NET NEUTRALITY RESTORED!
Link to the article:https://www.theverge.com/2024/4/25/24140157/fcc-vote-restore-net-neutrality-rosenworcel-biden
>>100179324What is this? HackerNews?
>>100179354?
Before saying anything else, I want you to define the concept of "net neutrality".
What ever happened to that pajeet guy that advocated the repeal of net neutrality?
we did it reddit!
To tone down the news a little, Net Neutrality had already been restored on the state level, but not for all of them.Now it's enforced on the federal level again.
>>100179482Net Neutrality are regulation rules that force Internet Provider Services to deliver all data to users with the same speed, regardless of the website it comes from.
4chan won
>>100179565wasn't this already the case?
>>100179489No longer in charge of the FCC.
>>100179583it wasn't mandated before so if the isp cabal decided to start charging extra for access to full speed goyflix it would have been legal
>>100179583The implication is that there are backroom deals where large content providers are forced to pay higher prices as a proportion of usage. The entire time the issue has been corporate vs corporate, and the tie breaker is your moral opinion.Net neutrality is simply the idea that you paid for your service already, and the content provider paid for their service already, so why does some nearly unrelated third party get to gouge too?Logically, the cost of delivering the packets should have been figured into the price between ISP tiers already.
>>100179583See >>100179526Net Neutrality enforcement on the federal level ended under the Trump presidency, but was reinstated on the state levels by many states, but for states who didn't, ISP could play favorite and allow some websites to work faster than others. As it has been reinstated in the federal level, they no longer can do that.Mind you, the way Internet as evolved, with people only using few website, it might seem less important nowadays than it was back then when the FCC ended it.
>>100179311We need to put trump back in power so ISPs and the FCC can fill their pockets with middleman / donor money, do your thing migapedes! We'll own the libs and do trump dance moves on tiktok!
>>100179565>ESLGo back to Venesuala.
>>100179311who cares net neutrality is a non-issue
>>100179778It's funny how some actually think that pointing that is an own, somehow.
I know this won't actually have any actual benefit for consumers, but I love how thoroughly it screws ISPs.Fuck Comcast, have fun hemorrhaging money, faggots.
>>100179799see>>100179684It might look less important right now, but it prevent unfair competition for websites who already dominate the market.A actual potential competitor to a website that you hate could be killed in the nub if that website pay to have the ISP gave it faster access.
>>100179778Two more weeks sister! Two more weeks until le ebil vuvuzela and le heckin Spetsnatz that supports them is defeated by NATO
>>100179823I didn't mind Comcast until I had to cancel. I actually liked that they adopted IPv6 so early.God damn that was awful though. They even screwed me out of an extra month of service by giving me the run around. Fuck them.
amazing how i noticed absolutely zero difference during all this time
>>100179512Gay newfag>>100179571Based oldfag
>>100180131see>>100179684>Net Neutrality enforcement on the federal level ended under the Trump presidency, but was reinstated on the state levels>Mind you, the way Internet as evolved, with people only using few website, it might seem less important nowadays than it was back then when the FCC ended it
>>100179615>>100179489He will be back when Trump wins this eyar
>>100181981>implying glowies won't start crying about Chinese hackers and then stuff ballots again
>>100181981>when Trump wins this eyarget a load of this covfefe
>>100179874at&t is basically the same as they all are
>>100179311FINALLY! Now my internet plan won't come in the form of a cable package anymore! We did it Reddit!
>>100181981> when Trump winsLOL
>>100179684>Mind you, the way Internet as evolved, with people only using few website, it might seem less important nowadays than it was back then when the FCC ended it.Those few websites are more likely to either operate their own CDN or be paying a lot of money for one. Net neutrality can mean the cost of this is greatly reduced. I live in Asia and they basically need to bribe the ISPs with a lot of money compared to anywhere else in the world to ensure everything goes through smoothly. Major CDNs have nodes hosted by each major ISP. The cost of traffic reaching these destinations is high as fuck compared to the rest of the world.
>>100181981he's going to jail
Here's the thing: plebbit and similar sites predicted that without NN laws, ISPs would start charging for access to individual websites or have website packages like cable tv. But it never happened. Let me repeat that: IT NEVER HAPPENED!The Democrats are mad that it never happened. They predicted the end of the Internet without their law and it didn't happen. Nothing they said would happen actually did happen. Which should make you wonder why they're so insistent on passing a law to prevent something from happening that never happened. This isn't theoretical, we know what will happen without NN because we've already been living through it. Also note two other things because plebbit often tries to confuse people with these: this have nothing to do with your mobile phone and it has nothing to do with data caps. Neither of those are covered under this law (or more accurately, this FCC rule).All plebbit has now is a prediction that someday, at a time they can't predict, ISP would start charging by the website. Their only explanation for why it didn't happen without NN is that California and New York had their own laws but then they can't explain why the national law is needed if the laws in those states scared ISP nationwide. Nothing about any of this makes sense by their stated arguments.
>>100179778Goenn dir dein fentanyl, spasti
>>100183479>They predicted the end of the InternetThey predicted it will get worse, and it did. The only question is if this contributed or not
>>100179311>election year>government control intensifies
It'll be removed again next year once Trump's in office
>>100183944Didn't he support the trade war?
>>100183944Didn't he support Israel?
>>100179311Now we need to outlaw data caps, or force them to be 5 times their "average" user.fuckin Comcast had the fucking nerve to tell me 1.2 TB is a lot of data. fuck that. they gave me two free months before they enforced the data cap. I ran 4.5 Petabytes through their networks during those two months lmao then I dumped them for Tmobile home internet
>>100181981This is why I vote Biden. The demonrats are wokist trannies, but when the other side wants to let corporate America steal MY internet speed, I'll choose the wokists every time.
>>100183479The reason it didn't happen is because they realized it would make people chimp out. I don't think it's an exaggeration to say that people would have died if they just switched to doing that overnight.
>>100184658Comcast is so unbelievably bad. I'm glad they got their fucking nuts eaten in my market.
wow the jews move fast, they really are mad about their apratheid state being exposedthey will control your media, one way or another
>>100184658>4.5 Petabytesthat's like adding the traffic of 3000 families to their network lmao
>>100183512*Source: it all seemed to get worse in my mind
>>100179311Seeing as how the biggest marketing push I have ever seen online was Pro-NN I'm taking this as a bad thing
>>100179311i'm glad they saved the internet. do you think there will be any enforcement actions?
>>100184658outlawing data caps could be useful to a few people but doesn't help most. won't ever happen in a selfish democracy.
giant reeses cup bros...
>>100181996Pathetic how you need to make shit up to not admit that Trump lost.
>>100183512How did it get worse? Please give hard data, not "well, my router sometimes reboots and that sucks".
>>100183479>Here's the thing: plebbit and similar sites predicted that without NN laws, ISPs would start charging for access to individual websites or have website packages like cable tv.Like said before, the reason it didn't happen is because many states passed their own Net Neutrality regulations.
>>100183516Oh no, government telling big corporations that no one elected that they can't have everything. Truly this is tyranny.
>>100185659>the reason "bad thing" didn't happen is because a different law already fixed itThen why do we need this new law?>:(
>>100185868So the corpos can't find a way to wriggle out of it and fuck us all.
>net neutralityno one cares, call me when they start breaking up telcos or microsoft/amazon etc again
>>100185632reddit got bigger
>>100179862free vuvuzela
>>100185868It only exist on state-level and not all states passed it.Now it's nationwide.
>>100185356ISPs have no choice but to comply. that's the beauty of it.
>>1001846581.2TiB is a lot of data for a residential non-business account. You consooming idiot. Get a business-tier plan if you need unlimited data.
>>100185368Unlimited data is just tragedy of commons waiting to happen. You know that most residential plans are subsidized by business accounts?
A reminder that NN battle is just a smokescreen between old and new media fighting each other.The customer ends up playing the bulk of externalities no matter what
>>100183479pic related literally happened in 3rd world countries.now you can be like "haha it didn't happen yet we don't need net neutrality"or you could not be a retard and realize we need net neutrality so that it can never happen
>>100187448>The customer ends up playing the bulk of externalities no matter whatCustomers will pay more without Net Neutrality.
>>100187500Nope, the end-up paying the same at the end. It will collected by a different party or under different service.>Kiddes cannot get into economics
>>100185337All the social media companies (including 4chan) and all the streaming sites like Netflix all leech off NN with their bloated bandwidth and oversized presence.(Well, maybe less so 4chan, since I’d assume its bandwidth footprint isn’t as bad as most other sites.)Of course said nu-internet sites would run a big shill campaign against removing it.
>>100187500They will pay less for better service actually.>Hey ISP, I don’t want to have to pay for the Facebook package or the Netflix package in my internet plan anymore.>Alright sir we’ll remove those packages from your internet plan. Your new plan will be 30 dollars less per month.>Hey ISP, can I get the scam protection package, that stops facebook from MITM attacking my web browsing?>Of course sir, that will be +5 dollars per month.Meanwhile in the gay NN reality we live in.>Hey ISP, can you cut netflix, I don’t want it.>Sorry but due to NN laws you must pay for the whole internet, as a collective, and that cost is $99 a month.>Hey ISP, can I get the scam protection package to stop facebook from MITM attacking me?>Sorry we can’t discriminate against internet traffic due to NN laws, you will have to continue paying $99 a month to have Zuckerberg fuck you in the ass.
>>100187546>Nope, the end-up paying the same at the end.Wrong. ISP would increase their price, which result in websites having to pay more and impacting that increase on the customers.Don't talk like you know shit about economic.>>100187739Holly Batman corporate shill. You know that you can simply not go to Facebook. Also, without Net Neutrality, Facebook can pay your ISP so that only they are easily accessible to your location.
>>100185337>>100187564You should be more worried that ISPs are the one pushing against it.
>>100179311>isps discriminating traffic based on the destination: bad>companies discriminating traffic based on the source (throttling and refusing you access): goodNow tell me how companies are totally like real people and have the right to freeze peach.
>>100179622instead goyflix took it in their own hands to cap the data they sent out to people on ISP that don't have unlimited data as part of the regular internet package. even if you had unlimited you were capped because you had that ISP and nothing you could do about it.
>>100187416>1.2TiB is a lot of data for a residential non-business accountNot even close, if you have multiple people on one modem, you're looking at multiple 4k tv streams daily, youtube auto playing hours at a time, 200gb game download on occasion, you're looking at 1.5tb easy that's not even getting into torrents.
>>100187416>Get a business-tier plan if you need unlimited data.You obviously don't know what the fuck you're talking about. As someone who has done this, you run a dedicated line straight from the ISP to your place, you pay for every foot of that line plus the install fee, then you sign a 5+ year contract to make it worth it for them, and then you overpay out the cock for lower max speeds than the residential plans, all because you wanna push 2PB of data a month with nobody yelling at you.
>>100188113>>companies discriminating traffic based on the source (throttling and refusing you access): goodNo, also bad. It's just not covered by Net Neutrality.
>>100188036>Holly Batman corporate shillForgot this was ESL hours. >You can just not go to facebookBut its bandwidth footprint is baked into your internet bill.You literally pay for bloated websites you don’t ever go to.>Facebook would pay to be the only site accessible. Trust me bro it’s gonna happen.1. Your scenario is already covered by anti-competitive law2. They’d have to pay a lot. ISPs will lose too many customers if they are stuck offering an unappealing experience.Basically what’s already happening with the exodus from cable television.
>>100179862>>100185945Go back to preddit, commietroon rat
>>100188051You should be more worried that , Shitflix, et al are the one pushing for it.
>>100187546>>100188036It would be the same total cost for the market, but the distribution of costs would be shifted across customers.Don’t want Netflix? You can just cut it from your bill.However, the bandwidth Netflix uses is still there, so some adjustments will need to be made to catch the windfall.So for the people who do opt in to stream Netflix, they will have to pay more, because the non-flixers aren’t paying for that site anymore.
>>100188417>Forgot this was ESL hours.When will people learn they only ridicule themselves when they think this is a valid call out?>You literally pay for bloated websites you don’t ever go to.Same thing with phone, anon. And other people pay for the websites you go to but they don't. This is what make the price remain lower. Bing against that is stupid pettyness that end up making you pay more than you actually would.>1. Your scenario is already covered by anti-competitive lawThe end of Net Neutrality make it legal.>2. They’d have to pay a lot.Not something corporation have been afraid to do to keep the market for themselves.>>100188466No, not really. ISPs are the one that can be a real threat to Internet access, not Netflix.>>100188568>It would be the same total cost for the marketNo, it wouldn't. ISPs end up draining less cash from other parties because they no longer can, making the operation cheaper.>However, the bandwidth Netflix uses is still there, so some adjustments will need to be made to catch the windfall.>So for the people who do opt in to stream Netflix, they will have to pay more, because the non-flixers aren’t paying for that site anymore.Not how it work at all. what happens is that Netflix has to pay ISP who have seen a way to make more money and they impact the price on their customers.Meanwhile people who don't pay for Netflix have a slower internet because website who aren't Netflix aren't paying ISP to not be throttled down and the websites they want to access to are slower.
>>100185671The government and public companies (not private) go hand in hand.
>The reclassification of BIAS enhances the Commission’s ability to protect the nation’s communications networks from entities that pose threats to national security and law enforcement.
>>100189127whenever the government is doing something to "increase national security and law enforcement", it always ends bad for the citizens. always.
>>100189207>>100189127and the sad part, the majority of normies fall for it everytime
>>100187416>>100187431>NOOOOOOOOO even though the entire non-anglo world has internet access without datacaps, WE need to give them another reason to nickel and dime us because... because we just DO, okay!?Americans and brown-nosing corporations.Name a more iconic duo.
>>100189055Not always and when it's the case, it always result in less regulation for corporation.Reminder, you elect the people in charge of your government, that's not the case for corporations.
>>100189508>Reminder, you elect the people in charge of your government, that's not the case for corporations.Technically, the companies and foreign governments elect our government. We havent elected anyone since the 1800s. Once the Fed came in, we've been owned by foreign parties since. There's a reason all the presidents since I have come from elite schools and private academies owned by said powers.
>>100189207>>100189213Guess they shouldn't have made murder illegal.
>>100189522>Technically, the companies and foreign governments elect our governmentNo, they don't. They'd want to, but they don't.>We havent elected anyone since the 1800s. Once the Fed came in, we've been owned by foreign parties since. There's a reason all the presidents since I have come from elite schools and private academies owned by said powers.Oh, okay, you are off your meds.
>>100189556>No, they don't. They'd want to, but they don't.They do. I don't know how you're still believing the election by the people myth in 2024. Hint: whenever they say "the people", they mean the government.>Oh, okay, you are off your meds.All the recent presidents were born from politician academies where they were groomed to be figureheads and nothing more.
>>100179311We did it reddit!
>>100189583>I don't know how you're still believing the election by the people myth in 2024.I actually live in reality.>All the recent presidents were born from politician academiesYes, because you are more likely to succeed with better education or if you come from more affluent families. There is no conspiracy, there.Fun fact: private companies threw billions in political campaign to make people distrust the government for several decades.
>>100189861>Yes, because you are more likely to succeed with better education or if you come from more affluent families. There is no conspiracy, there.You're literally agreeing with me, yet you're being such a faggot by saying>well, it's cause they come from wealthy familiesThat's the fucking point, retard. You literally are agreeing with me! God you fags act like reddit sometimes.You're a dumbass
>>100189889>You're literally agreeing with meNo, because that doesn't mean corporations elect governments. also, the government is not jus the president, moron.You are just doing baby 101 conspiracy with zero actual knowledge of this shit.
>>100190005stfu and stop talking
