Net neutrality

Gunvolt: Honestly. You need to stop listening to everything Social Media and Youtube Celebs tell you. Do your own research. Dagger has already written out a very well thought out post regarding it. All you're doing at the moment is repeating hearsay and fear mongering, you have absolutely zero proof anything like that has a chance of happening. You're going completely off of assumption and really shouldn't be sticking your nose into the issue knowing so little. These e-celebs are doing the same thing you're doing. Not actually reading what Net Neutrality covered, instead you hear the name of it and decide it HAS to be good. Does the Patriot Act ring a bell? Dagger already did a good job of covering courts ALREADY taking care of overstepping ISPs. I'll touch on how Net Neutrality actually hurt the ability for people to create ISP startups to compete. Net Neutrality invokes, "Title II of the Telecommunications Act of 1996" [1]. This means that in order for a new ISP to emerge as a startup they must not only apply for costly broadcasting licenses, but construction permits and laying wire. Not only this but the government is able to rescind the ISPs broadcasting license for any reason. This is effectively shutting out any attempts of new ISPs emerging and is lowering the rate of investment into ISP services. Now if legal issues, and ISPs overstepping was already being dealt with by other means (as with Verizon VS FCC[2]) what makes you think that suddenly that's just not going to happen anymore? Look I know Communism is all the rage with you kids these days, and you think businesses are the devil, but I recommend you stop and actually read the documentation instead of getting everything spoon fed to you secondhand. Really that goes for everyone here that's repeating the Social Media talking points they've heard and nothing else. Again there is zero proof other than blind speculation that you're going to have to pay more to access certain websites or you're going to have to get internet package bundles like cable. [3] And it'd really be nice if some of you could actually educate yourselves and stop spewing disinformation like you're knowledgeable. As another little test, I ask those who want to participate to call some real estate agents or downtown offices and ask about ISPs. Specifically ask about your city having a "contract" with a specific ISP that entirely shuts out others from providing service in a certain radius. This has gone on well through Net Neutrality's existence. You'd be surprised about what doesn't get reported. [1]https://www.fcc.gov/general/telecommunications-act-1996 [2]https://www.fcc.gov/document/verizon-court-opinion [3]https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-347927A1.pdf

well the world is probably going to end soon anyways due to a nuclear war caused my trump and kim jong un not saying i dont care about all this stuff but.. yeah.

The irony, and the biggest reason that won't happen, is that the .com's are much larger than the ISP's. Amazon is over twice as large as Comcast, which is the largest ISP in the country, and yet Amazon is only #5 of the largest .com's. Google is larger than every ISP int he country COMBINED, and yet Google is only #2. Netflix is described as being too large for an ISP to attempt to strike an noncompetitive deal with, and Netflix is not even in the top 5. ISP's don't hold the sway to block any of the larger content providers, and it would be foolish gate off the small time content providers, especially given that they could easily become just as large as any in the top 5. Then the question remains, what if they gate off a smaller content provider so that they can eliminate competition providing their own content? Thing is, that was already illegal before 2015, and still remains illegal, due to antitrust laws that have existed long before the 1996 telecommunications act. The only thing that has changed on the consumer end is that ISP's can now practice paid prioritization, which is STILL SUBJECT TO ANTITRUST LAWS and consumer protection laws. In the advent that an ISP somehow finds something to block or throttle within the confines of the law, they will receive tremendous amounts of bad publicity, forcing them to cave in which historically they always have done. All you have to do to see this is look at the list of "net neutrality violations" going around.

'GunvoltX I still don't understand why there are people that don't care if Net Neutrality is gutted. With Net Neutrality gone, the internet will be treated like cable TV. ISPs will be more than able to charge you whatever they want while giving you access to a lot less for more. Imagine having to pay a subscription fee just to use certain sites (we could be having to pay a per month fee just to use this very site). Depending on which ISP you have, they can purposefully have certain sites run slowly, simply have them be blocked, or be behind a paywall while favoring others that they like. This could include social media or even news sites. For example, Fox News or CNN can pay off ISPs to favor their news site over their competitors. How is this not censorship? I'm not saying that all of this Will happen, but that it CAN happen. That alone should at least worry you a little. Even if these big corporations promise to never do anything shady like that, there would be nothing stopping them if they decide to do it. Can you really trust big companies? They don't care about you. All they care about is making as much money as possible. Some companies aren't that bad, but so many of the bigger companies have proven to be greedy as all hell. Imagine the greediest company you can think of as your ISP. So many people from both sides of the political spectrum want to keep Net Neutrality. So, this isn't something that just the Left cares about. https://www.battleforthenet.com/' It's already the case with mobile phone internet. Even when net neutrality was in place.

@Leon Can you at least read previous posts that discredit everything you just said?