Current Events > Net neutrality will be repealed on Thursday

(+) Yeah! (+)

GaryGaryGary posted...

I explained how competition means net neutrality is not an issue.

1.) you didn't, I did.
2.) you responded to me saying that net neutrality and lack of competition are independent issues.

Good thing you've shown you're as ignorant as mal_fet and nicklebro. Removing net neutrality isn't going to increase competition, because net neutrality isn't what's stopping companies from trying to break into the regional monopolies areas.
---

ChromaticAngel posted...

GaryGaryGary posted...

I explained how competition means net neutrality is not an issue.

I remember when Admiral uses this image to argue that access is fine in America. Lol
---

If you need help deciphering that chart, it means, in 2015, 55% of the blocks surveyed had no provider that sold 100 down / 10 up internet (this is still really slow compared to rest of the world), 35% had just 1 choice.

This means that 90% of the people have NO competition for anything resembling fast internet.

25 down is only slightly faster than DSL.
---

Getting modded or even banned for this, but I don't care.

Ajit Pai deserves death, and nothing else.
---

A_Good_Boy posted...

GaryGaryGary posted...

I Like Toast posted...

GaryGaryGary posted...

No they aren't.

Yes they are. Considering it was just explained to you how they are. Feel free to try using actual points, logic, examples, stats or figures instead of "Nuh-uh, i said so!'

GaryGaryGary posted...

in the UK

Cool, doesn't mean shit when you're talking about us companies and us law. The US is fucking huge, regional monopolies are larger than the entire UK. And because they're not national, they get to skirt the laws against monopolies.

I explained how competition means net neutrality is not an issue.

I used the UK, which has lots of healthy competition and is never going to have an issue with net neutrality, as an example.

Don't even know why I'm arguing, i can tell this is going to be like talking to a flat earther. You've made your mind up that competition is not the answer and that's that, even though the rest of the world, that has a first world Internet set up, basically uses competition to keep it fair and healthy.

Enjoy your throttled download limited over priced no choice but net neutral Internet.

I think the issue here is that when more informed people are trying to explain to you the difference in the UK and US isp market you're refusing to acknowledge what those differences are and instead you're allowing yourself to look like an idiot. Have you considered reading ILT posts instead of looking like an idiot?

Please don't resort to childish insults.

My point is very clear.

I am very well Informed on this issue.

You need competition, saying "we've got no competition" is not informing me about anything. I clearly know you have monopolies that cover large areas, that why I said you need competition.

If you can't see how that is why you have a problem with net neutrality and how they're linked I give up.

GaryGaryGary posted...

, that why I said you need competition.

you didn't, you said that's why we need to get rid of net neutrality, as though that's going to create competition.
---

I Like Toast posted...

GaryGaryGary posted...

I explained how competition means net neutrality is not an issue.

1.) you didn't, I did.
2.) you responded to me saying that net neutrality and lack of competition are independent issues.

Good thing you've shown you're as ignorant as mal_fet and nicklebro. Removing net neutrality isn't going to increase competition, because net neutrality isn't what's stopping companies from trying to break into the regional monopolies areas.

Are you a bit dim?

My argument is clearly the reverse of that.

I'm saying you increase competition and you don't need net neutrality because it becomes the default way every provider operates.

I've not claimed net neutrality is stopping competition, I'm saying the lack of competition is what means you have this weird little net neutrality fight.

The fight for net neutrality laws is stupid in the scheme of things if you're just going to keep the shitty monopolies.

Somebody tell the szechuan sauce guys.
---

GaryGaryGary posted...

The fight for net neutrality laws is stupid in the scheme of things if you're just going to keep the shitty monopolies.

GaryGaryGary posted...

Are you a bit dim?

---

GaryGaryGary posted...

I'm saying you increase competition

The only way to force companies to compete with each other is through anti-trust laws aka what they did to break up AT&T and (much longer ago) Standard Oil, or force them to expand via regulation as a utility the same way governments mandate residential areas have access to USPS or electricity.
---

GaryGaryGary posted...

The fight for net neutrality laws is stupid in the scheme of things if you're just going to keep the shitty monopolies

Are you under the impression Net Neutrality is the only Internet related law people call for? I constantly hear complaints about lack of competition, slow speeds, etc.
---

I Like Toast posted...

GaryGaryGary posted...

, that why I said you need competition.

you didn't, you said that's why we need to get rid of net neutrality, as though that's going to create competition.

No I didn't.

I said you were fighting the wrong thing.

I said you should be fighting the monopolies.

You said the monopolies and competition had nothing to do with net neutrality.

I said they definitely do have something to do with net neutrality.

I find it bizarre all this effort is going into keeping the awful system when the actual problem is ignored.

I don't even think most Republican voters want this. Seems like Republican representatives aren't representing very well. Might as well vote Democrat next time.
---

I Like Toast posted...

GaryGaryGary posted...

The fight for net neutrality laws is stupid in the scheme of things if you're just going to keep the shitty monopolies.

GaryGaryGary posted...

Are you a bit dim?

Are you?

I refuse to believe you can't understand what I'm saying.

I honestly don't know how to make it any more simple.

If you fight for net neutrality you don't really achieve anything if you keep the monopolies.

If you fight the monopolies you don't need net neutrality because it becomes the default way the Internet would work.

@Blitz4532 posted...

Another Australian here with a question; how will this affect us visiting American sites like youtube?

Also Sayoria - I recommend Adelaide or Brisbane. Very laid back without the stressful vibe of Sydney or Melbourne IMO.

Bostonian here that's moving to Perth next year to stay with some friends as moving to Oz is a LONG time coming. I MUCH prefer Oz to the USA and well, most other first world countries qualify as well. Mr. President has only made this even truer. Personally, I could NEVER live in Queensland or South Australia. Not my culture at all and QLD also has weird laws and gets too hot even for Oz. NSW is my favorite state and I love VIC for Melbourne. Perth is VERY laid back and imo, they have the coolest Aussies but Perth as warm and welcoming as it is, is pretty boring and my friends and a lot of people from there often say the same haha.

Melbourne as amazing it is isn't a city I could live in much like New York City. Sydney is basically Australian Boston and NSW is a LOT like Massachusetts to me so it feels very homely. I was originally supposed to move to the Central Coast with my Aussie ex but as you can guess that fell through when we split. Wollongong is also VERY nice to me. I have friends all over the country so no matter where I am there's cool people to hang out with and even stay with. Can't wait until I'm out of this country though will miss my high speed internet :(
---

I really hope and pray that this is all overblown and besides higher rates that service will only be marginally badly impacted.
---

GaryGaryGary posted...

I Like Toast posted...

GaryGaryGary posted...

The fight for net neutrality laws is stupid in the scheme of things if you're just going to keep the shitty monopolies.

GaryGaryGary posted...

Are you a bit dim?

Are you?

I refuse to believe you can't understand what I'm saying.

I honestly don't know how to make it any more simple.

If you fight for net neutrality you don't really achieve anything if you keep the monopolies.

If you fight the monopolies you don't need net neutrality because it becomes the default way the Internet would work.

No shit, but the US courts aren't well known for taking on monopolies. Assumedly it's mostly a matter of money, and the system doesn't regulate itaelf very well seeing as wealth division has only increased over the years. Therefore measures like net neutrality are absolutely necessary.

Oh and while I'm at it, big cable is playing at a loophole insofar as monopoly status is concerned anyway since they make sure to divide their territories evenly. So you see, this is not an effective approach.
---

Azardea posted...

Getting modded or even banned for this, but I don't care.

Ajit Pai deserves death, and nothing else.

You have some seriously fucked priorities
---

Mal_Fet posted...

Azardea posted...

Getting modded or even banned for this, but I don't care.

Ajit Pai deserves death, and nothing else.

You have some seriously fucked priorities

You decided since you couldn't get him modded to whine? Some things are worth fighting for. Seems that America is learning that a bit too late, unfortunately.
---

Mal_Fet posted...

Azardea posted...

Getting modded or even banned for this, but I don't care.

Ajit Pai deserves death, and nothing else.

You have some seriously fucked priorities

When someone seriously threatens freedom like he's doing? No, I do not.
---

@Azardea tbh, I am surprised there havent been any terrorist threats.

Honestly I'm surprised there isn't an organized march against this yet.
---

P4wn4g3 posted...

Honestly I'm surprised there isn't an organized march against this yet.

I guess nobody was offended by it.
---

TheCyborgNinja posted...

P4wn4g3 posted...

Honestly I'm surprised there isn't an organized march against this yet.

I guess nobody was offended by it.

If that's what it takes we are beyond fucked.
---

Azardea posted...

Mal_Fet posted...

Azardea posted...

Getting modded or even banned for this, but I don't care.

Ajit Pai deserves death, and nothing else.

You have some seriously fucked priorities

When someone seriously threatens freedom like he's doing? No, I do not.

If you think net neutrality has anything to do with the concept of freedom then I suggest you actually read the policy and try to understand what exactly it does.
---

Mal_Fet posted...

Azardea posted...

Mal_Fet posted...

Azardea posted...

Getting modded or even banned for this, but I don't care.

Ajit Pai deserves death, and nothing else.

You have some seriously fucked priorities

When someone seriously threatens freedom like he's doing? No, I do not.

If you think net neutrality has anything to do with the concept of freedom then I suggest you actually read the policy and try to understand what exactly it does.

Mal_Fet posted...

I'm not entirely sure you even know what Net Neutrality is.

Mal vs mal.
---

Just tell Reddit that this is like the internet having loot boxes and they'll take care of the rest
---

They get away with shit like that all the time. They throttle bandwidth then put you in touch with sales who suggests you buy a better package. Until someone with some knowledge of how internet speeds work uses the network and realizes the ISP is ripping them off.
---

fenderbender321 posted...

I Like Toast posted...

fenderbender321 posted...

The populace is free to send a message to the internet companies that they won't tolerate whatever horrific thing that ISPs do after it's repealed by canceling their internet service altogether.

Because there exist such strong competition for isp in America right?

If there's no backing down from the power ISPs hold over us, how are they not getting away with charging $500 a month for internet?

Because people wouldn't be able to afford it and eventually people will settle for using their slower unlimited mobile plans with hotspots
---

P4wn4g3 posted...

Honestly I'm surprised there isn't an organized march against this yet.

We can't even get 100 people to fucking organize, let alone thousands. Not unless it's Ferguson or some shit like that.

Biggest group of people I've seen at one place recently was at Barack Obamas inaguration back in 2008.

It was PACKED.
---

March for net neutrality on Wednesday.

https://www.facebook.com/events/397458310684312/

fenderbender321 posted...

So there is competition....

In the sense that all 150 lbs of me would be competition with an Olympic weight lifter in weight lifting. Sure. In the actual viable sense of the word, no, because the competition is a significantly inferior product that only becomes an option under your ludicrous 500/mo scenario.

Don't be a moron
---

VGAddict90 posted...

March for net neutrality on Wednesday.

https://www.facebook.com/events/397458310684312/

Well that's something at least. In DC though.
---

Mobile internet isnt a legitimate replacement for a internet connection to your home for anyone except grandma. Yes it is stupid to suggest otherwise
---

fenderbender321 posted...

I'm a moron

You did just remove any doubt
---

fenderbender321 posted...

I Like Toast posted...

fenderbender321 posted...

I'm a moron

You did just remove any doubt

I will have you know that I have a college degree from college.

That's printed on the back of a chinese take-out menu
---

And yet I still hear no cries of revolution.

When the people are ready to start lynching this administration and their corporate overlords in the street, let me know, until then this is just impotent stamping of feet and crying from powerless children.
---

fenderbender321 posted...

I Like Toast posted...

fenderbender321 posted...

So there is competition....

In the sense that all 150 lbs of me would be competition with an Olympic weight lifter in weight lifting. Sure. In the actual viable sense of the word, no, because the competition is a significantly inferior product that only becomes an option under your ludicrous 500/mo scenario.

Don't be a moron

I'm a moron for pointing out there is competition?

2 or 3 (if you're lucky) providers is barely competition.
---

fenderbender321 posted...

I Like Toast posted...

fenderbender321 posted...

I'm a moron

You did just remove any doubt

I will have you know that I have a college degree from college.

And? Plenty of morons graduate college. Which the fact you thought this was a relevant point in the first place is further proof of.
---

fenderbender321 posted...

Rika_Furude posted...

Mobile internet isnt a legitimate replacement for a internet connection to your home for anyone except grandma. Yes it is stupid to suggest otherwise

It's good enough for whatever essential things are necessary with the internet, as somebody argued earlier. Although I don't agree that the internet is a necessity for the vast majority of people. Almost every town has publicly funded places where you can use internet if you have to pay bills, apply for jobs, etc.

It's like we just refuse to accept that change has to come with cost...and sometimes that cost is boycotting the product. Instead, people would rather have their cake and eat it too...don't wanna give up internet, but want ISPs to do what they want.

Good enough for grandma and the 1 facebook post she makes a month

And nobody should have to accept a shittier internet just because you think monopolies deserve more power
---

The Catgirl Fondler posted...

And yet I still hear no cries of revolution.

When the people are ready to start lynching this administration and their corporate overlords in the street, let me know, until then this is just impotent stamping of feet and crying from powerless children.

---

How can the FCC just disregard the vast majority of Americans like this? This is blatant corruption and crony capitalism.

You just have to wonder, who's actually voting against net neutrality?
---