Current Events > This is your internet without net neutrality

(+) Yeah! (+)

So why is freedom for business more important than freedom for the american citizen again?
---

Itll trickle down to us and well all benefit man! Any day now. Those drops just have a long way to go but its gonna reach us any moment now. Cant wait :)
---

$4.99 a month for netflix is cheaper than it is at the moment. Why are people against this?
---

Who posted 3
---

man this again, I'm tired of explaining why everyone posting this pic is wrong
---

Link HT posted...

man this again, I'm tired of explaining why everyone posting this pic is wrong

First time I've seen it. Can you link me to one of your previous posts explaining it please?
---

Izual_Reborn posted...

$4.99 a month for netflix is cheaper than it is at the moment. Why are people against this?

Do those look like dollars to you? Is the same as $ in your book?
---

>not having izual on ignore
---

It'd be like browsing, but with microtransactions.
---

Izual_Reborn posted...

$4.99 a month for netflix is cheaper than it is at the moment. Why are people against this?

You realize they have to pay that to their provider in addition to paying Netflix right?
---

Izual_Reborn posted...

Link HT posted...

man this again, I'm tired of explaining why everyone posting this pic is wrong

First time I've seen it. Can you link me to one of your previous posts explaining it please?

@Link_HT the man asked you a question.
---

Bullet_Wing posted...

Izual_Reborn posted...

$4.99 a month for netflix is cheaper than it is at the moment. Why are people against this?

You realize that 4.99 doesn't actually cover your Netflix subscription, just access, right?

This. It's the equivalent of buying a ticket to then be allowed to pay for netflix.

Izual_Reborn posted...

$4.99 a month for netflix is cheaper than it is at the moment. Why are people against this?

That's not the netflix subscription, it's what your isp charges to allow you to access netflix
---

Kaname_Madoka posted...

>not having izual on ignore

---

Jiggy101011 posted...

Izual_Reborn posted...

Link HT posted...

man this again, I'm tired of explaining why everyone posting this pic is wrong

First time I've seen it. Can you link me to one of your previous posts explaining it please?

@Link_HT the man asked you a question.

I'll just copy paste my post from the other topic:

Portugal does have Net Neutrality because of EU regulations.

That image is about mobile data and what you're seeing is an example of zero-rating where some specific services don't consume any mobile data. If you're curious you can go read more about internet regulations in europe.


While what is being done is in fact a violation of internet neutrality, it's not nearly as serious as people make it out to be.
---

butthole666 posted...

Izual_Reborn posted...

$4.99 a month for netflix is cheaper than it is at the moment. Why are people against this?

That's not the netflix subscription, it's what your isp charges to allow you to access netflix

See this is wrong. All your mobile data will still work with internet neutrality where all traffic will be treated equal. These packages simply offer the possibility of not counting towards your mobile data cap for certain services.
---

Izual_Reborn posted...

$4.99 a month for netflix is cheaper than it is at the moment. Why are people against this?

It would be $100 for internet with no access to any site
$5 or more for the video package with includes permission to navigate to netflix
And then whatever netflix itself will charge you. So no, it wont be cheaper
---

Link HT posted...

butthole666 posted...

Izual_Reborn posted...

$4.99 a month for netflix is cheaper than it is at the moment. Why are people against this?

That's not the netflix subscription, it's what your isp charges to allow you to access netflix

See this is wrong. All your mobile data will still work with internet neutrality where all traffic will be treated equal. These packages simply offer the possibility of not counting towards your mobile data cap for certain services.

For mobile yes. If this passes the fear is ISPs can charge you for access to certain sites. Just like a cable provider can. And they have every reason to do it since theyre all about making money.
---

Bullet_Wing posted...

Izual_Reborn posted...

$4.99 a month for netflix is cheaper than it is at the moment. Why are people against this?

You realize that 4.99 doesn't actually cover your Netflix subscription, just access, right?

You realize that all of those prices, when converted to dollars, is still less than most people pay for high-speed internet access in America, right?
---

Rika_Furude posted...

Izual_Reborn posted...

$4.99 a month for netflix is cheaper than it is at the moment. Why are people against this?

It would be $100 for internet with no access to any site
$5 or more for the video package with includes permission to navigate to netflix
And then whatever netflix itself will charge you. So no, it wont be cheaper

And you have some sort of insider info on what the pricing for internet is going to be, I take it?
---

The whole worry of the loss of net neutrality is only through government intervention in the first place - the government set up the monopolies and duopolies for ISP's throughout the nation, and are therefore the sole responsible party for why there is ZERO competition driving pricing down.

Of course, people addicted to big government are too short-sighted to recognize this, and feel that we need more big government to solve the problem that big government created in the first place.
---

>Corporate freedom
>Consumer freedom

Pick one.
---

darkjedilink posted...

Bullet_Wing posted...

Izual_Reborn posted...

$4.99 a month for netflix is cheaper than it is at the moment. Why are people against this?

You realize that 4.99 doesn't actually cover your Netflix subscription, just access, right?

You realize that all of those prices, when converted to dollars, is still less than most people pay for high-speed internet access in America, right?

Its still in addition to their base plans. Like how Comcast will charge me x amount for cable and more if I want HBO. We could be charged x amount for basic internet and more if we want YouTube.
---

darkjedilink posted...

Rika_Furude posted...

Izual_Reborn posted...

$4.99 a month for netflix is cheaper than it is at the moment. Why are people against this?

It would be $100 for internet with no access to any site
$5 or more for the video package with includes permission to navigate to netflix
And then whatever netflix itself will charge you. So no, it wont be cheaper

And you have some sort of insider info on what the pricing for internet is going to be, I take it?

do you have a crystal ball that shows that ISPs will not abuse their power? despite every business in america always exploiting any freedom they are given? show me your crystal ball, show me how ISPs are different and more trustworthy
---

darkjedilink posted...

You realize that all of those prices, when converted to dollars, is still less than most people pay for high-speed internet access in America, right?

I think what you are failing to realize is that people are suggesting that you continue to pay what you are already paying right now, and then on top of that certain sections of the internet are behind paywalls where you need to pay more to access them.

This isn't a picture of a place without Net Neutrality. This is a preexisting picture that people are using to say it could become like this. In addition to what you are already paying.
---

People need to understand what they're talking about before posting these sort of pictures.
---

DuranOfForcena posted...

Izual_Reborn posted...

$4.99 a month for netflix is cheaper than it is at the moment. Why are people against this?

i really hope this is a joke post

its not. pathetically

Mister_Spyker posted...

People need to understand what they're talking about before posting these sort of pictures.

please explain how ISPs are trustworthy enough that you know beyond reasonable doubt that it will not become like OP
---

So basically EA controls the internet now.

Rika_Furude posted...

darkjedilink posted...

Rika_Furude posted...

Izual_Reborn posted...

$4.99 a month for netflix is cheaper than it is at the moment. Why are people against this?

It would be $100 for internet with no access to any site
$5 or more for the video package with includes permission to navigate to netflix
And then whatever netflix itself will charge you. So no, it wont be cheaper

And you have some sort of insider info on what the pricing for internet is going to be, I take it?

do you have a crystal ball that shows that ISPs will not abuse their power? despite every business in america always exploiting any freedom they are given? show me your crystal ball, show me how ISPs are different and more trustworthy

Don't you see? Somehow deregulating big businesses will make them behave better. They totally won't fuck us over harder and continue to crush their competition. Giving them unlimited power will make them powerless.

People think the problem is regulation when It's just the way we institute it. We need to ban lobbying so we can actually regulate properly.
---

darkjedilink posted...

The whole worry of the loss of net neutrality is only through government intervention in the first place - the government set up the monopolies and duopolies for ISP's throughout the nation, and are therefore the sole responsible party for why there is ZERO competition driving pricing down.

Of course, people addicted to big government are too short-sighted to recognize this, and feel that we need more big government to solve the problem that big government created in the first place.

---

I would like to assume that this will leave most big markets the opportunity to have at least one provider continue to offer net neutrality. Then consumers will be smart enough to choose that provider. The free market should be able to demand this if it's actually what it wants.

Although, this is a big fuck you to everyone across the nation who has Comcast as their only option.
---

Bandit_Keith posted...

darkjedilink posted...

You realize that all of those prices, when converted to dollars, is still less than most people pay for high-speed internet access in America, right?

I think what you are failing to realize is that people are suggesting that you continue to pay what you are already paying right now, and then on top of that certain sections of the internet are behind paywalls where you need to pay more to access them.

This isn't a picture of a place without Net Neutrality. This is a preexisting picture that people are using to say it could become like this. In addition to what you are already paying.

So, you agree that they are literally pulling this Doomsday scenario out of their asses.
---

Jiek_Fafn posted...

Although, this is a big fuck you to everyone across the nation who has Comcast as their only option.

And the 'government must provide!' crowd are the ones ultimately responsible for it.
---

darkjedilink posted...

So, you agree that they are literally pulling this Doomsday scenario out of their asses.

No. No one mentioned a doomsday scenario. And they are basing this off of how corporations already treat the public. They are using history to predict how things will play out in the future. It's informed speculation based on past practices.
---

This is karma for pirating. You fucks thought you'd never end up paying?

Learn more here.

https://ajitvpai.com

Noone can think this is a good thing
---

---

Liberals fearmongering?

Why I never...

Youre an idiot to be against net neutrality
---

iamintents posted...

Youre an idiot to be against net neutrality

I really hate when people say this. Corporations aren't charities.

Even if companies never use the system to their advantage, there is no benefit to the consumer.
---

JohnLennon8 posted...

iamintents posted...

Youre an idiot to be against net neutrality

I really hate when people say this. Corporations aren't charities.

I dont care your mind is tiny
---

Dragonblade01 posted...

Even if companies never use the system to their advantage, there is no benefit to the consumer.

Its about the potential
Mthey shouldnt even have that
---

iamintents posted...

Dragonblade01 posted...

Even if companies never use the system to their advantage, there is no benefit to the consumer.

Its about the potential
Mthey shouldnt even have that

That's what I mean.

There's no benefit to the consumer, so there's no reason any consumer should be in favor of removing net neutrality.
---