Net neutrality gone

[Draco-Onis]

It wasn’t a problem prior to 2014. So you wanted Democrats to pass a law without control of Congress? Are you fucking serious rn?

It was brought out during the 2012 elections it was one of Romney's stances, the Comcast versus FCC incident happened in 2007.

[Sormine]

"You" I aint a democrat, I aint even American lol. and I most certifiably wouldn't be if I was

This part is particularly funny, I had to come back to it. Since you aren't American I can understand why you haven't noticed. But since Trump has been elected into office our entire capital has essentially become one big cash grab for any coorperation that would like favorable legislation.

It's honestly taken lobbying to a completely new level.

[Moralgy]

This can still be fought and undone. Call your representatives

People can try it, but it won't work. Republican leadership is for this, specifically Trump, so listening to the people won't get them reelected when the leadership puts up a further right candidate during re-election.

People have short memories, and doing one good thing to help them won't stop them from losing their campaign in a year.

[Tenjen]

https://twitter.com/Celeste_pewter/s...70676467744768

just a heads up on what can be done now.

[RobertoCarlos]

The ruling partys didnt even listen to the public and wrote off the millions of protests as "fraudulent spam"

we're fucked.

[Draco-Onis]

So a guy changes his opinion when the population expresses a disagreement with him? Wow, sounds like a good public official.

Secondly, the FCC is the institution in charge of modifying laws for the internet. You're basically saying that it's the democrats for letting the rules exist the way they are. Hence, your post made no sense.

Congress can and still may put it into law taking it off the hands of the FCC it is within their mandate. And the official changed his mind because the Obama administration felt the pressure as well, the last net neutrality battle did happen under Obama.

[breadisfunny]

this is really poorly worded it states most bills need 60 votes but the cra only requires a simple majority. which implies that requiring a 83% majority is easier than 60 votes in the senate which is basically a 60% majority.

[Bullettime]

People can try it, but it won't work. Republican leadership is for this, specifically Trump, so listening to the people won't get them reelected when the leadership puts up a further right candidate during re-election.

People have short memories, and doing one good thing to help them won't stop them from losing their campaign in a year.

It's not calling reps at this point. We have a pretty rigid set of laws and policies in place for the judicial system to make it all come crashing down on them. It's just waiting now.

I'm confused as to why they thought this would actually work. Their little botting extravaganza is going to blow up massively in their face and cause their plan to backfire.

[unbound]

With net neutrality, there is a forced way of running a company as an ISP. You don’t get a whole lot of flexibility with speeds and pricing because it needs to be “fair.” As a result, poor people can’t afford internet because they have to pay for the whole package. They can’t even afford lowest speed options. Us that make money already get fast lanes. I have from Comcast for a while because I give them more than my neighbor. They just hide the fact they do that with all-inclusive price tags.

Naturally, they charge $10/mo, then you opt into services you want for $5/mo. However, net neutrality passed and they were like, “okay, $45 for the package then and you have to pay for it all.”

lol

No, that isn't how it works at all. Who told you that nonsense? Verizon, Comcast, AT&T?

Net neutrality has absolutely nothing to do with offered speeds. Literally nothing at all. All net neutrality does is that they have to treat all traffic the same.

Why don't they offer lower speed packages very often? Because American consumers are morons, and corporations know how to milk money out of them. Verizon can absolutely make money selling lower speed and priced packages, but they aren't interested in that market. They make a ton of profit going after the higher speed market...FFS, just open their annual report and look at the profits (many billions of dollars each year for at least 5 years now...profit, not revenue). The same is true with Comcast and AT&T and every other major ISP out there. They are making money hand over fist.

Like the vast majority of markets, there isn't a great deal of competition (no, a handful of players is still an oligopoly, not a healthy competitive market) and prices don't have anything to do with costs. Stop accepting the PR BS coming from the ISPs...especially when a casual look at their financials easily tells you that they are lying about their costs.

[Kathandira]

No, dont listen to Zentail, he doesnt know what hes talking about and is making outlandish claims with 0 proof.

Cost will go up or you will have your current service levels lowered or limited. Nothing more

Well, that blows. I'm already paying 82.99 a month for 50/50 from Verizon.

[Orby]

So a guy changes his opinion when the population expresses a disagreement with him? Wow, sounds like a good public official.

Secondly, the FCC is the institution in charge of modifying laws for the internet. You're basically saying that it's the democrats for letting the rules exist the way they are. Hence, your post made no sense.



I don't understand what you're saying. Everybody and their grandmother was warned shit like this would happen if Trump was elected. He was elected anyways. Now that it's happening you're basically saying we can't blame the people responsible.

Oh YOU can blame them as much as you want, but I prefer to take this fight to the FCC and that idiot Ajit Pai or however you spell is name (A Shit Pie?). You know where it counts... because I don't think blaming citizen voters is going to help your case or make us keep Net Neutrality. Because most of the misinformed people that voted for Trump seem to want Net Neutrality (I know right crazy), if they knew before or they didn't they still voted against the FCC and still the FCC still voted against them, if anything I am sure there are a lot of swayed voters out there today because of this.

[shifu]

You should all recognize a few really big things.

1. Net Neutrality wasn't something we ever had until just a few years ago. Everythine was, more or less, the same as it was before.

2. The absense of Net Neutrality doesn't inherently mean things cost more money. It means the ISPs, for example, actually have control over their own company. This may or may not be an actual good thing. They could abuse it and we're screwed. Or they could give us more for less (far less likely, but still possible). However, this creates my third point.

3. Get the hell of Comcast. They're going to jack up prices and slow speeds. Guess what? Go to another company that isn't. Other company has the ability to be competetive now. With Net Neutrality, ISPs are almost all the exact same company because the government is making them be. Now they can try and be their own company and flourish.

People try to compare us to India's situation. We, as a country, are not like that at all. Nothing the FCC says or does will let us get to that point because we would literally have a civil war over it first. We are also more advanced as a country. People have more of an opinion; people come up with better ideas; people work harder to make a name for themselves.. you get it.

TL;DR: We don't know where the absense of Net Neutrality is going to lead. However, you are being incredibly oblivious if you don't understand that it could theoretically be a good thing to have it gone. It most likely won't because we live in a monopolized (even though our country tries to deny it), greedy country, but it could be a good thing.

Oh, and FFS, people who are calling out specific political parties, you need to stop being ignorant. People who are for/against this movement are in every single party. Someone who voted for Trump didn't vote for this. Someone who is against him didn't vote for this. This is an incredibly mixed view/argument. Get off whatever party you follow's bandwagon Facebook page propaganda and learn about what your party actually stands for. None of them default your beliefs in line with or against Net Neutraility. #BasicHighschoolEducation #MaybeImJustSensible

And let's not forget the most important side of all of this... WoW will probably stay $15/mo. If it increases, it will simply be due to the fact that with inflation over the years, WoW has maintained a price that techincally becomes less and less each year. I'd pay up to $25/mo simply because how easy it was to get $15 when the game first came out, it's more or less just as easy to do the same thing and now get $25 instead of $15. Just as I wouldn't object to games going up to about $100 if they cut out their stupid micro transactions.

Which company should I go to? When Comcast is LITERALLY THE ONLY ISP PROVIDER FOR MY ENTIRE COUNTY.

[Not A Cat]

We just gave the only thing more hated than Congress (Comcast) more power.

On the bright side their customer service can't get worse right?

Right?

[Sormine]

Congress can and still may put it into law taking it off the hands of the FCC it is within their mandate. And the official changed his mind because the Obama administration felt the pressure as well, the last net neutrality battle did happen under Obama.

Ah, you mean the GOP controlled Congress of the past 7 years. That Congress. The Congress that isn't Democrats.

[Kathandira]

Premier youtube only costs $10 extra a month who cares etc etc. That is his argument pretty much

Which is hilarious when you consider all the stuff they said about rural america. The place which has the lowest incomes and highest poverty rates. They are looking out for them...all the while effectively implementing higher prices for their access.

[Vyuvarax]

It was brought out during the 2012 elections it was one of Romney's stances, the Comcast versus FCC incident happened in 2007.

Democrats didn’t control Congress in 2012 either. Done with you. You are a serial liar. You should be ashamed of what you’ve done to people by supporting the Republican Party.

[Silver Forte]

Honest question. What if they just raise their rates period, as they have been well before this whole thing? Is that still not greedy?

That is not even comparable to charging for this bullshit:

http://www.wordstream.com/images/wha...ge-diagram.jpg

My rates haven't gone up once in a year at my current residence. The last residence, they went up one time 5 dollars a month on modem rentals which wasn't a thing before that on my bill. Not to mention my ISP wasn't throttling my services or putting me in slow lanes and still demanding I pay. I had access to the internet, freely, at acceptable speeds. You can't compare a few bucks tacked onto my bill once ever to what is being discussed here.

[Dextroden]

One which was enabled by the Pussygrabber-In-Chief that was elected by.....The right wing.

More philosophically, the right wing and their obsessive pursuit of laissez-faire economics also enabled this.

Oy. So you admit you just wanted to bitch about Trump then.

[Moralgy]

Ah, you mean the GOP controlled Congress of the past 7 years. That Congress. The Congress that isn't Democrats.

No, lets just hold hope that republicans will be good people and protect us from giant corporations. I won't hold my breath. It is dead everyone, just remember that republican leadership caused this in 2018 and 2020.

[Zantos]

https://twitter.com/Celeste_pewter/s...70676467744768

just a heads up on what can be done now.

Dont repeat the same message! Seriously, this mistake was Just made. They will do what they did with net neutrality and just say its all, automated Spam BS and ignore. So, for the love of net neutrality, DONT MAKE GENERIC MESSAGES!