Net Neutrality is dead, FCC voted to kill it.

[xcvbn]

Fuck Ajit Pai. I'd love to see his offshore bank accounts and who funds them. @IRS Do your job, boys.

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

Net neutrality is something that should've remained untouched -- but breaking down resellers, and various broadband delivery providers -- there are over 2600 isp's in the US covering various regions.

Some of them are going to offer all you can eats at relatively fixed speeds to set themselves apart. Others will follow suit.

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

I'm struggling to reconcile this statement with the small ISPs being heavily pro NN, whereas the large ones are anti.

Because a huge portion of line owning ISP's is wholesaling to resellers - which typically thrive in the market by offering cheaper flat rates and unlimited data (caveat being sometimes cheaper switches)

If line owning ISPs push tiered services onto smaller resellers, it would hurt their market share and potentially give alternative delivery providers like fixed wireless or satellite (which have the largest coverage networks) but an expensive operating cost a more competitive edge.

 

[A_bomb47]

He should consider making his teeth great again above anything else.

 

[Prutfis]

So the US will have no NN on top of shitty speeds and data caps. lol. That really sucks bigtime. Some of the prices are also insane.

 

[InternetHero]

Hopefully one day Murkans will wake up and stop letting corporations act like tyrants.

How long would it take Americans to learn that lesson?

I would say fifty years to start to really understand and start to do something about the problems...

But with all the lawyers, litigation from those lawyers, and special interest groups... maybe in another hundred years altogether.

 

[D3thr0n3d K1ng]

How long would it take Americans to learn that lesson?

I would say fifty years to start to really understand and start to do something about the problems...

But with all the lawyers, litigation from those lawyers, and special interest groups... maybe in another hundred years altogether.

Probably never. They've resigned themselves to believe theres nothing they can do about it, and the only way to combat it is to suck up and fellate the people who are controlling them. Stockholm Syndrome. Just look up Cuck-0's(I mean Sean-o's) posts about that Vietnamese doctor who fought back against United Airlines for beating him up because he wouldnt give up his seat.

Cuck-o claims Dr. Dai was "out of line".

 

[InternetHero]

Probably never. They've resigned themselves to believe theres nothing they can do about it, and the only way to combat it is to suck up and fellate the people who are controlling them. Stockholm Syndrome. Just look up Cuck-0's(I mean Sean-o's) posts about that Vietnamese doctor who fought back against United Airlines for beating him up so he wouldnt give up his seat. Cuck-o claims Dr. Dai was "out of line".

Sure, sure, I don't think Americans will ever see.

A gradual decline is probably in order.

Although you know what? The super rich on top will probably lament that the lower classes are more placid, resentful, and ignorant all the time while tightening the screws all the more.

Funny how that works.

 

[uppercutbus]

It will affect everyone outside US.

If the website you want to reach is located in the US, then US carriers could simply refuse your request or only provide a trickle of bandwidth for you since you are not directly making them money.

Setting a precedent, other countries will then follow suit for paid metering services and other throttling on bandwidth.

 

[Prutfis]

It will affect everyone outside US.

If the website you want to reach is located in the US, then US carriers could simply refuse your request or only provide a trickle of bandwidth for you since you are not directly making them money.

Setting a precedent, other countries will then follow suit for paid metering services and other throttling on bandwidth.

Then those sites would most likely see a massive drop in revenue or host their services outside the US. Competitors would also arise. It really is that simple on the web.
The top countries will never follow a second tier internet nation down this rabbit hole.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

You're right, we should have voted for Hillary and got TPP instead

Hillary naw. TPP yes. Please.

 

[Fawlty]

Gee, hey- this doesn't seem like the sort of thing that an unelected official should be able to dismantle on a whim.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

I hope someone does something stupid, to let these arrogant cunts know, that there is a line, and people die when you cross it.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Gee, hey- this doesn't seem like the sort of thing that an unelected official should be able to dismantle on a whim.

Why not?

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Regulators like the FCC make regulations. Why can’t they get rid of them?

 

[ChainFlow]

Regulators like the FCC make regulations. Why can’t they get rid of them?

Specifically, the FCC is not allowed to remove existing regulation without demonstrating that conditions are materially different from when the regulations were enacted and that the removal would improve conditions for the public.

If they do decide to remove them, it must be as a result of public hearings and information gathering.

Pai described this from the beginning as “a fight we are going to win” and has ignored every real world study showing that NN hasn’t harmed investment or diminished availability of internet services to the public whatsoever. He’s ignored that the ISPs have been reporting this exact thing to their shareholders FFS, in shareholder meetings where they are legally bound to tell the truth. He’s ignored the fact that the vast majority of public responses to the Request for Comment were in favor of keeping NN.

In a just world his removal of the regulations will be swiftly reversed by the courts. We will see.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Specifically, the FCC is not allowed to remove existing regulation without demonstrating that conditions are materially different from when the regulations were enacted and that the removal would improve conditions for the public.

If they do decide to remove them, it must be as a result of public hearings and information gathering.

Pai described this from the beginning as “a fight we are going to win” and has ignored every real world study showing that NN hasn’t harmed investment or diminished availability of internet services to the public whatsoever. He’s ignored that the ISPs have been reporting this exact thing to their shareholders FFS, in shareholder meetings where they are legally bound to tell the truth. He’s ignored the fact that the vast majority of public responses to the Request for Comment were in favor of keeping NN.

In a just world his removal of the regulations will be swiftly reversed by the courts. We will see.

Oh I get that. Hearings and call for comments from the public and review, but the article referenced in the OP just refers to a vote to review the rules.

 

[Scheme]

It will affect everyone outside US.

If the website you want to reach is located in the US, then US carriers could simply refuse your request or only provide a trickle of bandwidth for you since you are not directly making them money.

Setting a precedent, other countries will then follow suit for paid metering services and other throttling on bandwidth.

Net neutrality has been around for 2 years. The Internet functioned fine before that.

 

[Falsedawn]

Net neutrality has been around for 2 years. The Internet functioned fine before that.

Net Neutrality was introduced particularly because ISPs were trying to do the things we're warning about if NN is repealed.

Saying "the internet always worked" is fucking asinine when they're actively trying to move away from the previous status quo. This argument is severely wanting, and you should be ashamed for continuing to perpetuate it.

 

[method115]

This could be a real issue for me. I only have Xfinity in my area and that satellite internet which is crap.