Current Events > Net neutrality wouldn't be in danger if people cared about it as much as...

(+) Yeah! (+)

Microtransactions.
---

Were_Wyrm posted...

Microtransactions.

You mean the things that aren't going away and companies refuse to budge on?
---

I'd care more about net neutrality if the horror scenarios people use to scare people about supporting it didn't describe a vastly superior internet experience to what I've been stuck with for years with no sign of improving.

It's like middle class people going up to a homeless person saying, "Dude the heating in my house isn't working as well anymore because of failing insulation soon I may have to sell the house and move into another one that's smaller and is further away from my job PLS CARE"
---

Tmk posted...

I'd care more about net neutrality if the horror scenarios people use to scare people about supporting it didn't describe a vastly superior internet experience to what I've been stuck with for years with no sign of improving.

hey bud

its gonna get a lot worse, jus sayin
---

Tmk posted...

g it didn't describe a vastly superior internet experience to what I've been stuck with for years with no sign of improving.

Yeah here's the deal, this wont help them improve speeds or data caps. In no way will your internet improve.

Here's a techquickie on it/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c5lhtYYNOdE
---

metralo posted...

hey bud

its gonna get a lot worse, jus sayin

127 dollars a month, baseline 600+ ms ping, 10mbps speed at best but almost never, barely half that, often less than 1mbps upload. 60gb usage limit per month but they intentionally lower performance significantly if you use "too much" in too short a time frame anyway. Extremely frail connection that goes out over weather all the time, and also just for no reason for hours sometimes too. Packet loss for days.
---

A lot more people care about Net Neutrality than microtransactions. Let's be honest here.
---

Anarchy_Juiblex posted...

Yeah here's the deal, this wont help them improve speeds or data caps.

I know I thought that was obvious from the comparison I gave right after that.
---

Tmk posted...

It's like middle class people going up to a homeless person saying, "Dude the heating in my house isn't working as well anymore because of failing insulation soon I may have to sell the house and move into another one that's smaller and is further away from my job PLS CARE"

It's like a middle class person doing that, and then the city cleaning up the homeless guy's street but forcing him to go live on an even shittier street because now there's a fee to stay on the street he always had.
---

It would also help if people actually understood what Net Neutrality is and what it isn't.
---

and you think thats going to change... why?

this just gives them more options to fuck you over and raise the costs even higher.
---

Tmk posted...

I'd care more about net neutrality if the horror scenarios people use to scare people about supporting it didn't describe a vastly superior internet experience to what I've been stuck with for years with no sign of improving.

It's like middle class people going up to a homeless person saying, "Dude the heating in my house isn't working as well anymore because of failing insulation soon I may have to sell the house and move into another one that's smaller and is further away from my job PLS CARE"

I dunno man, gigabit internet is pretty damn awesome.
---

@Tmk
You said it described a better experience.

I guess I misunderstood you. Are you saying that their nightmare scenario is better than your current one, and tho it wont improve your experience any, fuck them anyways because your situation sucks?

If that's what you're saying, you're a huge piece of garbage as a person.
---

"Hey guys I don't have access to running water, fuck the people in Flint, I don't care if their water has lead!" ~Tmk
---

metralo posted...

and you think thats going to change... why?

this just gives them more options to fuck you over and raise the costs even higher.

This. They were given a $200 BILLION tax cut in the 90s to invest into infrastructure to prevent this very problem from happening. Instead they pocketed most of that and now are bitching that the cable they have in the ground can't meet demand when they were given the opportunity to lay fiber 20 years ago and did nothing.

There's no version of "ending net neutrality" where your service gets better if the companies can charge more for the same or lesser quality service.
---

s0nicfan posted...

It's like a middle class person doing that, and then the city cleaning up the homeless guy's street but forcing him to go live on an even shittier street because now there's a fee to stay on the street he always had.

The moral of the story is that the middleclass person doesn't care about that homeless person and never will and only turns to them when they themselves are risking suffering.

metralo posted...

and you think thats going to change... why?

Why do you think I think it'll change for the better? I never said it would. What I'm saying is, what I have now is the best internet I've ever known, and likely ever will, and it's fucking atrocious, and no one has ever given a shit about that, and when someone is forced to accept this garbage as the best they'll get, it numbs them significantly to an issue like this, especially the way people portray it. I remember reddit doing a thing where they were raising awareness by pretending you went over a data cap and to pay more to get more usage, and it was like "WHOA WOULDN'T THAT BE SCARY IF IT HAPPENED?! CLICK HERE TO DEFEND NET NEUTRALITY SO IT DOESN'T" and I'm like bitch that's already been my fucking internet since I got off dial-up.

CableZL posted...

I dunno man, gigabit internet is pretty damn awesome.

I wouldn't know.
---

Tmk posted...

The moral of the story is that the middleclass person doesn't care about that homeless person and never will and only turns to them when they themselves are risking suffering.

The moral of the story is the homeless man's situation still get shittier, but it sounds like in this instance you're the "homeless man" and are willing to suffer even worse service to spite someone else.
---

Anarchy_Juiblex posted...

You said it described a better experience.

I guess I misunderstood you. Are you saying that their nightmare scenario is better than your current one, and tho it wont improve your experience any, fuck them anyways because your situation sucks?

If that's what you're saying, you're a huge piece of garbage as a person.

You're oblivious to what it's like to be in my situation and the way people treat you. I don't care what you think about me, you're just another for the pile of negative reactions no matter what I say.

s0nicfan posted...

This. They were given a $200 BILLION tax cut in the 90s to invest into infrastructure to prevent this very problem from happening. Instead they pocketed most of that and now are bitching that the cable they have in the ground can't meet demand when they were given the opportunity to lay fiber 20 years ago and did nothing.

I'm well aware of how corrupt and stupid they are.
---

s0nicfan posted...

The moral of the story is the homeless man's situation still get shittier, but it sounds like in this instance you're the "homeless man" and are willing to suffer even worse service to spite someone else.

It's not so much about spite as it is not being as fired up as they want me to be for reasons they don't understand nor care about and will just see my lack of fired up as a reason to hate me, which doesn't exactly breed compassion for them on my end.
---

Tmk posted...

s0nicfan posted...

The moral of the story is the homeless man's situation still get shittier, but it sounds like in this instance you're the "homeless man" and are willing to suffer even worse service to spite someone else.

It's not so much about spite as it is not being as fired up as they want me to be for reasons they don't understand nor care about and will just see my lack of fired up as a reason to hate me, which doesn't exactly breed compassion for them on my end.

It doesn't really matter what their perceptions are, though. At the end of the day, you're still willing to get shittier and/or more expensive service and the only reason you don't care to fight it is because you know it'll hurt others worse than you. That's a shitty attitude.
---

It would probably help if every few weeks wasn't the FINAL BATTLE FOR NET NEUTRALITY.
---

s0nicfan posted...

It doesn't really matter what their perceptions are, though. At the end of the day, you're still willing to get shittier and/or more expensive service and the only reason you don't care to fight it is because you know it'll hurt others worse than you. That's a shitty attitude.

You still don't understand. It's not about hurting others worse. I just point out that they have more to lose to highlight how shitty what I have is. What I have is worse than a lot of people's hypothetical nightmare scenario.

And I have to accept this. Win or lose for net neutrality, this is my reality and future internet service. I have to accept this.

If a person has to accept something so crappy in terms of quality, they naturally have to do things to their standards that will numb them to matters like this. I'm explaining, again, why I'm not as fired up about the fight as all the things on the internet trying to rile people up about it want me to be.
---

If it's so hard for people to understand maybe it's because it's a fucking stupid point, dude
---

Tmk posted...

What I have is worse than a lot of people's hypothetical nightmare scenario.

Net neutrality is going to affect now the entire nation deals with it, you selfish, self absorbed, short sighted fucking prick. Fuck your personal internet, move if it's so bad.
People are concerned about more than their personal experiences, this will affect media, the distribution of ideas. God fucking damn you.
---

Far more people care about net neutrality, people have been fighting it back for a decade at least so far which is why the battle is still going on instead lf being over by now.
---

DarthAragorn posted...

If it's so hard for people to understand maybe it's because it's a fucking stupid point, dude

Yeah because angry people on the internet are renown for their reading comprehension and not rushing to judgment so the fault couldn't possibly lie with them.

There's nothing stupid about saying "OMG if net neutrality fails we might get data caps" is not a very effective way to get someone with satellite internet who previously had cellular internet to take the problem seriously.

But to be fair I CAN pay more monthly to have a higher data cap.

Let's see, isn't like around 300GB a month what cable internet usually gives? Let's say 300GB. So...if I wanted that each month, I'd only have to pay, in total... 2527 dollars a month. At <10mbps speeds.
---

Anarchy_Juiblex posted...

Fuck your personal internet, move if it's so bad.

Ah there we go. There it is.

"Move if it's so bad"

See, you don't care. This is what I always hear. That and "lol pay more then" when I already likely pay 3x as much as they do for not even 10% of what they have.
---

Porn will figure out how to adapt, and the rest of the internet will soon follow.

Tmk posted...

See, you don't care.

Pay to have them lay fiber. What the fuck do you want? Sympathy? You want geography and population densities to not matter in city planning and utilities?

"WAHHHH, MEEEEEEE"
---

Tmk posted...

There's nothing stupid about saying "OMG if net neutrality fails we might get data caps" is not a very effective way to get someone with satellite internet who previously had cellular internet to take the problem seriously.

Net Neutrality is about WAY more than data caps, dude. Comcast already does data caps in about 30 states. Net Neutrality is about you on your shitty satellite link having certain web sites load twice as slow as they do currently because said sites didn't pay the fee to get on the "fast lane". Imagine your current service, but half the internet loads about half as fast. THAT'S the fight over net neutrality. Data caps aren't even in focus.
---

http://i.huffpost.com/gen/1567010/original.jpg

Anarchy_Juiblex posted...

Pay to have them lay fiber. What the fuck do you want? Sympathy? You want geography and population densities to not matter in city planning and utilities?

Because telecommunication companies certainly could do no wrong, is that it? Dude I've heard stories of ONE SIDE of a street not getting service while the other did. It's arbitrary as fuck.

If electricity can be wired to a home, fucking internet should be too by now. It's 2017.

s0nicfan posted...

Net Neutrality is about WAY more than data caps, dude. Comcast already does data caps in about 30 states. Net Neutrality is about you on your shitty satellite link having certain web sites load twice as slow as they do currently because said sites didn't pay the fee to get on the "fast lane". Imagine your current service, but half the internet loads about half as fast. THAT'S the fight over net neutrality. Data caps aren't even in focus.

Oh I know. Which is why I'm pointing out how dumb what reddit did was. Framing it like that not only simplifies the issue, it's going to come across as obnoxious to everyone on satellite or cellular internet.
---

I don't need somebody from a failing European nation to try to monitor and censor me and force their dying ways on us. Pass!
---

Tmk posted...

Oh I know. Which is why I'm pointing out how dumb what reddit did was. Framing it like that not only simplifies the issue, it's going to come across as obnoxious to everyone on satellite or cellular internet.

So if you know that, then why aren't you "taking the problem seriously"? At that point, if you know what the real issue is, and you KNOW it'll negatively impact your already bad experience, then the ONLY reason for you to be less energized than you would otherwise be is, again, spite. There's zero other possible reason.
---

southcoast09 posted...

I don't need somebody from a failing European nation to try to monitor and censor me and force their dying ways on us.

What are you even on about? Are you drunk or high or something?

Tmk posted...

, and it's fucking atrocious, and no one has ever given a shit about that

are you kidding me? people give the US shit all of the fucking time for its awful, expensive, slow internet

and now its getting worse.
---

Tmk posted...

Because telecommunication companies certainly could do no wrong, is that it? Dude I've heard stories of ONE SIDE of a street not getting service while the other did. It's arbitrary as fuck.

The city almost certainly has a convoluted and half-corrupt permitting process when that happens.
No telecom would refuse money from the other side of the street just because.

s0nicfan posted...

So if you know that, then why aren't you "taking the problem seriously"? At that point, if you know what the real issue is, and you KNOW it'll negatively impact your already bad experience, then the ONLY reason for you to be less energized than you would otherwise be is, again, spite. There's zero other possible reason.

I already said why like 3 times in this topic. You should listen more.

What I have to accept is so shitty it numbs my standards severely

What's happening here appears to be a total failure of empathy on your part. I'm not sure all the verbal handholding in the universe can fix that.

Perhaps look at it this way: I came to satellite internet from cellular internet. Which, for reference, was much slower even than satellite, and had a 5GB cap. So, satellite internet was an upgrade, amazingly. And like I said, it's the best I've ever known, though I know it's utterly unacceptably bad. But I have to accept it. Having to accept something unthinkably bad in quality for most people, naturally does really messed up things to one's standards.

Similarly, if someone with like, fiber optic internet, had to switch down to satellite, for even a year, they'd probably hate it even more than I do, because they have modern internet standards. It'd be harder to accept.

If all else fails, just look inside yourself, and find how much you don't care about my situation or the fact it's been my situation for years and will continue to be and that satellite internet is BASICALLY a fraud and this is what millions in America have to use. You don't care, and most don't. And what I've been pointing out, is the dialogue used to try and get people to care about net neutrality, is aimed at people with modern internet, and modern internet standards, and so the language generally says things that like "wouldn't it be bad if this happened" but for someone with satellite internet, that already happened, always was, and is much worse, so NATURALLY it's going to come across worse to them.

I am not explaining this again.
---

metralo posted...

are you kidding me? people give the US shit all of the fucking time for its awful, expensive, slow internet

and now its getting worse.

I've generally seen that framed as "modern internet available in the US is behind other countries" so still sorta focusing on the middleground of service, or the higher end. Not the lowest end, which is equal parts an infrastructure and monopoly problem.

Questionmarktarius posted...

The city almost certainly has a convoluted and half-corrupt permitting process when that happens.
No telecom would refuse money from the other side of the street just because.

I dunno sometimes their reasoning for not extending who's wired up amounts to "we wouldn't instantly make the money back it would take a little while so meh"

They seem pretty content to not expand or upgrade at all and just find new ways to BS existing customers into paying more for less.
---

Tmk posted...

I am not explaining this again.

What you're not getting is everyone who's been fighting the ISPs for years are doing so to your benefit as well. It may not look like it from your position, it's probably like watching a bunch of rich people argue over tax code, but you directly benefit or suffer from the results. You've got such a victim complex that you can't even see that their fight is your fight.

I get what you're saying about being numbed to it, but while you're saying you "have to accept it", everyone else fighting is fighting FOR YOUR BENEFIT TOO. They're fighting to change the thing you've resigned yourself too. Any frustration you see is from people with better internet fighting your battle for you and being upset that you've just given up entirely.
---

Tmk posted...

I dunno sometimes their reasoning for not extending who's wired up amounts to "we wouldn't instantly make the money back it would take a little while so meh"

Because, they're losing a shitton of money to pay off bureaucrats to get permission to pay three or four guys $12 an hour to run a cable across a few poles.

s0nicfan posted...

They're fighting to change the thing you've resigned yourself too.

No they aren't. They aren't at all.

Are you seriously trying to tell me if we KEEP net neutrality, that will...what? Am I gonna get DSL here? Cable? Fiber? Magic new internet that just everyone can access without the delay of having to go to and from space while being slow restricted and unreliable?

It's a fight to keep things from getting worse, not make them better.
---

Questionmarktarius posted...

Because, they're losing a shitton of money to pay off bureaucrats to get permission to pay three or four guys $12 an hour to run a cable across a few poles.

It's more like they're paying off politicians to not have to run that cable across more poles, and lobby to ban community owned broadband projects or google to pick up the slack where they won't service.
---

Tmk posted...

No they aren't. They aren't at all.

Tmk posted...

And I have to accept this. Win or lose for net neutrality, this is my reality and future internet service. I have to accept this.

Tmk posted...

t's a fight to keep things from getting worse, not make them better.

You resign yourself that what you have is your "reality and future" REGARDLESS of the result of the net neutrality fight. You also acknowledge that things will get worse if we lose it. These are fundamentally contradictory statements. Get your shit together.
---

Tmk posted...

It's more like they're paying off politicians to not have to run that cable across more poles, and lobby to ban community owned broadband projects or google to pick up the slack where they won't service.

If they're so malicious (they are) then why in Lucifer's name do you want(or apathetic to) to give them more power?
---

Tmk posted...

Are you seriously trying to tell me if we KEEP net neutrality, that will...what? Am I gonna get DSL here? Cable? Fiber? Magic new internet that just everyone can access without the delay of having to go to and from space while being slow restricted and unreliable?

Net Neutrality has nothing at all to do with running fiber to the boonies.

It's more like they're paying off politicians to not have to run that cable across more poles, and lobby to ban community owned broadband projects or google to pick up the slack where they won't service.

Possible, and also why the root cause of shitty internet is Municipal Franchises.
When a city has exactly one, or in very rare cases two, providers, there's no competition, so fuck you if you don't like what offered.

I'm talking about satellite internet.

I'm stuck with satellite internet, forever. If net neutrality loses, I will still have satellite internet. If net neutrality wins, I'll still have satellite internet.

While it could be made marginally worse, the key problem is that it's satellite internet. Just inherently, satellite internet is incredibly bad. The technology is terrible. It's overpriced. It can never be on pace with modern internet.

Furthermore you may be underestimating just how invasive data caps truly are and can be. They can even be used to circumvent net neutrality.
---

Anarchy_Juiblex posted...

If they're so malicious (they are) then why in Lucifer's name do you want(or apathetic to) to give them more power?

I've explained that 3 or 4 times in this topic already. Not doing it again.
---

Tmk posted...

Anarchy_Juiblex posted...

If they're so malicious (they are) then why in Lucifer's name do you want(or apathetic to) to give them more power?

I've explained that 3 or 4 times in this topic already. Not doing it again.

So STFU.
---

Webmaster4531 posted...

So STFU.

?
---