NicBramble
238142
9432
191
Dec 15, 2017 4:55 AM
NicBramble
238142
9432
191
drmount
Annnnnnd...the vote is over.
marvin282
In New Zealand where there is no net neutrality they do need to pay more for Facebook, Twitter, etc... that is where that feat came from
RenaissanceNerd
If ISPs choose services, hence content, should they take publishers' responsibility for traffic they carry? Might make them think twice...
FuzzyX
A very nice post BUT ISPs could now package your Internet into subscriptions when nothing to stop them beyond people having better options.
Tacocatisapalindrom
There's also the inherent danger of ISPs controlling what the public is allowed to see. That's a lot of political power
TooDumbToCare
This *is* the danger. All the other things are not really important, compared to this.
SometimesIUseAllOfMyCharactersAtOnceAndDontCareAboutTheConsequ
Help us Ol Musky, you're our only hope!
TheBurritoConfederacy
He's planning on launching a fleet of Low Earth Orbit broadband satellites in the next few years. We can only hope that it works.
PhailRaptor
It's not misinformation if it's also true. Yeah, these other issues are the bigger dangers, but a lot of people can't understand that. ->
PhailRaptor
-> So the lesser issue, that is far easier to understand, was used to get attention to the subject.
fundorin
We already have DPI in Russia. China also has it.
fundorin
Rotten system, where sites and protocols could be blocked globally by the goverment with a court decision of some small town in Syberia.
fundorin
There's supervisory authority exist, called RosCommNadzor, which often blocks resources by mistake.
fundorin
Even though it would be unblocked later, the owner will loose lots of money and RosCommNadzor does not bear any responsibility.
fundorin
Don't let this happen in the US too, comrades!
coreyjayb
Suddenly we care about capitalism. How about that..
ShaneGadsby
That's not capitalism, it's corporate cronyism; something that affects all systems of government
coreyjayb
The absence of a law is not cronyism. Protectionism is cronyism
darksniperknight
Repealing Net Neutrality is bad and wrong. It's badong.
xmessifcb10x3
@kreebs123
Vick4rs
DPI is already a thing in the UK, I assumed it would already be implemented in the USA as it's a pretty basic thing.
CrossEyedVoyager
Dpi is a thing in the UK if you've been hacked. You talk so much shit your arsed is getting jealous.
StoneThrowingDevil
People like to say Communism doesn't work due to greed, I'd say it's exactly the same with Capitalism too.
MetaUnstable
No, you are wrong. Capitalism works exactly because of greed. It's just that the US sees unfettered capitalism as something absolutely 1/n
RiskItForATotalBiscuit
I believe that the best system is a capitalist democratic system with appropriate regulations on business w/ some socialist principles
MetaUnstable
positive. But the truth is, that capitalism favors those with power and money. It makes everyone who isn't rich and powerful a slave. 2/n
MetaUnstable
While the US, in general, looks down on Europe (not just the EU, but all countries) and their, sometimes, quite heavy regulations, it's 3/n
MetaUnstable
exactly those regulations, that keeps the 1% from gaining too much power through money. And thus keeps people free from the whim of 4/n
MetaUnstable
those that think more about _their_ bottom line and not the country or the society as a whole. 5/5
Evenlymade
It still isn't about the money. They want to control the information so they can direct people's attention to or away from things, whenever.
Hellstorm99
How does this not create an even stronger grip on a monopoly, for an already monopolized system?
theoneandonlydairyqueen
I could be wrong, but I'm fairly certain that a monopoly is when only one company controls an item or service. (1/2)
theoneandonlydairyqueen
There are multiple internet providers, even if they all suck. (2/2)
RidiculousButCurrentlyRelevantAndWittyUsername
I and something like 75% of the rest of the country have one option for internet. It's a localized monopoly.
fandsor
The ISPs are deliberately colluding to not overlap in each other's territory, so it is monopolized.
CyberAkuma
They are a monopoly in their respective locations however. They pretty much don't compete in other's areas and block others from competing.
mardukkur
But actually, in Portugal when NN wasn't enforced they used ZERO-RATING to, in effect, charge directly for access to youtube, twitter etc.
kworzora
wat
mardukkur
I all-capped zero-rating so people could look it up. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-rating
qtRaven
The problem is the average internet user will say "I don't see how this affects me."
MOTHERFUCKINGLUCIFERMORNINGSTAR
I don't have a problem with that statement. I have a problem with people saying that and then no effort into finding out how it would.
AntaNce
Exactly. "I don't worry about the NSA seeing my stuff, I got nothing to hide!" Same stupid argument. "I don't use this- why should anyone?"
ThoughtfulTortuga
It won't affect a lot of them. It most likely won't affect me a huge extent either. But it's still an important issue, and if we don't fight
ThoughtfulTortuga
for it, there's no real reason for the people it does affect to fight, when it's something that will affect us. One shouldn't have to be
ThoughtfulTortuga
personally affected by a policy in order to care about it.
Showmeyourotters
I'm so frustrated with my best friend over this. "It's not gonna effect us, we don't even need facebook" "It'll effect literally thousands
Showmeyourotters
of people who's livelihoods depend on the internet. They can't just boycott like you and I can" "Yeah but that's not me. Half of them are
Showmeyourotters
probably scammers anyways, not real businesses" I'm a little disgusted anyone I consider this close to me could have this attitude tbh
OSCgal
Forget the average internet user. Think about the people you actually know. If one of them doesn't get how it'll affect them, relate it 1/2
OSCgal
to something that they care about. For me, I'd be like, "You know how my brother has a used car lot? Advertises his cars online? 2/3
OSCgal
Repealing Net Neutrality could make it more expensive for him to do that. It would hurt his business." 3/3
gtrocks555
Serious question has NN made it easier since it passed in 2015?
OSCgal
No. IIRC NN came about not b/c telecoms were already favoring anybody, but b/c they wanted to try. It was preemptive.
FatherDale
The problem with assuming that Americans are smart is that Trump is President.
wallowinit99
Why are all the net neutrally mentions got a loading symbol next to them?
JrElmoe
Ironically, this was handled in the least democratic way possible as well.
JamesProton
It's almost as if the US is actually a... democratic republic.
amattwithnousername
Home of the free
Apollogize
Unfortunately, that's how net neutrality was setup though. Small singular authority put it in, and a small singular authority took it out.
SomeRandomNobhead
This opens up so many ways to fuck people over, sad asf.
RepostFromLastWeek
TL;DR; Internet is made of tubes.
Counterfit
So you're saying it's not a big truck?
CyberAkuma
*Tosses a whole BOOK into the tubes*
ImperialWatch
IT'S A SERIES OF TUBES.
secretoaster
I thought it was a small black box with a small red light???
iamkarlpilkington
Uh no. I've spoken to The Elders of the Internet https://imgur.com/Uavc9GI
sugwhite
Net truthality!
SemiBrutalOne
Net Friendship!
CybrMeow
Net Brutallity!
bruthalamus
Net Fatality!
Mailvirgo
Sounds like a new fatal Mortal Kombat move. Except its real.
MommyMelusine
I would downvote for bad pun but the post was su true i cant bring myself to do it. Upvote for you good sir!
DarkUranium
Net Babality!
lauracili
.
Lierofox
The goal of the meme wasn't to downplay what could happen, it was to get the point across to people that wouldn't otherwise understand.
2074red2074
Is it that hard to say Time Warner will block Netflix so you have to buy cable?
TechnicallyRight
But the pay wall is something that can happen....
Undeity
Yet, it ultimately undermined the message, didn't it? It dissuaded potential allies due to "exaggeration", and allowed Pai to cry trolling.
Whipawa
Or care to actually read up on what it would entail.
pronoun
Well obviously the point of those memes wasn't to downplay... They're bad because the opposition can use them to discredit the movement.
ThisOneTimeInZelda
I mean, it will happen given the chance. The memes aren't wrong just not what is going to happen in the short term.
WilliamShatinher
Or even just to make it super easy and quick for everyone to understand, so the message would spread faster and further.
Sentay
I really hate that
Imdumbshesalesbian
Exactly why I use that example for my parents dumb friends
eroso
Yup. Gotta sell the idea to populists too. They only listen to scandals.
PmMeGifsForSauce
I.e. the end note. Don't assume people are too stupid to understand if properly explained.
Lierofox
I don't, I give them the benefit of the doubt so they can definitively let me down.
BlueTalon
Have you met people?
Dragas
I agree. At first glance this makes the whole thing look "oh it wont affect me"
DannycakesOW
So then you literally lie about what would happen because you thought people wouldnt be able to understand complex issues? Pathetic
imjustherewellnotexactly
An average really is never taught how networking works formally so you have to break it down to be easier to describe about their day to day
ThatIsMyPassword
It's not breaking it down or describing. 'You'll have to pay for Twitter' is entirely different than 'WeldingWeb will be extremely slow.'
Lierofox
"Deep packet inspection" is a phrase I could say to coworkers and they'd look at me with glazed over eyes and say "I have nothing to hide."
catasus
"I have nothing to hide"--I imagine these same people allowing their freedom of speech just slip away. "I have nothing to say."
MOTHERFUCKINGLUCIFERMORNINGSTAR
That's exactly what they are doing. You may not have anything to hide but you should absolutely not want people snooping through your life.
redrocketunicorn
Explain that it's like USPS opening all your mail first. You want Verizon looking at and selling all of your financial information?
decoding
People literally answer: I got nothing to hide
MOTHERFUCKINGLUCIFERMORNINGSTAR
You should start telling them "good, that means you don't mind me selling what you don't have to hide"
Lierofox
But holy shit if you tell them "Oh and you will probably have to pay extra to use facebook" you get their attention FAST.
jimmyriba
The problem is that they *wont* have to pay extra to use facebook and so will think you were talking BS. It's the small guys that'll suffer.
Shohanna
just ask them how "My Space" turned out. LOL
jimmyriba
I'd be so happy to see Facebook go the same way, on an unrelated note.
Lierofox
It was to communicate the issues to the layman, getting them onboard with the simple stuff instead of losing them to the deeper complexity.
HitlersArtCritic
Net Neutrality has some complex roots, its not just simply "all traffic is equal".Not something you can summarize accurately in 140/280>less
HitlersArtCritic
You get into blocking, throttling, prioritization and deprioritization of services, with previous infractions of ISPs wanting more money.
OGTubix
Sure it might get them behind the idea, but you do see the argument of that being borderline misinformation? It is a bit morally grey.
OGTubix
Probably for the greater good ofc but still.
JimmySmits
It's absolute misinformation, and it weakens our argument when half the people fighting our side are arguing invalid points from ignorance.
Brianetta
Nobody will ever have to pay extra for Facebook. They'll have to pay extra to use alternatives to Facebook.
Nova225
There's an alternate to Facebook?
Brianetta
It won't matter soon.
snotcaulk
A bunch of 'em. They don't have the critical mass of users though.
Brianetta
If you get somebody's attention with information that turns out to be wrong, they'll pay you less attention in future.
AskingTheRealQuestions
chesirecats
This just isn't truth. Take the Brexit Vote Leave "£350 million a week for the NHS". A lie, but Brexit voters still think they did right.
TheBigReveal
Right? It compared it to paying for cable TV channels which everyone understands.
CyberAkuma
This, it's to get people who have no idea what it is to actually care about it.
mikeydaMVP
Isn't that the whole point of the last message that people will understand if you explain it to them?
LardTank
That’s exactly what I thought when I read that comment. Was...sort of the point.
Lierofox
The problem is they don't want to take the time to listen to it. They don't get it immediately so they just shut the conversation down.
eroso
This is why we got Trump - people prefer to keep it simple. Facts are simply ignored to populists. Gotta talk their language too.
neohippie7319
And his point is that it's wrong. An average person might understand the complexities, but they probably don't care enough to learn.
neohippie7319
The "$9.99 basic web access package" concept is a technically correct oversimplification that my grandparents can (and need to) understand.
CyberAkuma
They won't, especially if they don't care to understand.
TheBurritoConfederacy
How many court dockets are you or the average person willing to read? You have to know about YEARS of legal cases to learn the nuances of
TheBurritoConfederacy
how we got to here when it comes to telecommunications regulations, Internet protocols & infrastructure and the history of ISP shenanigans.
Spongybunny
Except, even reading that (very good) description, I know TONS of people who wouldn't get that.
DannycakesOW
Then those people don't need to get into the debate at all. If you don't know the facts don't cut corners and bullshit your way through.
test616
Don't know why this is downvoted, clueless idiots clouding up debate with bullshit is a major problem.
smeeshsmoosh
Holy crap, a nuanced opinion on net neutrality
BronzeLeaguePro
It's essentially the EFF's position. It's a good position.
uchronian9
here’s a more nuanced opinion: net neutrality is only necessary because of telecom monopolies in the first place.
koflan
Don't look for nuance in 140 character posts, unless of course it's a chain of 50 of them, as above.
whatevsies
It's about fairness, privacy, but most of all, democracy.
nibbley
...is accuracy nuance?
DigitalSword
how the fuck do you call debunking false info with facts an "opinion" ??????? That's like if I say SCUBA is an acronym for 1/2
DigitalSword
self contained underwater breathing apparatus and you say "what a nuanced opinion" ...just, no.
SpaceSphere
Now if only we can get people to address the peering issue.
Contracepted
I didn't see a single point of opinion in that message. All just objective facts.
idontenglishsorry
The thing with this and the memes is that the memes are obviously directed to people who cares more about twitter than anything else 1/2
idontenglishsorry
If you show them this they will literally tell you that you either tldr it or that they won’t read it, that’s why they joke with memes
idontenglishsorry
But I agree with the statement made on the post, we need to educate ourselves about the real issue and not just some meme boi about Twitter
Mrmeguyme
It's good to educate but our voice is much louder with many people chiming in, it gets a lot more people talking about it. However having1/2
Mrmeguyme
A balanced diet of long thoughtful posts and shit posts is necessary to get multiple demographics talking about the topic.
namiasdf
Yes, but anybody with a brain knew this. These examples are for those who cannot conceive the problem in a logical fashion.
missmaryMACKMACKMACK
I'm so glad you're here to make everyone else feel inferior to your vast knowledge o wise one
Aesurah
The majority don't read past the title. They will stop caring when the 19.99 thing doesn't happen, despite the real bad shit still happening
namiasdf
If the majority had a brain America you wouldn't have Trump as president.
TobySomething
Here is a more in depth look: http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/net-neutrality-debate/
natepiano
Very good read. Thanks for the share!
joyjumper
Great article!
OverMyDadBody
Before net neutrality in the EU (Hungary), some providers were blocking voip calls on mobile net
insegrevious
Well, VOIP traffic requires priority on congested networks... not sure where NN stood on allowing that for voice traffic..
insegrevious
I am for NN, I'm just stating I do not know what wording was around VOIP.
OverMyDadBody
Let congestion caused quality loss be our problem. If customer wants qos, that could be a righteous charge for it
OverMyDadBody
only of course if they don't fabricate the quality loss to urge qos purchase
insegrevious
Well, this is where we get into the difficulties of 2~ extra seconds of buffering in Netflix vs noticeable voice distortion.
insegrevious
I say noticeable voice distrotion, because voice quality is shit with VOIP compared to landline, but it doesn't generally reduce the exper
RowdyRutabaga
They did the same in the USA. Google Skype and AT&T.
Counterfit
Or AT&T blocking Google Wallet on their phones...
TheBurritoConfederacy
Or AT&T blocking FaceTime from working.
SpreadyUnsettling
Which is hilarious "oh no that bank app takes up way too much data, but here's A YouTube optimized subscription and our own shitty bank app"
TacoBellBelly
Why can’t the Supreme Court step in and say that the FCCs decision is unconstitutional and doesn’t allow for free media to the public??
TheBurritoConfederacy
First a court case would actually have to go through several lesser courts and appeals before it could reach the SCOTUS.
JamesBluntThatSmartassCunt
Shame they dumped it off to the FTC. (Federal Trading Commission)
ThatWillBuffOut
It may yet. Dozens of States are planning to sue the FCC.
JifLover
It's not unconstitutional. And the supreme court doesn't just step in.
PiggyWobbles
as unpopular as this opinion is it is likely right; courts haven't even agreed that internet is a utility
JifLover
Facts are usually unpopular. Especially on social media.
Counterfit
They have to be sued first. The Supreme Court doesn't just jump in whenever they want.
cattoebeans
The First Amendment only applies to government restrictions on speech. Repealing NN doesn't led to any additional *government* restrictions.
cattoebeans
If the states are going to win their suit, it's going to be on some procedural irregularity that violated the Administrative Procedures Act.
SometimesISayDumbShit
While I get his/her point, why does it matter what reason people are fight the repeal of NN? It’s a flat out wrong thing to do. If I am...
JolietJakester
I think we should start using "singular they". No more his/her
hawkeye23
Because if they lie about the reasons it is bad they are LYING and LYING is also wrong.
Boluba
Yes what does the truth matter? As long as it happens to follow your own agenda you dont need to know it! Ignorance to the people!
OrangeFlavours
Because at it's core, it's a political issue, and spouting bullshit to get people to vote your way for a political issue is wrong?
PitWolf87
It's what politicians do and we are not politicians we are better.
PitWolf87
Or at least we should be.
PirateRubberDuck
As long as politicians think the public is ignorant and gullible, they get away with doing what they want. This is the same everywhere.
PitWolf87
Well yes but have you seen the average person. That is the the dumbest waste of breathable air I have ever seen. In any country.
OrangeFlavours
I mean, that's the point of politicians, right? Shit's too complicated for normal people to care, they simplify it by representing us 1/2
OrangeFlavours
2/2 and caring for us. Not exactly what their role is meant to be, but it's what it ended up being.
Shohanna
Exactly why Trump is sitting in the goddamned WH. **smdh**
SlightlyRelatedToThePost
Because if you spout wrong information, you give your opponent ammunition to use against you and pick apart your argument.
mambypambyland
Because people shouldn’t be ignorant just because they agree with something.
WeaponizedJerk
Because he doesn’t like false information being spread.
PrincessDonaldTrumpBANNED2
Because we sound like a bunch of fucking ignorant children by bitching about the wrong thing. Which is exactly what they are seeing this as
PrincessDonaldTrumpBANNED2
We are bitching about stuff found to be illegal BEFORE the internet was put as a title II under the telecommunications act. This repeal is
PrincessDonaldTrumpBANNED2
putting the internet back the way it was before 2015... and every case being brought up were cases found to be illegal before 2015.
kidfropro
Because that's the same reasoning Republicans used to vote for Trump. You don't want the devil on your side, even if he's fighting for you.
Terminology
Because misinformation and propaganda is abhorrent. It would make us no better than Trump's fake news. We all think we're right.
SometimesISayDumbShit
Fighting the same thing that someone else is also fighting, is why they’re fighting it, I just know we’re on the same side so fuck it.
tesserax
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/08/b6/06/08b6064df605859767870d321c2b4482.jpg
Gorzine
If you are fighting for the wrong reason and that reason can easily be taken away then you won't be fighting for long.
SometimesISayDumbShit
yes but there is more than one reason to continue fighting.
Minnakht
Because a large part of the fight is spreading the word, and it seems wrong to misinform others just to get them on your side.
SometimesISayDumbShit
if they're already on your side though, then is it misinformation to get them on your side?
Velonici
But its not misinforming people. The whole they can charge for access to certain site is a real threat as well.
Minnakht
Yes, but wrongly applied to popular sites in the examples. Charging for access to news not biased a certain way the ISPs like, that's bad
OrangeFlavours
But it's unlikely, based off all the countries that don't have NN, and saying "Pay 15 bucks to pay reddit" isnt gonna happen.
PrincessDonaldTrumpBANNED2
No, this isn't repealing net neutrality as a whole. Its removing the article from the internet and repealing it to pre201t
PrincessDonaldTrumpBANNED2
2015*. Which charging for access was already deemed illegal under its previous classification
GhostofBillyMays
In Portugal they charge just for snapchat or Google. Also neglecting to mention they could altogether halt access to competitors..
ThatWillBuffOut
The EU protects net neutrality. The Portugal thing is fake news. https://www.snopes.com/portugal-net-neutrality/
mardukkur
If you read that whole article I think snopes is actually wrong about this. Zero-rating has the exact same effect on user as charging more.
TheZulthar
Yeah ive seen posts showing it from places thar dont have NN and they have to pay for certain website packages
LastElf
That's for data cap free usage, not to use it at all. Smaller countries get charged for international bandwidth. Since these services 1/2
mardukkur
That's zero-rating and it's the exact functional equivalent of charging for the service directly.
LastElf
Primarily exist in the US it gets very expensive to "import" Netflix if your country doesn't have its own CDN. Mobile infrastructure is 2/3
LastElf
Expensive too, which is why you see similar data caps on US mobile plans 3/3
GhostofBillyMays
The problem is Paid pretending that corporations will do the right thing, which isn't there nature.
LastElf
I wasn't debating that, the US residential infrastructure is trash, I was just providing info about how other countries have to pay for it
LastElf
2/2 the country using more than it sends has to pay a fee to the companies that own the undersea cables, a problem the US doesn't have
LastElf
I'm in Australia, we get hosed by ISPs because everything we use is hosted in the US and the cabling can't keep up, thus monthly data caps
GhostofBillyMays
Oh you're good mate, we all are just sad inside since we're all kinda forced into this net neutrality, I'm not mad, just sad. http://i.imgur
SpaceballsTheComment
https://www.snopes.com/portugal-net-neutrality/
cerbis
Thank you for linking this. Net neutrality is vital, but let's not drag Portugal in the dirt.
CardboardPizzas
Fucking THANK YOU.
PreviousNameWasStalkable
Not true. It's for mobile internet, nothing else. Source: I lived there. When at home or public wifi, I did whatever the hell I pleased
mardukkur
Of course other than wireless Portugal does have to abide by NN rules. Without NN any connection could be treated this way.
GhostofBillyMays
Right, so Verizon wouldn't do what they just did and let you pay $10 extra for more data cap, then slowly integrate favorite websites.
rpgmjay
Lies. This only applies to mobile charges
toimiski
EU
somepersondoingsomethings
Those are mobile providers.
VictusVonGuyver
the trade off is that internet speeds in Portugal tend to be better than the US, but then again, a lot of countries have faster speeds.
Ryssaroori
Well shit, how could you have let this happen, Portugal? Are other EU countries next on the line?
kworzora
Those packages are for free traffic within those apps. you pay a monthly fee and don't pay anything else. And it's regarding mobile data.
TobySomething
Doesn't HTTPS prevent traffic between your computer and the website from being inspected by your ISP?
iamthecanadian
Yes - until it's decrypted which is possible.
laDisparitionDesHeures
Sure, that was a bit fallacious. The correct analogy is for the postman to see which department the letter is addressed to.
TheBurritoConfederacy
The content of the traffic may have some protection, but they still know every site you are visiting and can still throttle/block.
lordblc
Not even by a longshot.. Hardware exist to decrypt, analyze and filter HTTPS at line speed up to 40 gbps easy..
Counterfit
Not going to work if you don't have the right certificates on that hardware.
lordblc
Guess again... http://ow.ly/1VIS30hi9px
TheBurritoConfederacy
The CA system is a joke and fake certs have been caught being issued numerous times by actual cert authorities.
GRex2595
You can create fake certs, but that doesn't allow you to decrypt real certs. You'd have to set up a man in the middle DNS cache poison attac
Counterfit
Which is why I don't use ISP DNS servers