Net neutrality gone

[Grapemask]

I wish more people would actually do some research instead of relying on info-graphics and paid (probably) fear mongering from your friendly neighborhood social media pages. It's as if the FTC isn't a thing, and that anti-trust laws and other regulations/practices that have been in place since the internet took off don't exist.

But here's what actual research would show you: the FTC is not enabled to regulate ISPs well. They have largely taken a hands-off approach in the tech industry beyond blatant anti-consumer trends, but have shown no desire to work with the tools that are necessary to logistically understand and process the tech space. This has been a known known since "the internet took off."

Edit as an example, a large problem in the tech space: algorithms that subtly gather and process your data to reconstruct private, potentially illegal, information about you. This is invisible and of no interest to the current workings of the FTC.

[Draco-Onis]

I wish more people would actually do some research instead of relying on info-graphics and paid (probably) fear mongering from your friendly neighborhood social media pages. It's as if the FTC isn't a thing, and that anti-trust laws and other regulations/practices that have been in place since the internet took off don't exist.

The FTC has already been sued by the cable companies and lost, they have no authority to regulate the internet. The second thing is that anti-trust laws do not apply to ISPs in the US which is why you have monopolies. In all my time living the area there was only 1 ISP only this year we got a second one, the rates are identical the only saving grace is the new one equipment doesn't break every 6 months. These monopolies are also getting bigger, if it was a free market we wouldn't need net neutrality.

[breadisfunny]

<snip this flaming load of braindead bullshit>.

dsc i was going to break down your post and explain why it's wrong except EVERY SINGLE FUCKING SENTENCE IS WRONG. you get a f-.if this was an essay (which it easily could be) your teacher would give you an f and tell you to go sit in the corner and think about what you did. it is obvious you have no damn clue how the internet actually works and are either brainwashed by the gop's talking points or are completely ignorant as to what actually happened. or there's option c.

[hulkgor]

Whenever you are updated, however, or receive anything from Blizzard financial you are routed to *gasp* US servers. Not only that, the game is developed in *gasp* the US, which use network and Cloud tech and storage is in *gasp* the US. Not only that, your realms data and backups are stored in *gasp* the US. All of which can be susceptible to ISP ransoming.

Now you're just talking out of your ass, or you're blissfully ignorant. Whichever you prefer.

[Gorsameth]

I wish more people would actually do some research instead of relying on info-graphics and paid (probably) fear mongering from your friendly neighborhood social media pages. It's as if the FTC isn't a thing, and that anti-trust laws and other regulations/practices that have been in place since the internet took off don't exist.

Ignoring the fact that prior to NN, throttling of popular services did happen. Which is why NN became a thing in the first place.

[breadisfunny]

Now you're just talking out of your ass, or you're blissfully ignorant. Whichever you prefer.

while the servers that you play on may be located in e.u. where exactly do you think they get those updates from? from blizzard's main servers in irvine.

[tankbug]

I am not sure I understand it. Are you talking about Binge On? It's the point that there are actions which do not count towards the data limit.

I was saying that basically the only positive thing a mobile operator can do with no net neutrality is to exclude data from certain sources to count towards their limit. But that's only for mobile (if you're living in a civilized place on earth), and it's just a matter of time before this data limit will be a thing of the past, like paying for your minutes connected to the internet and all these "crazy" price models we had back when the internet was young. Once you don't have a data limit anymore, what can ISPs possibly do to enhance your experience by analyzing your data? They are only supposed to give you the speed and uptime you're paying for, and don't meddle in where the data comes from, or where its going.

[Ishayu]

Explain why an amendment that prevents ransomware, and has prevented the most of it, is ineffective.

Prevents ransomware lmao wtf. Ransomware is rampant, and in the last few years it's gotten far worse.

Ransomware isn't legal regardless of whether you have net neutrality or not. Ransomware is made by criminals - they already know what they're doing is illegal before they do it. It's still illegal.

Your experience is a good indicator for proving your point, which is why I led with it. You can choose to believe it or not, but it only supports my claim, and it would strengthen anyone else's claim to me, just as much as how I would hire them if I saw it on their resume.

You don't know anything about my experience, and frankly trying to sound like you're in a position where you're looking at my MMO-Champion comments as if it's a job resume or something is utterly embarassing. You're in no such position. I wouldn't work for you.

I still can't say what I actually work with, but I can tell you it is related to IT security and integrations in a large corporation. Take it or leave it, I don't care.

Only it's already been done. Massive throttling of encrypted traffic is commonplace in the industrial industry, usually because packet size catches their attention, and many times you have to call them up because they're throttling your firm, which was illegal then.

The "industrial industry". This just gets better and better. I assume you mean the ISP's serving commercial customers? Yeah, alright. Your "experience" is really shining here.

And now you're going with packet size? Look, I can make the packet size practically anything I want to. I can pad it, I can split it up into tons of tiny packets and scatter it across dozens of routes along a network and assemble it at the other end (routing hack + TCP/IP), I can lie about the packet size in the IPv4 header, I can cram many requests into one packet in order to save network traffic (there's a minimum length due to the header on an IP packet) - WoW actually did this in its early days, but it caused 200ms latency until you turned it off.

The largest IP packet you can send is just shy of 66kB. If yo uwant to throttle Netflix by throttling big packets, I can simply use a VPN that makes them all small packets but gets 4 times more by telling their servers a low max packet size, which you can do in IPv4. What now, smartass?

[Torrasque]

Now you're just talking out of your ass, or you're blissfully ignorant. Whichever you prefer.

Only that is how it works. Unless you can prove otherwise. You haven't even presented an opposition other then "I don't believe you."

[Deathcries]

The better analogy is giving 2-3 people control over the water pipelines.

Internet is a utility not a service, and no NN essentially hands over complete power and unlimited earning potential and a bottle of lube to a handful of people in boardrooms

- - - Updated - - -



When that money being made is exploiting utilities then something is fundamentally wrong with the mega super fantastic capitalism model

or the government isnt doing its job of protecting the people, you can pick

Well pay for it. Why do you need government to force businesses by gun point? If you like government that goes after businesses then I hear Venezuela would be right up your alley.

[Cthulhu 2020]

The government isn't needed to solve this, which is why NN is bad. ( There is a reason why a big government, globalist shill, aka BHO and Google/Facebook wanted this sooo badly in the first place.)

When a post starts like this, you know you can safely disregard it as complete paranoid garbage.

I like how your post fails to address why Netflix ONLY slowed down on Comcast, and why it was very sudden. Your explanation for Netflix's slowdown might make sense... if it was gradual, but it was extremely quick and only on one carrier.

In the end, people who don't know how the internet actually works, but like to pretend they do because they read some incorrect stuff on 4chan, will make fools of themselves to anyone who knows what they're talking about, but "sound" smart to anyone who has no clue how the internet works. i.e. most of the old right wing Republicans who most of the time fail to even remember to plug their computer in and need charter to fix it.

Just start off your explanation with talk about big government being bad and you have every single old gullible paranoid right winger's attention full stop, and they'll believe and guzzle every word you say, just so long as you make the government sound evil and sinister.

[Silver Forte]

Y'all are worried about the ISP's when the FCC has said they will still be regulating and monitoring them. Meanwhile, actual content aggregation and how/what content is being highlighted/accepted is being manipulated or scrubbed. "but muh netflix speeds bruh!"

Google manipulating results in search: http://www.businessinsider.com/tim-w...results-2015-6

Youtube (part of google) censoring content: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/yo...rticle/2604384

Google had requested utility status: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/why-goo...-be-a-utility/

I don't want internet or internet content providers to have the protection of the government to do as they please without regulation and competition. The fact that all of this is and was happening during NN speaks volumes.

Also, don't forget that googles AI is incapable of deciphering what real news is. Popularity of an article is literally one of the first categories the algorithm follows. Hence why reddit troll articles were continually popping up. Also, there is a decidedly bias tint to Google, Facebook, YouTube.. and a host of other sites. Stunt and clickbait sites like Verge, salon etc.. rely on net neutrality so they can get the same space and influence as more legit sites. The proliferation of internet content that serves no objective other than to confuse and obfuscate information and then claim freedom to do so, while enjoying the "free and uncapped internet" is disgusting. Regardless of what side it falls on or from. All of this has been happening DURING NN. These things are far more pernicious and destructive than the potential for ISPs to make fast lanes.

The fact you think the FCC can be relied on after everything they've done (like using dead peoples' comments) is ridiculous.

[evogsr]

dsc i was going to break down your post and explain why it's wrong except EVERY SINGLE FUCKING SENTENCE IS WRONG. you get a f-.if this was an essay (which it easily could be) your teacher would give you an f and tell you to go sit in the corner and think about what you did. it is obvious you have no damn clue how the internet actually works and are either brainwashed by the gop's talking points or are completely ignorant as to what actually happened. or there's option c.

Very compelling. You've changed every dissenters mind with copy pasta plebbit response #30289034.

[Torrasque]

Prevents ransomware lmao wtf. Ransomware is rampant, and in the last few years it's gotten far worse.

Ransomware isn't legal regardless of whether you have net neutrality or not. Ransomware is made by criminals - they already know what they're doing is illegal before they do it. It's still illegal.

Ransomware is illegal, under Title 1, which no longer includes ISPs without Title 2. This means that ISPs will be exempt from using it, exactly like my link explaining it, which you obviously refused to read. Your argument is innately flawed due to your broad application of the term and not understanding the basics of the legislature at hand.

You don't know anything about my experience, and frankly trying to sound like you're in a position where you're looking at my MMO-Champion comments as if it's a job resume or something is utterly embarassing. You're in no such position. I wouldn't work for you.

Is your reading compensation really that pathetic? Never did I ever mention anything along those lines and now you start personally attacking me for a made up strawman? If this continues, I'll simply begin reporting you for such an obvious derailing of the topic which you STILL refuse to answer the topics raised against your flawed statements? Will you continue ignoring them, or are you hoping that they are simply forgotten with your insistent derailing?

I still can't say what I actually work with, but I can tell you it is related to IT security and integrations in a large corporation. Take it or leave it, I don't care.

The "industrial industry". This just gets better and better. I assume you mean the ISP's serving commercial customers? Yeah, alright. Your "experience" is really shining here.

I, however, do work in this industry. And sighting a "grammatical error" as the antithesis of your "proof" is downright pathetic and it doesn't address absolutely any of the flaws in your premise that have been rightfully brought up. In all honesty, are you just bullshiting now, or do you seriously believe that you know what your talking about when it comes to IXP Infrastructure? Because it wouldn't be very difficult at all to prove you even more wrong than you already are.

And now you're going with packet size? Look, I can make the packet size practically anything I want to. I can pad it, I can split it up into tons of tiny packets and scatter it across dozens of routes along a network and assemble it at the other end (routing hack + TCP/IP), I can lie about the packet size in the IPv4 header, I can cram many requests into one packet in order to save network traffic (there's a minimum length due to the header on an IP packet) - WoW actually did this in its early days, but it caused 200ms latency until you turned it off.

I'm talking about encryption and how easy it is to block and throttle encrypted packets by your ISP. You seem to be under the impression that a VPN is impregnable or that they aren't bought out, which many of them are.

The largest IP packet you can send is just shy of 66kB. If yo uwant to throttle Netflix by throttling big packets, I can simply use a VPN that makes them all small packets but gets 4 times more by telling their servers a low max packet size, which you can do in IPv4. What now, smartass?

Proven false in the link above. Also, if you think namecalling and personal attacks makes your point any stronger, it simply doesn't.

[Silver Forte]

https://imgur.com/gallery/KBn8h
To people who think the FCC actually gives a shit.

[RobertoCarlos]

Well pay for it. Why do you need government to force businesses by gun point? If you like government that goes after businesses then I hear Venezuela would be right up your alley.

Oh sweet summer child, please dont comment on things you clearly have zero understanding on.

Have fun picking out what service packet you want from comcast and have to pick out what sites you want to use.

[Trassk]

Y'all are worried about the ISP's when the FCC has said they will still be regulating and monitoring them. Meanwhile, actual content aggregation and how/what content is being highlighted/accepted is being manipulated or scrubbed. "but muh netflix speeds bruh!"

Google manipulating results in search: http://www.businessinsider.com/tim-w...results-2015-6

Youtube (part of google) censoring content: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/yo...rticle/2604384

Google had requested utility status: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/why-goo...-be-a-utility/

I don't want internet or internet content providers to have the protection of the government to do as they please without regulation and competition. The fact that all of this is and was happening during NN speaks volumes.

Also, don't forget that googles AI is incapable of deciphering what real news is. Popularity of an article is literally one of the first categories the algorithm follows. Hence why reddit troll articles were continually popping up. Also, there is a decidedly bias tint to Google, Facebook, YouTube.. and a host of other sites. Stunt and clickbait sites like Verge, salon etc.. rely on net neutrality so they can get the same space and influence as more legit sites. The proliferation of internet content that serves no objective other than to confuse and obfuscate information and then claim freedom to do so, while enjoying the "free and uncapped internet" is disgusting. Regardless of what side it falls on or from. All of this has been happening DURING NN. These things are far more pernicious and destructive than the potential for ISPs to make fast lanes.

sorry, but did you miss the part where they laughed off the idea of what the public said, and basically said 'fuck you, we're doing it anyway' ?

[Cthulhu 2020]

I like how people actually believe that ISPs will be "able to create fast lanes" with net neutrality gone.

Seriously, think about it for a second. Use your brain for just one second, rather than guzzling down everything the FCC tells you.

For the last two years your internet has basically had instant access to every single site available, with pings even to servers across the ocean being <200ms.

And you think the ISPs are going to create "fast lanes" when you're already getting content instantaneously...

Ok, tell me genius, how is the internet going to get any faster than it is? Are they going to start delivering content to you before you even think about it? Is this Net 4.0 going to be Jedi internet where your internet is delivered to you before you even knew you wanted it?

Or do you think, maybe, just maybe, you're going to see services start slowing down, and then they'll tell you that you can either keep paying $70 for the internet package that under NN gave you everything instantaneously, but is now getting really slow FOR SOME ODD REASON, or you can pay them $150 to get NEW BRAND NEW FAST LINES (i.e. the speeds you used to get).

I really want someone to explain this line of thinking to me. Are "fast lanes" going to be Jedi internet, or is content going to begin slowing down before you're finally offered "faster internet! Now with less load times! The exact same thing that you had under net neutrality... BUT BETTER, because it's UNREGULATED BY THE EVIL GOVERNMENT!"

Gotta love those buzz words they throw in. Every single time Ajit and his kind mention "overregulation" the dopamine receptors in every righty immediately start firing and they're willing to believe anything said by people who oppose "OVERREGULATION" *Evil music plays*.

Even though they won't tell you what regulations were stopping them from "innovating" lol, they keep it nice and vague so you can continue to guzzle that delicious "BIG GOVERNMENT BAD" kool aid.

[Silver Forte]

I like how people actually believe that ISPs will be "able to create fast lanes" with net neutrality gone.

Seriously, think about it for a second. Use your brain for just one second, rather than guzzling down everything the FCC tells you.

For the last two years your internet has basically had instant access to every single site available, with pings even to servers across the ocean being <200ms.

And you think the ISPs are going to create "fast lanes" when you're already getting content instantaneously...

Ok, tell me genius, how is the internet going to get any faster than it is? Are they going to start delivering content to you before you even think about it? Is this Net 4.0 going to be Jedi internet where your internet is delivered to you before you even knew you wanted it?

Or do you think, maybe, just maybe, you're going to see services start slowing down, and then they'll tell you that you can either keep paying $70 for the internet package that under NN gave you everything instantaneously, but is now getting really slow FOR SOME ODD REASON, or you can pay them $150 to get NEW BRAND NEW FAST LINES (i.e. the speeds you used to get).

I really want someone to explain this line of thinking to me. Are "fast lanes" going to be Jedi internet, or is content going to begin slowing down before you're finally offered "faster internet! Now with less load times! The exact same thing that you had under net neutrality... BUT BETTER, because it's UNREGULATED BY THE EVIL GOVERNMENT!"

Gotta love those buzz words they throw in. Every single time Ajit and his kind mention "overregulation" the dopamine receptors in every righty immediately start firing and they're willing to believe anything said by people who oppose "OVERREGULATION" *Evil music plays*.

Even though they won't tell you what regulations were stopping them from "innovating" lol, they keep it nice and vague so you can continue to guzzle that delicious "BIG GOVERNMENT BAD" kool aid.

This right here that I underlined shows you don't understand what's being discussed here. People aren't claiming the internet is going to get faster and we're going to be forced to pay more for it... It's very clearly been explained that the fear is that the current speeds we experience now with NN will be separated into a "premium" service separate from what we will have if we don't shell out more cash, and that can be done per website. In other words... what we have now will be the premium we can only access if we pay for packages or subscriptions to certain sites or types of sites.

In other words, to put it more simply, you have "free" access which is slowed down and you'll stream video on youtube or hulu or whatever at less than 720p with increased buffering due to lack of substantial bandwidth. There will be packet loss, you're insane if you think otherwise.

Or you can pay a monthly fee to access youtube at 720p and higher with acceptable bandwidth. It also means that ISPs can blacklist services from your access. Maybe the CEO of verizon doesn't like Instagram or whatever (bad example, humor me). Verizon could decide to block Instagram from their customers. Remember how certain ISPs were throttling Netflix access a while back? How about we just give them full power to do that 100% of the time and with no consequences? Maybe Time Warner/Spectrum decides to back Hulu and since Netflix is a contender of theirs, TW starts throttling or blocking Netflix to force people to switch to Hulu... Why would you support this? Why would anyone?


Coming from someone who has had SUBSTANTIAL experience working with ISP techs to fix packet loss issues and damaged nodes, I can tell you the incentive for them to repair these issues will get worse as well. Imagine an entire neighborhood that has Windstream in a rural area and is experiencing 10-15% packet loss, which happened to me for about a year. Why would that ISP care to fix it? No regulations, they can do whatever the fuck they want. Sure you could argue that eventually new companies could come and compete, but they can't really afford to. Do you really think that TWC and Comcast, who act like competitors but are actually working together to strongarm the market, are going to allow a new ISP to start and compete with them on any real level? No, they'll just buy them out or find other ways to fuck them over, maybe even using physical methods to claim nodes on terrain those new ISPs desperately need. Even if that didn't happen, money corrupts. No rules + money = new ISP eventually becomes the same kind of cunts TWC is.

What is happening here is people have given over the keys to the kingdom to corrupt assholes who actually don't care at all about their customers (I have been told this by officials from TWC) unless something is costing them money on a noticeable scale. It's not just about speed, it's about quality, control, greed and costumer service. There are already millions of people in the US not getting acceptable internet related to the rest of the world and who can't get proper help with technicians.

We already have too many subs in the US. netflix, Hulu, Amazon... MMOs, sites we support with donations, bills to pay, food to buy, pets to take care of, family who need help, health concerns we deal with (in the US this is especially bad), maintenance on vehicles and our homes... On top of that we could end up having to fucking pay for PACKAGE DEALS FOR THE INTERNET? Fuck that and fuck anyone who thinks that's okay. We need the internet to advance as a species. Being connected all the time on a free and open system is what will push us into the future. This is why countries get along now who used to hate each other. US can talk to Japan at any time, we can get to know each other and be humanized. That should NOT be controlled by ISPs to the degree that it will be. What we are talking about here is a step backward for human evolution.

ISPs have already done shit like this in the past:

https://imgur.com/gallery/KBn8h

Why now are people acting like it won't happen again and be worse when the rules no longer apply to the rich asswipes in charge?

[bowchikabow]

@Silvercrown

Have you spent any time at all asking yourself why Google, YouTube, Netflix, and several other MASSIVE content sites support NN?

Spoiler Alert: They don't wanna have to spend more money for using more bandwidth. Because of this, the people (and they are a massive %) that only do basic things like email and/or facebook to check on family are paying needlessly large sums of money for internet. They are, in essence, subsidizing the big boy sites. So yes... I think Net Neutrality should go away, and when companies want to use more resource they should pay more for it. And when people want more of a service they should pay more for it.

NN is, at it's very fucking core, redistribution of bandwidth cost. It is internet socialism. And it is wrong.