Current Events > The FCC unveils its plan to repeal its net neutrality rules

(+) Yeah! (+)

Muffinz0rz posted...

NeverOffended posted...

man people ITT really are dense enough to make this a left vs right issue lol, newsflash we've fought both sides on NN

Everything is a left v right issue. As easy as it should be to keep it nonpartisan, people will still make it a partisan issue.

the right had many many politicians who either out right supported NN or were open to it, don't both sides me on this bullshit.
---

Howl posted...

The actual need that people have to use the internet for is extremely minor.

Bullshit
---

The alt right is as stupid as usual itt.

This is an underrated post:
luigi13579 posted...

To be honest, I think the focus on charts like the above is to ignore many of the wider issues around net neutrality.

For example, ISPs won't just be able to charge you more, but they'll be able to modify speeds and even modify the data in transit. On speeds, this will allow them to favor their own services over their competitors and to essentially freeze out new entrants to the market who can't afford to pay for preferential speeds. Even a small difference in speeds affects the sites people go to. On the data itself, this allows them to add trackers, spyware, etc. and potentially remove certain layers of encryption, making the internet less safe to use.

There's also the issue of the infrastructure that ISPs control (e.g. pole attachment), where they can prevent new ISPs from entering the market. For all the talk of competition being all that's required (rather than regulation), well, there ain't gonna be much.

I'm probably sounding like a broken record here lol.

And you know, not to mention this would bring us to third world internet standards. Again no surprise with the alt right, they are basically terrorists that get a platform. For sane people the obvious downsides here are devastating across the board.
---

Muffinz0rz posted...

NeverOffended posted...

man people ITT really are dense enough to make this a left vs right issue lol, newsflash we've fought both sides on NN

Everything is a left v right issue. As easy as it should be to keep it nonpartisan, people will still make it a partisan issue.

Except for the part where the GOP almost unanimously vote against Net Neutrality and the Democrats vote almost unanimously for Net Neutrality, and that this FCC chair who is pushing this was hand picked by Trump. The former FCC chair, Wheeler, was for Net Neutrality and was appointed by Obama.

So except for the fact that the two sides of the aisle are COMPLETELY OPPOSITE on this issue, yeah, they're identical. Right?
---

We could have saved net neutrality on November 8, 2016 and we failed.

RedZaraki posted...

Muffinz0rz posted...

NeverOffended posted...

man people ITT really are dense enough to make this a left vs right issue lol, newsflash we've fought both sides on NN

Everything is a left v right issue. As easy as it should be to keep it nonpartisan, people will still make it a partisan issue.

Except for the part where the GOP almost unanimously vote against Net Neutrality and the Democrats vote almost unanimously for Net Neutrality, and that this FCC chair who is pushing this was hand picked by Trump. The former FCC chair, Wheeler, was for Net Neutrality and was appointed by Obama.

So except for the fact that the two sides of the aisle are COMPLETELY OPPOSITE on this issue, yeah, they're identical. Right?

this is a GREAT article on the 2016 presidential candidates views on the matter guess which party was largely strongly opposed to NN?
https://gizmodo.com/the-2016-presidential-candidates-views-on-net-neutralit-1760829072
---

I don't see how they'll get it passed through without facing a lot of court battles.

Muffinz0rz posted...

NeverOffended posted...

man people ITT really are dense enough to make this a left vs right issue lol, newsflash we've fought both sides on NN

Everything is a left v right issue. As easy as it should be to keep it nonpartisan, people will still make it a partisan issue.

Hmm

House Vote for Net Neutrality

For - Against
Republicans: 2- 234
Democrats: 177 - 6

Senate Vote for Net Neutrality

For - Against
Republicans: 0 - 46
Democrats: 52 - 0

---

RedZaraki posted...

The former FCC chair, Wheeler, was for Net Neutrality and was appointed by Obama.

Wow that's verifiably false.

And just because politicians play politics doesn't make it a partisan issue where people are concerned.
---

I am confused, is the FCC Chairman an idiot? He says if ISPs screw us when Net Neutrality ends, we can always switch to another one... WHAT OTHER ONE?! Most people only have 1 options, 2 if they are lucky. ISPs basically have a monopoly.
---

LightHawKnight posted...

I am confused, is the FCC Chairman an idiot? He says if ISPs screw us when Net Neutrality ends, we can always switch to another one... WHAT OTHER ONE?! Most people only have 1 options, 2 if they are lucky. ISPs basically have a monopoly.

so start your own isp. Free market!
---

bevan306 posted...

LightHawKnight posted...

I am confused, is the FCC Chairman an idiot? He says if ISPs screw us when Net Neutrality ends, we can always switch to another one... WHAT OTHER ONE?! Most people only have 1 options, 2 if they are lucky. ISPs basically have a monopoly.

so start your own isp. Free market!

You do realize even Google failed to start their own ISP right? If Google can't afford to fight the current ISPs, what the hell makes you think I am able to?
---

LightHawKnight posted...

bevan306 posted...

LightHawKnight posted...

I am confused, is the FCC Chairman an idiot? He says if ISPs screw us when Net Neutrality ends, we can always switch to another one... WHAT OTHER ONE?! Most people only have 1 options, 2 if they are lucky. ISPs basically have a monopoly.

so start your own isp. Free market!

You do realize even Google failed to start their own ISP right? If Google can't afford to fight the current ISPs, what the hell makes you think I am able to?

He's making a joke about the absurdity. As for the question at hand It's doublespeak plain and simple.
---

Yes he's an idiot, you should be against him.
---

LightHawKnight posted...

I am confused, is the FCC Chairman an idiot? He says if ISPs screw us when Net Neutrality ends, we can always switch to another one... WHAT OTHER ONE?! Most people only have 1 options, 2 if they are lucky. ISPs basically have a monopoly.

Ajit Pai was a lawyer for Verizon and tried to sue the FCC multiple times because he hates net neutrality. He doesn't give a shit that people only have 1 choice. He's gonna be getting fat checks on the downlow from the ISP's for helping them out while they never actually enforce their rules if the consumer gets screwed over.
---

Zeeak4444 posted...

LightHawKnight posted...

bevan306 posted...

LightHawKnight posted...

I am confused, is the FCC Chairman an idiot? He says if ISPs screw us when Net Neutrality ends, we can always switch to another one... WHAT OTHER ONE?! Most people only have 1 options, 2 if they are lucky. ISPs basically have a monopoly.

so start your own isp. Free market!

You do realize even Google failed to start their own ISP right? If Google can't afford to fight the current ISPs, what the hell makes you think I am able to?

He's making a joke about the absurdity. As for the question at hand It's doublespeak plain and simple.

Is it? There are plenty of people throwing around that there is somehow an option, a choice of ISPs you can choose from. Where do they live?! Not in America if they have options for ISPs.
---

LightHawKnight posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

LightHawKnight posted...

bevan306 posted...

LightHawKnight posted...

I am confused, is the FCC Chairman an idiot? He says if ISPs screw us when Net Neutrality ends, we can always switch to another one... WHAT OTHER ONE?! Most people only have 1 options, 2 if they are lucky. ISPs basically have a monopoly.

so start your own isp. Free market!

You do realize even Google failed to start their own ISP right? If Google can't afford to fight the current ISPs, what the hell makes you think I am able to?

He's making a joke about the absurdity. As for the question at hand It's doublespeak plain and simple.

Is it? There are plenty of people throwing around that there is somehow an option, a choice of ISPs you can choose from. Where do they live?! Not in America if they have options for ISPs.

I know parts of San Diego have both Cox and AT&T U-verse but they're by far the minority (I worked for the U-verse program for a while and my neighbor is in top management at AT&T). Last I checked (back in early 16) about 3% of the city had access to both.

To my understanding we're rare because in LA you're stuck with FiOS and in SJ you're stuck with TW.

Make no mistake though, the people saying that are either ignorant or deliberately pushing a narrative.
---

After reading comments about this the last couple days, it makes me glad when SOPA happened when it did. That was the only time this decade (and I mean the ONLY time) when all sides came together to fight against a bullshit bill. If SOPA was getting passed now, I guarantee you it would dissolve into typical right vs. left shitposting like we are getting now with Net Neutrality.
---

SavenForever posted...

After reading comments about this the last couple days, it makes me glad when SOPA happened when it did. That was the only time this decade (and I mean the ONLY time) when all sides came together to fight against a bullshit bill. If SOPA was getting passed now, I guarantee you it would dissolve into typical right vs. left shitposting like we are getting now with Net Neutrality.

It's really sad that important issues are being boiled down to "fuck liberals" and "fuck conservatives". Like, we have a pedo that's probably gonna get elected into the Senate because people don't want to vote for a liberal. And people would rather side with corporations because it's seen as only liberals want net neutrality when conservatives are gonna get screwed too.
---

The thing that makes me mad is that this was repeatedly voted down, but they just pushed it over and over again until they found a way to do it.
---

bevan306 posted...

LightHawKnight posted...

I am confused, is the FCC Chairman an idiot? He says if ISPs screw us when Net Neutrality ends, we can always switch to another one... WHAT OTHER ONE?! Most people only have 1 options, 2 if they are lucky. ISPs basically have a monopoly.

so start your own isp. Free market!

You literally cant. You get sued to death by existing ones.
---

Holy_Cloud105 posted...

SavenForever posted...

After reading comments about this the last couple days, it makes me glad when SOPA happened when it did. That was the only time this decade (and I mean the ONLY time) when all sides came together to fight against a bullshit bill. If SOPA was getting passed now, I guarantee you it would dissolve into typical right vs. left shitposting like we are getting now with Net Neutrality.

It's really sad that important issues are being boiled down to "fuck liberals" and "fuck conservatives". Like, we have a pedo that's probably gonna get elected into the Senate because people don't want to vote for a liberal. And people would rather side with corporations because it's seen as only liberals want net neutrality when conservatives are gonna get screwed too. Ajit Pai doesn't care about consumers. He just wants to give his former bosses the rub that he couldn't when he was their lawyer.

It's scary how accurate Metal Gear Solid 2 was in predicting the future.
---

Hinakuluiau posted...

I don't see how they'll get it passed through without facing a lot of court battles.

Muffinz0rz posted...

NeverOffended posted...

man people ITT really are dense enough to make this a left vs right issue lol, newsflash we've fought both sides on NN

Everything is a left v right issue. As easy as it should be to keep it nonpartisan, people will still make it a partisan issue.

Hmm

House Vote for Net Neutrality

For - Against
Republicans: 2- 234
Democrats: 177 - 6

Senate Vote for Net Neutrality

For - Against
Republicans: 0 - 46
Democrats: 52 - 0

This is my point exactly

When a given issue is broached, those with political power don't think, "where do I stand on this particular issue?" They think, "what does my party think about this given issue?"

In this issue, the voters aren't thinking, "which do I prefer, a single monthly flat-rate for access to any internet site ever, or getting nickeled and dimed for literally no discernible benefit to myself or any consumer, barring those who work for a large ISP?" They're thinking, "okay the republicans are voting to repeal NN so I need to stick with the party."

I don't blame them for sticking with the party, considering they'd get ostracized for going against it, but I'm just trying to take the idealistic approach. Unfortunately, as long as bipartisan politics exist in the US, that will never happen.
---

Big government wins again