![net-neutrality[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/imjYeWx.jpg "net-neutrality[1].jpg")
Where do you stand on net neutrality?
>>68049842
I have never seen anyone who is neither a politician nor an employee of a telecomms company be against net neutrality once they understand what it means.
>>68050044
what does net neutrality mean.
>>68050044
Hardcore libertarians are against it on principle.
>>68050304
It means communications companies can't prioritise certain kinds or sources of data over others, meaning they can't lock consumers out of certain internet services behind a paywall or otherwise or incorporate advertising into their network.
Private enterprise should be allowed to do whatever they want. Forcing businesses to act against their own best interests is insane. Net neutrality is communist to the core. Let the consumers decide. Let the market decide.
Give me unlimited bandwidth and access to everything for a set price or i i'll take my money elsewhere.
>>68049842
I gotta be honest, with my experience on the net, it seems a little biased to me!
>>68051032
>>68051527
>Let the consumers decide. Let the market decide.
My understanding of American communications industry is that many regions of the country only have access to one internet provider because the communications companies have formed cartels where they don't compete in each other's territories, so you're more or less have to go along with what your ISP says.
>>68051032
When you effectively operate as a utility (easement rights, construction on city property, claiming sole rights to utility poles, etc), don't be surprised when the government tells you you have to obey some rules. And "don't charge people a shitton more money just because you can" isn't exactly a very restrictive rule.
>>68049842
Either we have Net Neutrality and data caps or we have unlimited access to a handful of websites. ISPs need a way of charging people for usage, and either consumers pay or websites pay. Right now, data caps are the standard ISPs are adopting so we're doing alright.
>>68051961
>Either we have Net Neutrality and data caps or we have unlimited access to a handful of websites.
False dichotomy. Net neutrality without data caps works just fine elsewhere.
>>68051032
>i like paying hundreds of dollars for bullshit
good goy
>>68050044
Net neutrality is voluntary principle in most of the world. The reason for its success it is that it's voluntary. When you say someone is against net neutrality he is usually against forced net neutrality not the voluntary one.
>>68052218
in countries with socialized internet and utilities
in the US utilities are privately owned and operated
It's a very broad term that shouldn't be applied anti-competitively but also cannot be ignored outright
>>68049842
That image reminds me of AOL. Apps are the future? I'm getting flashbacks...
>Just search us on AOL using the keyword kidzone!
>>68051808
That's totally false. Anyone can start an ISP, all it takes is a copper or fiber line to a location some routers and a server. Thousands of local ISPs exist all across America.
Net neutrality is wrong. If an ISP is limiting access to competitors, the proper way to oppose it is to publicize what they're doing and provide an alternative. If consumers don't actually care about what the "abusive" ISP is doing, well, that's capitalism.
>>68055907
Since the deregulation of broadband years ago your choices have turned into Comcast or like 1 other person, and their prices are both outrageous. Muh free market doesn't work in jew-ridden countries
>>68055907
Gonna need a source on that local ISP bullshit. Most medium sized cities have only two providers, and they rarely overlap such that you actually have a choice. The biggest roadblock is what you mentioned, copper and fiber. If a company wants to start an ISP, they have to create their own lines rather than share with the large ISPs (i.e. telecom companies) who've had the infrastructure since the beginning. I'm all for free market capitalism, but these companies have city sized monopolies and customers rarely, if ever, have a choice.
>>68057098
Name a US city which does not have a local ISP.
>>68055907
>He thinks anyone can buy lines and plant them
Hilarious
>>68051527
this only makes sense here in scandinavia and other places where you have government influence on ISPs. In america everyone would do it.
>>68049842
a clusterfuck of stupidity and statism.
Everyone fell for the internet speed throttle debate bait.
"general conduct rule."
Prepare for years of onerous litigation, and the eventual censorship of content.
>>68049842
If we stopped net neutrality what will happen to the internet? more specifically, how will new websites and apps arise when you now have to pay more to use their products and services?
Wouldn't ending net neutrality be fucking over not just the consumer, but also all internet based products he uses just to so Mr. Goldberg at Telecom can have a new yacht?
