FCC Republicans vow to gut net neutrality rules “as soon as possible” - Polidicks

[url]http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/12/fcc-republicans-vow-to-gut-net-neutrality-rules-as-soon-as-possible/[/url] [QUOTE] The US Federal Communications Commission's two Republican members told ISPs yesterday that they will get to work on gutting net neutrality rules "as soon as possible." FCC Republicans Ajit Pai and Michael O'Rielly sent a letter to five lobby groups representing wireless carriers and small ISPs; while the letter is mostly about plans to extend an exemption for small providers from certain disclosure requirements, the commissioners also said they will tackle the entire net neutrality order shortly after President-elect Donald Trump's inauguration on January 20. "[W]e will seek to revisit [the disclosure] requirements, and the Title II Net Neutrality proceeding more broadly, as soon as possible," they wrote, referring to the order that imposed net neutrality rules and reclassified ISPs as common carriers under Title II of the Communications Act. Pai and O'Rielly noted that they "dissented from the Commission's February 2015 Net Neutrality decision, including the Order's imposition of unnecessary and unjustified burdens on providers." [/QUOTE]

It's so fucking bullshit that net neutrality has become a partisan issue. I thought Republicans were supposed to be for rights? It seems they're only for whatever will line their pockets.

Hope there's mass protests about this. Completely wrecks the free internet as a concept.

[QUOTE=BlackMageMari;51557935]It's so fucking bullshit that net neutrality has become a partisan issue. I thought Republicans were supposed to be for rights? It seems they're only for whatever will line their pockets.[/QUOTE] Big Government influence is bad, unless it benefits them by discriminating against gay people, women who want abortions, people who utilize Net Neutrality, etc.

it pains me to see something so free and open like the internet at the mercy of these men who put the needs of their corporate sponsors over that of the people. they should feel so much shame.

It's ok, you can still have all your favourite sites including Facebook and Twitter! If you pay for the Premium Gold package, you can even get 150MB of data for browsing "other" miscellaneous websites. Alternatively, if you use the FOL (our brand new Fun On-Line) browser, you can access 7 websites of your choice between 3pm-8pm. What more could you want?

I'm so ready for the fucking old cable monopolies to die but with how eager the Republicans are to suck their dicks for pennies and the whole Republican triple majority I guess that's not happening any time soon

If it comes down to it, hopefully we can convince everyone to cancel their service and rely on public access for internet service.

Hurry, pirate EVERYTHING while you still can :yarr: [editline]a[/editline] We can create a website to archive it all, some kind of 'pirate harbor'

Honestly cannot see any positives from this. Can someone shed light on what positives can come from this if you consider American work ethic and service? Please, I'm just asking for one. Your fucking nonsense about "this will improve infrastructure in America" is about as laughable as bringing a snowball into a government building and claiming global warming is a hoax.

[QUOTE=Kagu;51558021]Honestly cannot see any positives from this. Can someone shed light on what positives can come from this if you consider American work ethic and service? Please, I'm just asking for one. Your fucking nonsense about "this will improve infrastructure in America" is laughable.[/QUOTE] 1) [I]b-b-but[/I] think of the persecution big businesses have had to suffer and endure! They deserve this! 2) lolol Liberal tears lolol 3) I... um.... er, let me get back to you if I find more.

[QUOTE=TurtleeyFP;51558020]Hurry, pirate EVERYTHING while you still can :yarr: [editline]a[/editline] We can create a website to archive it all, some kind of 'pirate harbor'[/QUOTE] maybe it could be some kind of bay of sorts!

[QUOTE=Kagu;51558021]Honestly cannot see any positives from this. Can someone shed light on what positives can come from this if you consider American work ethic and service? Please, I'm just asking for one. Your fucking nonsense about "this will improve infrastructure in America" is about as laughable as bringing a snowball into a government building and claiming global warming is a hoax.[/QUOTE] One of the biggest arguments against net neutrality usually just comes down to regulation being bad and evil because BIG GOVERNMENT but that's mostly a lot of chaff to obfuscate the amount of money being funneled into political pockets by the cable companies to try and even further monopolize internet service in the US and enact anti-consumer package deals and policies

[QUOTE=BlackMageMari;51557935]It's so fucking bullshit that net neutrality has become a partisan issue. I thought Republicans were supposed to be for rights? It seems they're only for whatever will line their pockets.[/QUOTE] Greed before Creed.

:snip:

[QUOTE=BlindSniper17;51558037]1) [I]b-b-but[/I] think of the persecution big businesses have had to suffer and endure! They deserve this! 2) lolol Liberal tears lolol 3) I... um.... er, let me get back to you if I find more.[/QUOTE] This is how I imagine those inbred idiots babble about in office. How can I fuck over the consumer while lining the pockets my pockets by using buzzwords? "BIG GOVERNMENT" "SHILLARY" "OBAMA'S BIRTH CERTIFICATES" For people who bash on the other side for using buzzwords, they sure love their own buzzwords so, so much huh.

Drain the swamp and fill it with so much dirty cash there's no room for water. I can't wait to see how /pol/ and r/the_donald react when the ISPs feel emboldened enough to bring out the king-size sandpaper dildos on them. It didn't have to be this way, guys.

[QUOTE=BlackMageMari;51557935]It's so fucking bullshit that net neutrality has become a partisan issue. I thought Republicans were supposed to be for rights? It seems they're only for whatever will line their pockets.[/QUOTE] They are for rights. Rights of businesses.

Gotta hand it to the Republicans, they are playing the long game so that Crooked Hillary can no longer get the last laugh. Now, her emails will be delivered at throttled speeds! Good going, GOP, you saved America and improved our national security. :terrists:

[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;51558082]I don't really understand how this would work. Websites are privately owned, are they not? How could you legally charge for one and not others? You can't set up a tollbooth and make people pay to get to buildings you don't own. (unless you're the government, and that's only to support the infrastructure and is not for profit)[/QUOTE] Well currently it's illegal to do that but if NN goes out the window then ISPs will be able to charge what they like. They already cap you when you go over your allotted data, it's not hard to imagine that they could target that towards specific sites they "like" (i.e. pay them money)

[QUOTE=The golden;51558106]And those businesses are made up of people. People with no rights. Eat shit, GoP.[/QUOTE] Don't forget, corporations are people too!

If you're with Verizon or some shitty ass ISP, you're out of luck in the future. But if you're with Charter Communications (Time Warner and Bright House), then don't worry: [url]http://variety.com/2015/biz/news/charter-communications-time-warner-cable-net-neutrality-1201528148/[/url] They have promised to uphold net neutrality.

[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;51558082]I don't really understand how this would work. Websites are privately owned, are they not? How could you legally charge for one and not others? You can't set up a tollbooth and make people pay to get to buildings you don't own. (unless you're the government, and that's only to support the infrastructure and is not for profit)[/QUOTE] The agreements are set up with the website owners, who get a slice of the profit. I'm 110% sure they'd love to make more money for doing nothing. Non-peered websites like Facepunch wouldn't charge you at the gate, but would probably be much more bandwidth-expensive to read if they start charging by image count. Unless we have 16x16 avatars so I guess garry saw this coming

Hopefully big sites will organize a campaign, republicans will flip on it like SOPA if they think it will lose them a lot of support

[QUOTE=joshuadim;51558118]If you're with Verizon or some shitty ass ISP, you're out of luck in the future. But if you're with Charter Communications (Time Warner and Bright House), then don't worry: [url]http://variety.com/2015/biz/news/charter-communications-time-warner-cable-net-neutrality-1201528148/[/url] They have promised to uphold net neutrality.[/QUOTE] Perhaps this is just my cynicism and pessimism talking, but I only see them sticking to that until their profits are so in danger because they can't compete against the ones that don't uphold net neutrality.

"We dissent from the Order's imposition of unnecessary and unjustified burdens on providers, such as anti-trust laws, ensuring free speech, and not having 99% profit margins."

[QUOTE=joshuadim;51558118]If you're with Verizon or some shitty ass ISP, you're out of luck in the future. But if you're with Charter Communications (Time Warner and Bright House), then don't worry: [url]http://variety.com/2015/biz/news/charter-communications-time-warner-cable-net-neutrality-1201528148/[/url] They have promised to uphold net neutrality.[/QUOTE] That's surprising of them, and a decent silver lining out of all of this I suppose. I hope that ISPs who choose to uphold Net Neutrality become competitive enough to make those who abuse the absence of it become close enough to a minority. Obviously, not all people have the privilege of choosing to be able to move to a place with better options, though.

[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;51558082]I don't really understand how this would work. Websites are privately owned, are they not? How could you legally charge for one and not others? You can't set up a tollbooth and make people pay to get to buildings you don't own. (unless you're the government, and that's only to support the infrastructure and is not for profit)[/QUOTE] The internet service providers own the infrastructure. Without net neutrality they would happily charge customers $20 dollars more a month to access YouTube and Netflix at full speed. It's not toll booths to get into a building, it's like having to pay extra to see more exhibits at a museum

[QUOTE=BlindSniper17;51558110]Don't forget, corporations are people too![/QUOTE] No, see, corporations actually get rights

[QUOTE=BlackMageMari;51558131]Perhaps this is just my cynicism and pessimism talking, but I only see them sticking to that until their profits are so in danger because they can't compete against the ones that don't uphold net neutrality.[/QUOTE] Reminder that most areas in the US have one or at most two broadband ISPs available. There is no competition. They have regional monopoly agreements with each other where, say, Verizon won't try and move into Comcast's market over there and Comcast won't invade Verizon's territory over here. This is not considered a massive antitrust disaster because corporate lobbying is legal and, thanks to Citizens United and precedents since, effectively unlimited. And it's going to get even better (for big business, worse for the public) with President Gold-plated Apartment taking office.