https://www.battleforthenet.com/

Yeah it opens the door for Comcast and Verizon to buttfuck consumers. But they can't stop consumers from finding another ISP if shit hits the fan. The internet never had or needed Title II throughout it's history and has grown just fine. I'm not a genius by any stretch, but I doubt that ending Title II would equal the end of the internet as we know it.

how can you be so apathetic about this?

You can't really find other cable options in your area as is. And the number of net providers isn't much higher. Or at least I've never seen a cable company that had a rival. It's like electric or water. You get 1 option so you have to pay whatever they want.

We already have provisions in place to stop people from being abused by anti-consumer policies.

Verizon can't just wake up one day and say "we're gonna ban all our users from accessing Netflix today," not without consequence anyway. They can do little inconspicuous things, but that's not stuff Google isn't already doing by manipulating search results in their favor.

And Title II didn't stop Verizon from throttling speeds on Netflix anyway, lol. Netflix was doing the same by the way, but they're not bound to Title II rules so they were fine.

Big corporations are going to play dirty, that's just how it is. You don't fix that by making it harder for potential entrepreneurs to enter their ideas into the industry. I'm not saying Net Neutrality isn't important, but Title II isn't the protective shield people think it is.

I think it's a necessary evil to let them have more control, if it means more people can play and get US internet speed up to par.

The FTC, contractual agreements? That's just for starters, there were a code of ethics before Title II you know, lol.

Enjoy being mad about people who disagree with you though, there's a lot of them out there.

Net Neutrality is simply fair and equal treatment across the internet, I don't think anyone here is against that. Title II is the regulation that forces ISPs to treat internet traffic the same. It's a way to enforce net neutrality, but they're not one and the same. One could make the argument that traffic shouldn't be obligated to be equal, allowing businesses to allocate where they want to spend their resources, but my position isn't nuanced enough to elaborate on that.

Not mentioned is how these regulations have cost $5.1 billion in investments but that was well after this article. The question should be: How does Title II encourage internet growth? Given that the US suffers from embarassingly slow speeds despite it's economic status as a whole.

in my case at least i never had net neutrality and i'm not living the nightmare scenario being put forth by so many. i hope isps aren't total shitheads about it in america

^ What the actual fuck is wrong with you?

i hope isps aren't total shitheads about it in america

Person Man said, December 14, 2017, 08:59:49 pm

^ What the actual fuck is wrong with you?

Out of curiosity though, What in the actual fuck is wrong with you?
Do I have to toe the lines of doom and gloom or be quiet when others do?
Or is it that I can't take the piss out of people unless it's Ajit Pai or the people who are somehow against NN? Because that never happens..
Have you been in any of the the Trump/Brexit threads since they started with all the pisstakes on both sides? If not, good for you!
Maybe you think I'm bullying MFG posters by only slightly exaggerating the hysteria from Reddit and Shitter? If so that's on you.
Or maybe you're just jealous??

Do you even browse All That's Left? You're acting like this is the first time you've seen ATL shitposting.

Not all of us! Niitris wins! 

I've been listening to the terrible conservative takes about net neutrality, and they have some points. They're wrong overall IMO, but they have some points. This isn't the only way to regulate net neutrality. 'The free market bluh bluh' isn't a viable response because so many areas of the US have absolute garbage monopolies, but there are other ways to attack this problem, and Title II regulations may not have been the best one.

Both? He was saying Schneiderman was investigating similar reports, not that he was involved in sending false comments.

in my case at least i never had net neutrality and i'm not living the nightmare scenario being put forth by so many. i hope isps aren't total shitheads about it in america

Even though the FCC voted to repeal Title II net neutrality protections last week, the fight to save the internet is far from over. Immediately after the vote, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman announced he will be suing the FCC, and 16 states have now signed onto this lawsuit. Additionally, activists across the country are now putting pressure on lawmakers in Congress to reverse this decision via the Congressional Review Act, which allows them to nullify votes from agencies like the FCC. In fact, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer announced that he will force a vote to reverse the FCC's decision soon.