#NetNeutrality

Net Neutrality needs to stay, its part of our freedom. To take this away is just insane

 

Except that Net Neutrality is government imposed, and by taking it away it just makes a free market in the business of providing internet service. I mean, I can see how it would jack up internet prices, but at the same time, it might stop people from being online nearly as much (which I honestly think would be better for the world as a whole, but that's a different discussion). With Net Neutrality, my understanding is that the government doesn't allow the ISPs to jack prices, slow down service, etc. Yet, that's governmental control over a service widely used by the public, which I don't agree with.

I don't think repealing it is a bad thing. If repealed, it just means the business of providing internet to the public becomes a free market, rather than being the slightly command economy system the government has in place. To use an extreme example of a government run internet, China has blocked youtube and most other forms of social media in their country. I'm not saying the US is going to do that, but it's not implausible that a government run internet providing regulation could turn into something like that.

Overall, America is a free market country, and that should apply to all areas, including providing internet service to its citizens. In the unlikely event the internet company you're using does end up blocking or slowing down access to sites, just switch companies. That's the beauty of a free market. The consumer can choose where they go and who they want to buy service from.

 

I saw this today.
Lol

 

Please, just do something about this thing so those of us not in the USA can stop hearing about it.

 

Minus the swearing, there's actually a lot of truth in the video. People are so busy fighting each other that they don't even realize what's happening. The deregulation of net neutrality just enhances the power of Big Tech.
And @K4C4128 I would usually side with you on a debate regarding free markets vs gov't intervention but on this issue, I think that net neutrality is a "necessary evil" so to speak in a free market economy since the public/social benefits outweigh the potential economic gain due to allowing the markets to run free. In this case the collective good should or ought to be more important than profit maximization IMO.

 

Book burning

 

Fair enough @aarondf To be clear, I'm neither for nor against Net Neutrality. That was just my two cents based on what I've read about it. I don't think I've read enough to have a solid opinion that leans one way or the other. I can see the virtues and negatives of both sides. So, on some level I agree it is a necessary evil, I just don't think the ISPs have any motive to suddenly slow down connections to certain sites. Sure they could do it without Net Neutrality, I just don't see why they would.

 

Bye bye nofap and bye bye discovering nofap. How does that sound?

 

Bye bye porn websites! .........I hope.

 

Lol absolutely not. I heard they work hand in hand with the ISPs.

 

I didnt heard of that, but I have a feeling porn sites have lots of money to pay for the fast lane. So youre right, bye bye NoFap for Americans.

 

Communists and george soros love NN.
So that tells me all I need to know about NN. Now the ftc can use antitrust laws to keep the censor loving big tech in check. This was a good move, but we need the internet totally decentralized.

 

I do believe this is being overblown, however. I don’t have net neutrality and the internet here’s fine. The US survived without NN for 22+ years. Your sites aren’t gonna disappear. That’s just Y2K-styled hysteria.

 

Nofap getting blocked or throttled was exactly what I was worried about. PAs will be a huge income source. There's still a lot of people working to save AND though. If you haven't checked it out yet look up battle for the net.

 

Exactly. More specifically, its leftist hysteria and lies. Its simply a top down internet power grab by leftist tech, ie. Google, Apple, fb, etc.
Its designed to censor Conservative talk and let weak leftist arguments go unopposed. In short, it is like the fairness doctrine.

 

That has nothing to do with what I posted. I'm wondering why they would slow down internet to certain sites, not saying they would. Sure they could, but why? What's the motive to do so? If anything, it would cause them to lose customers. For example, if Xfinity suddenly decided to slow down Nofap, but At&T didn't, I'd switch to AT&T to help me access it, y'know?

 

To me, NN sounded like a patch to ISP monopolies rather than an actual fix.

Reflection needs to be done with those in areas where ISPs are a monopoly, especially over what caused that monopoly to form. Did it become a monopoly due to excelling in competition? I highly doubt it, and even if it was, they became a “monopoly” because it was too good for any alternative. The moment they intentionally slow down something or start charging extra, that opens the door for more competition. I honestly doubt that’s ISP would want that in this case.

Then there’s the government-sanctioned monopoly due to contracts, sweetheart deals and subsidies. This completely shuts out competition, and as long as the government keeps bending over for them, the company wouldn’t need to care about reputation or competition. If people are stuck in this issue, then why do they support even more governmental action when governmental action caused the issue in the first place? Rather than get wrapped up in a giant web of governmental policies, subsidies and regulations, why not fix the problem at its actual source?

If someone’s not in a monopoly... then congratulations! I honestly doubt this repeal will affect them due to competition.

 

why wouldn't they? without net neutrality, smaller websites like nofap couldn't afford to be on the base packages that would be provided by internet providers like Comcast, and would therefore have to pay those telcos part of their margins in order to appear on the base packages provided to the public. you don't think these websites would pass those costs to the consumers? Oh, so you'll just switch to a provider with nofap on its plan, that's cool man, oh but YouTube and Netflix aren't on those plans, so you'll have to a) pay more for those services or b) suffer bandwidth restrictions to those sites (like running out of data on your phone)

net neutrality fosters competition. if all traffic is treated equally, then every company, cooperation or entity will have equal access to consumers -- this includes smaller actors like nofap, which now become severely handicapped without the means to prioritize their traffic. restricting the equal access regulations of the internet is therefor inherently anti-capitalism, which I find odd as most of the proponents of yesterdays ruling were almost exclusively conservatives