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

[QUOTE=MR-X;51558511]Well, the democrats and what the DNC pulled is partly responsible for a lot of the issues this country will face. If they only listened to their own people this wouldn't have happened.[/QUOTE] Well, Bernie still lost the primaries by a LOT. I agree the DNC was manipulative and the news media were dirty but I can't really say in good faith that he'd have had the nomination without it. So ironically, to have won the general election the DNC would have done the opposite; and have had the super delegates say "Hillary will have a very hard time compared to bernie. put him up."

Okay, I'm sorry, colour me extremely confused. Last I knew, or thought I knew, Net Neutrality was anything but and was, iirc, regarded as extremely harmful. Has this suddenly changed in recent years, or have I just been remembering it wrong?

[QUOTE=zpiscool;51558593]Okay, I'm sorry, colour me extremely confused. Last I knew, or thought I knew, Net Neutrality was anything but and was, iirc, regarded as extremely harmful. Has this suddenly changed in recent years, or have I just been remembering it wrong?[/QUOTE] Net neutrality was always good, you were just fed lies by special interest groups.

[QUOTE=froztshock;51558461]It's a lie. That's all it is really. Just a lie. They're lying, like they always do.[/QUOTE] If anything, Net Neutrality [I]creates[/I] jobs because companies like Netflix thrive from it.

[QUOTE=zpiscool;51558593]Okay, I'm sorry, colour me extremely confused. Last I knew, or thought I knew, Net Neutrality was anything but and was, iirc, regarded as extremely harmful. Has this suddenly changed in recent years, or have I just been remembering it wrong?[/QUOTE] Are you thinking of SOPA & PIPA?

May as well let go of my job in web dev and start learning to operate a pumpjack that's the only safe job.

[QUOTE=Kagu;51558244]"Hillary would have done the same"[/QUOTE] I've already seen that. "Oh sure, you're mad about Trump picking insiders and lobbyists for his cabinet? Hillary would have done the same thing! LIBERAL TEARS"

[QUOTE=MR-X;51558511]Well, the democrats and what the DNC pulled is partly responsible for a lot of the issues this country will face. If they only listened to their own people this wouldn't have happened.[/QUOTE] They did an incredibly poor job of convincing people that they'd die if they shot themselves. That doesn't mean people aren't fucking retards for shooting themselves.

[QUOTE=piddlezmcfuz;51558312][B]Great Depression 2017[/B] It is going to be a slow build, but the signs will be there from the start. Businesses will see hits on their ads becoming lower and lower as more people opt to block their ads in favor of faster loadtimes for pages across the internet. On top of that, businesses that do get site visits will see their traffic dwindle to a few loyal customers - everyone else goes to the major retail sites that have dished out their fair share of dosh to the ISPs to get their sites included in a bundle. People will notice this trend immediately and voice their concerns, but are ultimately ignored by the FCC and their Telecom overlords. Nobody can advertise their startups anymore, either, because the dominance of the few major corporations in the market drowns them out - they have paid to be the showcase, after all. With newspapers dead and TV being the only viable marketing platform, all local businesses end up drowning each other out with infrequent TV spots that only a handful of people will actually see. Small business dies out, and with it goes a sizeable chunk of the middle class. With nobody to buy their products, the retail behemoths and any production sectors remaining in the States suffer as well. We will see record high unemployment the likes of which have not been seen since the Great Depression. All of this because some assholes wanted a quick buck. And before you say this is dramatic or alarmist or downright stupid, keep in mind that most of the US economy is now tied to the internet in some way or another. Go ahead and tell me how disrupting the internet status quo [I]won't[/I] disrupt the economy in some way, because I can guarantee you that it will. And when it does, the FCC will [I]not[/I] remedy the situation by backpedaling. They have been paid not to.[/QUOTE] I hope this wakes people up

[QUOTE=Helix Snake;51558401]Let's see how the Republicans fair next election after 4 years of everyone experiencing slow internet and all blaming them for it. Hell, after 2 years even.[/QUOTE] Our wages have been stagnant since Reagonomics and the GOP uses anger over this to fuel their campaigns. I could see the same thing happening here, the GOP ruins the internet and then campaigns on restoring the internet. Of course like the economy, they're don't actually intend to do that.

[QUOTE=Souly;51558208]Who asked for this? I mean, do[B] ordinary republicans[/B] care about this issue? Or know what it actually means? Can't believe this wasn't brought up during the election. Smart move by the republicans, though. Can't imagine Trump supporters who actively uses the internet would approve of this.[/QUOTE] As though the Republican party gives half a shit what regular Republicans want. The man on the street is just a sucker and a vote to these people, regardless of political affiliation. [editline]20th December 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=piddlezmcfuz;51558312][B]Great Depression 2017[/B] It is going to be a slow build, but the signs will be there from the start. Businesses will see hits on their ads becoming lower and lower as more people opt to block their ads in favor of faster loadtimes for pages across the internet. On top of that, businesses that do get site visits will see their traffic dwindle to a few loyal customers - everyone else goes to the major retail sites that have dished out their fair share of dosh to the ISPs to get their sites included in a bundle. People will notice this trend immediately and voice their concerns, but are ultimately ignored by the FCC and their Telecom overlords. Nobody can advertise their startups anymore, either, because the dominance of the few major corporations in the market drowns them out - they have paid to be the showcase, after all. With newspapers dead and TV being the only viable marketing platform, all local businesses end up drowning each other out with infrequent TV spots that only a handful of people will actually see. Small business dies out, and with it goes a sizeable chunk of the middle class. With nobody to buy their products, the retail behemoths and any production sectors remaining in the States suffer as well. We will see record high unemployment the likes of which have not been seen since the Great Depression. All of this because some assholes wanted a quick buck. [B]And before you say this is dramatic or alarmist or downright stupid, keep in mind that most of the US economy is now tied to the internet in some way or another.[/B] Go ahead and tell me how disrupting the internet status quo [I]won't[/I] disrupt the economy in some way, because I can guarantee you that it will. And when it does, the FCC will [I]not[/I] remedy the situation by backpedaling. They have been paid not to.[/QUOTE] I would also like to point out that when radio was originally a thing you didn't need a license to broadcast, literally anyone could do it to spread their ideas. Once the regulations came in that shit was killed off and now you just have local radio, large corporation radio, and pirate radio. I hope you guys are prepared for the internet to become that, if the ISPs don't decided to package everything up like it's TV, that is.

How would this affect someone living outside of the US? Considering how much of the internet is hosted inside the US.

This will never work. Think about it, so many people just use Facebook or Google or those sites. The problem is a lot of these websites feed from other websites. People sharing links on Facebook or using Google for a research project for your kids. It sounds good in theory but literally everyone will need to pay for the "gold" or "unlimited" package just for the internet to actually "work". Even if this was implemented, I could see the price of the "unlimited" literally being the standard rates now and the "lower" tier being like 1/4 or 1/2 the price.

[QUOTE=King of Limbs;51558962]This will never work. Think about it, so many people just use Facebook or Google or those sites. The problem is a lot of these websites feed from other websites. People sharing links on Facebook or using Google for a research project for your kids. It sounds good in theory but literally everyone will need to pay for the "gold" or "unlimited" package just for the internet to actually "work". Even if this was implemented, I could see the price of the "unlimited" literally being the standard rates now and the "lower" tier being like 1/4 or 1/2 the price.[/QUOTE] Trust me, the Republicans will find some bullshit reason to sell this to people. Not that it matters, since they have control of the house and the senate. I wonder how easily SOPA and its like would have passed with this presidency.

[QUOTE=King of Limbs;51558962]This will never work. Think about it, so many people just use Facebook or Google or those sites. The problem is a lot of these websites feed from other websites. People sharing links on Facebook or using Google for a research project for your kids. It sounds good in theory but literally everyone will need to pay for the "gold" or "unlimited" package just for the internet to actually "work". Even if this was implemented, I could see the price of the "unlimited" literally being the standard rates now and the "lower" tier being like 1/4 or 1/2 the price.[/QUOTE] our only real hope is that corporations liek google/facebook/apple/etc all rally against this like they did SOPA and the others

[QUOTE=Folstream;51558959]How would this affect someone living outside of the US? Considering how much of the internet is hosted inside the US.[/QUOTE] A fair amount. Much more if you're accessing American websites, much less if you're accessing European websites. Though regardless of where you are you will be affected by this, if only because American ISPs are going to throttle THE FUCK out of the companies that don't pay them.

I'm gonna be optimistic and say that they might just go away from the Title II stuff and impose dedicated, specific net neutrality laws. It's very unlikely that they will. But also optimistically, if they don't and ISPs everywhere clamp down and start packaging internet like TV, people will flip shit and there will be massive protests everywhere. If it's sudden and severe enough, we'll probably see riots. I guarantee that Google and almost every major website out there will protest this, too.

Oh god here it goes again Every single time something like this pops up in the headlines everyone on facepunch goes crazy over it like it's the end of the world. Someone was even talking about a January 2017 depression, that's nice. Remember when that access holywood tape came out and everyone was like "oh shit this is big donald trump is DONE republican party is gone for yayy!!!!!!" but he still won the presidency by a fairly large margin? You have to realize people aren't [I]that[/I] stupid. They aren't going to just blindly say "oh wow comcast is making me pay to access this website let me just ignore the other alternatives out there and give them what they want." In the prosperous and wonderful capitalist society we live in, competition still exists, meaning companies actually have to give the consumer what they want.

[QUOTE=Occlusion;51557953]Hope there's mass protests about this. Completely wrecks the free internet as a concept.[/QUOTE] There will be, but everyone will just bitch at them for "protesting wrong".

[QUOTE=Pootis Mann;51559353]Oh god here it goes again Every single time something like this pops up in the headlines everyone on facepunch goes crazy over it like it's the end of the world. Someone was even talking about a January 2017 depression, that's nice. Remember when that access holywood tape came out and everyone was like "oh shit this is big donald trump is DONE republican party is gone for yayy!!!!!!" but he still won the presidency by a fairly large margin? You have to realize people aren't [I]that[/I] stupid. They aren't going to just blindly say "oh wow comcast is making me pay to access this website let me just ignore the other alternatives out there and give them what they want." In the prosperous and wonderful capitalist society we live in, competition still exists, meaning companies actually have to give the consumer what they want.[/QUOTE] While I agree that there is some overreaction, if I get fucked over by my ISP all I have to do is switch to one of the better alternatives in my area such as Oh wait, my ISP has no competition in this area. I'm sure quite a few people are in this same boat as well.

[QUOTE=Pootis Mann;51559353]Oh god here it goes again Every single time something like this pops up in the headlines everyone on facepunch goes crazy over it like it's the end of the world. Someone was even talking about a January 2017 depression, that's nice. Remember when that access holywood tape came out and everyone was like "oh shit this is big donald trump is DONE republican party is gone for yayy!!!!!!" but he still won the presidency by a fairly large margin? You have to realize people aren't [I]that[/I] stupid. They aren't going to just blindly say "oh wow comcast is making me pay to access this website let me just ignore the other alternatives out there and give them what they want." In the prosperous and wonderful capitalist society we live in, competition still exists, meaning companies actually have to give the consumer what they want.[/QUOTE] Except in the cases where anti-trust is ignored and competition is pushed out, or so small it can't compete with price fixing monopolies. People will fight and protest, but ultimately 90% of us will decide it's way easier to give in and pay the fee. A lot of our livelihoods and jobs depend on internet access, but it's not like a hunger strike - only we are the ones with something to lose. What reason do corporations have to listen to protests, if they know we don't have a choice and would pay up either way? They have 0 requirement to do anything other than pulling in cash - and charging for websites is so much cash it'd be unthinkable to not take the option. [editline]a[/editline] I appreciate you not defending Trump by saying there's [i]nothing[/i] wrong with this, though. Concession is a good starting point.

[QUOTE=Pootis Mann;51559353]Oh god here it goes again Every single time something like this pops up in the headlines everyone on facepunch goes crazy over it like it's the end of the world. Someone was even talking about a January 2017 depression, that's nice. Remember when that access holywood tape came out and everyone was like "oh shit this is big donald trump is DONE republican party is gone for yayy!!!!!!" but he still won the presidency by a fairly large margin? You have to realize people aren't [I]that[/I] stupid. They aren't going to just blindly say "oh wow comcast is making me pay to access this website let me just ignore the other alternatives out there and give them what they want." In the prosperous and wonderful capitalist society we live in, competition still exists, meaning companies actually have to give the consumer what they want.[/QUOTE] I would completely agree with you if competition did actually exist to even a half assed degree.

[QUOTE=Mr._N;51558440]FCC member Ajit Pai says that net neutrality rules "are holding back investment, innovation, and job creation." How will giving giant ISPs the power to throttle internet speeds, create internet fast lanes, and charge content providers create jobs and innovation?[/QUOTE] American politics protip, when Republicans suggest something that makes you go "hey wait hold on what are we doing I don't think that is a great idea" and their reasoning includes jobs or job creation, they are actually full of shit.

[QUOTE=Pootis Mann;51559353]Oh god here it goes again Every single time something like this pops up in the headlines everyone on facepunch goes crazy over it like it's the end of the world. Someone was even talking about a January 2017 depression, that's nice. Remember when that access holywood tape came out and everyone was like "oh shit this is big donald trump is DONE republican party is gone for yayy!!!!!!" but he still won the presidency by a fairly large margin? You have to realize people aren't [I]that[/I] stupid. They aren't going to just blindly say "oh wow comcast is making me pay to access this website let me just ignore the other alternatives out there and give them what they want." In the prosperous and wonderful capitalist society we live in, competition still exists, meaning companies actually have to give the consumer what they want.[/QUOTE] You're bitterly naive if you believe that "the market will correct itself" is a true statement. If it was true, why do we still have the military-industrial complex? Why do we have medical companies charging tens of dollars for band-aids? Why do we have a western world of predatory capitalism, based purely on bleeding and profiteering above all else?

[QUOTE=Levelog;51559421]I would completely agree with you if competition did actually exist to even a half assed degree.[/QUOTE] Even with competition I'd disagree. They might not slam it in raw with no lube. But it's just in companies rational interest to fuck with things somewhat, so it's going to be happening. Ethical consumerism, boycotts, and whatnot do help things but they rarely resolve problems.

[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;51558225]Can't wait to see Democrats take the blame for losing net neutrality[/QUOTE] this will actually happen. it has happened before. [url]http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/mitch-mcconnell-saudi-9-11-bill-228903[/url] There was a bill in congress JASTA, that allowed 9/11 victims to sue Saudi Arabia, along with a lot of other anti-terrorism measures. Obama vetoed it, but for the first time as president, his veto was overwritten by both the senate and congress. Turns out they never understood "HEY THIS BILL ALSO MEANS THAT OTHER COUNTRIES CAN SUE US FOR DRONE STRIKES, SHIT", and they blamed Obama for not telling them that EVEN WHEN HE DID. There's probably going to be another instance of that, except that it's going to be along the lines of "THE MEAN MINORITY OF DEMOCRATS DIDN'T CONVINCE POOR OLD DONALD TRUMP THAT HIS BILL WAS SHIT" when they realised that removing net neutrality means that they could do terrible things.

[QUOTE=ROFLBURGER;51559583]this will actually happen. it has happened before. [URL]http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/mitch-mcconnell-saudi-9-11-bill-228903[/URL] There was a bill in congress JASTA, that allowed 9/11 victims to sue Saudi Arabia, along with a lot of other anti-terrorism measures. Obama vetoed it, but for the first time as president, his veto was overwritten by both the senate and congress. Turns out they never understood "HEY THIS BILL ALSO MEANS THAT OTHER COUNTRIES CAN SUE US FOR DRONE STRIKES, SHIT", and they blamed Obama for not telling them that EVEN WHEN HE DID. There's probably going to be another instance of that, except that it's going to be along the lines of "THE MEAN MINORITY OF DEMOCRATS DIDN'T CONVINCE POOR OLD DONALD TRUMP THAT HIS BILL WAS SHIT" when they realised that removing net neutrality means that they could do terrible things.[/QUOTE] Though, to be fair. that wasn't a republican-only thing. Obama's own party sided against him. "97-1, and 348-77" My god I hate nationalist fervor at times.

Net neutrality is definitively pro-small business. Want to compete with Spotify or Apple Music? Well, sorry Rdio, Pandora, SoundCloud, Tidal, and any other music streaming service out there - you can't without net neutrality, because Spotify and Apple get priority access because they pay your ISP extra money to not throttle them. Trying to open a competitor? Tough shit unless you cough up cash to the ISP - cash you don't have unless you're already an established company. Also allows TWC and Comcast and other ISPs to provide their own in-house competition that doesn't have to pay any fee and experiences [I]boosted[/I] connection speeds, unfairly advantaging them over Netflix or other internet businesses. It's like telling new family-owned restaurants that they're legally required to deliver food 40 minutes slower than the Taco Bell across the store, unless they pay extra for permission to deliver food in a timely manner. It's fucking stupid. Being anti-net-neutrality is being pro-corporate and anti-small-business, and it would cripple the small business internet entrepreneurship that is exploding in size across the country. Genuinely the most corporate position you could take.

[QUOTE=thelurker1234;51559595]Though, to be fair. that wasn't a republican-only thing. Obama's own party sided against him. "97-1, and 348-77" My god I hate nationalist fervor at times.[/QUOTE] Democrats supported this bill because they don't support drone strikes because of the collateral damage. Republicans support drone strikes because it means less troop casualties and who cares about collateral damage? They only supported this bill because they thought it just meant that families can sue Saudi Arabia.

I'm still fucking pissed that it was now of all elections that the DNC had to shove an extremely unfavorable candidate down our throats, through collusion with DWS, Donna Brazile, etc. Was it worth it, DNC?