no reason to be this mad about people freaking out over Net Neutrality, which blocks a whole lot more than media specific data plans
There is when you and everyone else haven't even read anything about it. The fact that you keep insisting that these doomsday scenarios are going to happen makes it obvious that you haven't even tried reading the Net Neutrality repeal documents.

There are concerns but you nor anyone else have even mentioned the actual concerns that can be taken from the documents.
>>
>>97339713
>new regulations and laws will allow FCC and FTC to step in if throttling, restriction and so forth happens, isn't it?
You mean the same two entities that are already bought out by said ISPs, one of them now being run by an old lobbyist from an ISP?
>>
File: ay gurl u want sum fuk.png (336 KB, 960x402)
336 KB
336 KB PNG
>>97339755
>You mean the same two entities that are already bought out by said ISPs, one of them now being run by an old lobbyist from an ISP?
Pretty much every politician has taken donations

The guy you refer to was in said ISP in the 90's

The guy that pushed for NN in 2016 was also an old lobbyist from an ISP.

None of this is going to magically make the new laws and regulations invalid.
>>
>>97339848
Meant 2015.
>>
File: cancer incarnated.jpg (441 KB, 800x1213)
441 KB
441 KB JPG
>>97339848
And most of them just happened to Republicans. McCain is a fraud. Maverick my ass. He is out there screwing everyone that is currently alive just because he is dying of cancer.
>>
File: 1494249732837.gif (622 KB, 499x310)
622 KB
622 KB GIF
>>97339545
So, you admit to plying life on easy mode?
Filthy casual.
>>
>>97339978
I'd dress up in blackface and move to Detroit if it would get me more points at the end of the game, but it wouldn't, plus you'd bitch and moan endlessly about that, too.
>>
Leave it to fucking 4chan to have morons just as black and white as the "SJW liberals" they hate. All gubment is bad! They've never gotten anything right!
>>
>>97339713
>literal reason
A bad thing for sure
But that’s not intrinsic to ISPs, meaning that’s a bad thing in all markets, not just digital media
That’s not the main reason we need Net Neutrality

>new laws
Yes, new laws can help
But repealing Net Neutrality isn’t the first step in making new laws
Again, that’s not why people want Net Neutrality

>actual concerns
See: >>97338335
Yes, all of those things are illegal now
And they wouldn’t be under Net Neutrality
Which is why everyone is freaking out


Calm down dude
>>
>>97340063
>you’d bitch and moan
Like how whites bitch and moan about non whites seeking to live in their countries?
Yeah, probably
>>
>>97340111
It's funny how you're stretching further and further to find something that resembles an argument, but I can't laugh at dem trips.
>>
Not my porn!
>>
>>97340148
I’m actually not the same guy you’ve been responding to
I just jumped in because your logic was poor and it seemed like you missed the irony
>>
Look below for south park
>>97339948
>>
File: f9d.gif (1.13 MB, 260x172)
1.13 MB
1.13 MB GIF
>>97340063
>detroit
Nope. You could change your name to house nigger there and nobody would do a thing. Go to Camden. If you're not bitch-made, you might last more than a week.

Do that and you'll make world record status and I might consider your posts worth adding to my collection.
>>
>>97340205
>Camden
Good to know where the dregs of society are collecting, these days. I may just take you up on that.
>>
>>97339933
>And most of them just happened to Republicans.
Let me guess, you don't think pretty much all democrats has taken donations from ISPs as well?

373 of 435 house members took donations from Comcast. Now ask yourself, why aren't the news and people mentioning the democrats that took such donations? They line up all the republicans but, the 265 of them but "conveniently" forgets all the democrats that took donations as well.

And that's just from Comcast.

>>97340087
And again you ignore what I said and try to refer to another post when I already said the new laws and regulations will already do what people expect Net Neutrality to do right now

>Which is why everyone is freaking out
Don't goddamn sugarcoat it, the reason people are freaking out is because they see the name "Net Neutrality" and make assumptions. Those things your referring to would still be illegal after the repeal.

>Calm down dude
Tell that to everyone freaking out because people can't do a simple thing such as reading and researching about an issue before sperging out. At least I actually read the damn thing and know the actual potential risks, mainly loopholes, that this may have.
>>
File: index.jpg (10 KB, 225x225)
10 KB
10 KB JPG
>>97340234
Seriously, tho. Shitposting aside. Don't go there.
If you do really mean that, I'll feel guilty and have to fly my ass out of Puerto Rico just to come and rescue you from that shithole. You might be an Ajit-loving faggot who deserves to get anal dicking for retardation, but I've got standards.

If I'm telling somebody to go to camden, I really don't want that shit on my conscience if they actually went there and got dropped by a stray bullet just from crossing the goddamn ben franklin bridge into city limits.
>>
>>97340383
>You might be an Ajit-loving faggot
I think we have fundamentally misunderstood one anothers' positions.

>rescue you from that shithole
Not hardly. A place like that is where I'm going once I finally give up and don't care about living anymore. May be the closest I ever get to an actual warzone, and that's an experience I still haven't had yet. Not for lack of trying, though.
>>
>>97340237
>ignore what I try to say
You’re not saying much
Like, none of your most salient points are a good argument
If I’m ignoring anything, it’s stuff that doesn’t have anything to do with NN

>sugarcoat it
Everytime NN is mentioned, an explanation of why it’s bad is offered
You’re making the argument that people who don’t know what Net Neutrality is about are the ones freaking out, but it doesn’t make sense to say that on the internet without proof when it makes more sense to say the opposite
That’s why I’m saying you need to calm down

>sperging out
You’re the only one sperging out
>>
>>97339026

What about places in South America dealing with no regulation that get packaged and throttled internet plans?
>>
File: 1495231053777.gif (2.54 MB, 485x300)
2.54 MB
2.54 MB GIF
>>97340467
Well, at some point, I fell under the assumption that posts initially directed at me were meant to dissuade my opinions and views on Ajit.

If that wasn't your intent, then maybe we could at least come to the agreement that ajit's the biggest faggot of them all.
>Just now realizing how exploitable "Ajit the Faggot" is.
>>
Ok, I'll play along.

Let's pretend that Ajit Pai isn't an industry shill.

Let's pretend that the big ISPs aren't licking their chops at how they can nickel and dime America.

Let's pretend that a bunch of new laws are coming into play to protect Americans.

Assuming ALL OF THAT is true... why the lack of transparency?

There are hundreds of fake comments in favor of the repeal. The NY AG requested info from the FCC NINE TIMES to aid them in their investigation of identity fraud, and the FCC stonewalled them each time.

Even if, in the unlikely event they have the Anerican people's best interests in mind, they completely undermined themselves by acting shady as shit.
>>
>>97338335
>net neutrality is repealed
>instead of gleefully ripping off their customers in full legality, they raise the bar and start pressing their luck doing shit that was so illegal before that even they didn't dare risk it until now
I'm scared
>>
File: 1505444306558.gif (2.24 MB, 375x300)
2.24 MB
2.24 MB GIF
>>97340728
All manner of Ajit support utilizes the Anita Sarkeesian-style manner of tactics of Bare-assed lying and Highlighting only the things that sound tasteful in theory without giving the other side

Simply put, It's bargain-bin dishonesty that hundreds upon thousands of politicians around the world have done much better and the "impending date rape" is seen coming from a light years away without need for a telescope. If you're somehow not seeing the issues here >>97338335
the you're not only going out of your way to be blind, but you're also being dishonest yourself about a simple case of motive.
https://vocaroo.com/i/s05zWb7eVFYy
>>
>>97340906
>without giving the other side a fair representation of their case, actively dismissing criticism.
>>
I am concerned as much as anyone else here, but I don't think we should despair just yet.

Net-based companies will take this to the courts, plus the next administration that comes in may decide to roll it back (maybe not all at once, but bit by bit).

Point is, this vote will not be the immediate end of the battle, only the beginning. It may be a long, protracted, uphill battle, but I wouldn't lose hope just yet.
>>
>tfw there's only a week left until the repeal is voted on.
>tfw I've been hearing people talk about how we'll end up with website packages or paywalls on every website.
I mean, the laws they're going after have only been up for two years, right? Maybe we'll just revert to 2014 rules. Things won't be as bad as people say it will be, right?

I want to believe, guys.
>>
>>97341147
No. They phrased the text so poorly and also framed it in such a conniving way that it's practically criminal if it's let to pass.

The reason so many big companies paid for this is because they expected gargantuan returns almost immediately before the end of their fiscal year and the beginning of the next, so what they have to be after as a point of fact of the eagerness and large sums spent is the total principle of NN being pulled.

This "just the 2014" hogwash being inferred is about as bare-assed bullshit as saying that the kkk aren't racist. You can word it however you like, but you'd need a perfect idiot to believe it.
>>
File: SenorFagballsMcCocklord.jpg (2.64 MB, 2400x3000)
2.64 MB
2.64 MB JPG
How do we stop him?
>>
>>97342771
He has such a punchable face.




Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.