I hope you know that there won't be anyone ranting on "Tweeter" because they can't afford the Social bundle. --- Post updated --- Also, this could cause an economical crash, because most companies do business online nowadays.
The internet is not that unfavourable in the internet community.. Imagine having to pay for a website..? Yeah..
I agree on many tints in that post America sucks, it's true, honestly, the government their values the rich and wealthy companies over average citizens, they are openly biased against certain religions, they pick and choose whose me too claims are real, they endorse child molesters and rapists in their office, some are less exist than Saudi princes, and they turn away immigrants as if they are an infectious disease, but, the true topic is net neutrality In all honestly, net neutrality is really going away to save some pretty pennies of the Gouvernment so they can build a wall, an unneeded, waste of resources In the end, this comes down to the fact that large internet companies will take full advantage of this and sadly, it will likely happen fast
I know, but there is a fuck ton of middle class people too. Also I just thought of this, Rob Dyke would have a lot less material Why Would You Put That On The Internet if that would happen because go on any Why Would You Put That On The Internet video, there is going to be some ghetto ass or white trash tweets. Well some website do that most of the time porn sites, but still. Also I think the cheapest bundle would get you, Google, YouTube, Twitter, Facebook, any real popular as hell sites.
1. Offensive 2. There is going to be bundles for each. Google and Yahoo will be put in a "Browsing" bundle, along with all the other 3rd party browsers. YouTube, Twitter, Facebook, and the others will be put in a "Social" bundle. Discord, Steam, and other popular gaming websites will be in a "Gaming" bundle. (Along with online gameplay access). There is going to be, like I said, most likely an overpriced "Entire Internet" bundle, which would give you access to less popular sites like the BeamNG forums.
1.) But it's true. 2.) If we're unlucky that can happen, but in the business world that would be fuckin' stupid, the internet isn't like medicine, where you can jack up the price and people will still buy it because they need it, it's more like TVs, we all love them, but we don't need them. You see. I say what ever you pay now for your internet would be the full bundle, while the cheapest might be like 10 bucks.
This. I swear, you guys think this will bring the world to a halt. It's honestly hard to figure out who's being sarcastic and who isn't.
What? I can't have my own opinion on this if it disagrees with your opinion, that sounds like something a one party government would think.
I live in Eastern Europe so that won't affect me in any way, but so much turmoil has been going on that I decided to look into this thread. If I read one of the first posts correctly, the "Whole Internet Bundle" will cost 30 bucks per month (supposedly). Uh oh, big f-----g deal (and that's coming from someone who is used to eastern european, not american wages).
30 Bucks is very cheap, a full tank of gas for a large middle/small large car is about 30 bucks. But a car would need gas about anywhere in between a week or two, while the internet would be a month, so times 30 by 12 and it's about $360 per year, "Now that's a lot." you may say, but bills are normally in between 200-500 dollars per year.
This will affect us too (from West Europe myself) If an ISP limits the speed of Netflix, because they didn't pay the extra fees we will see Netflix slow down, resulting in lower resolution streams. There are also more indirect ways. Like say Netflix won't pay up and they do slow them down, they might make less money as people switch to other services and we will see less Netflix shows. Some pretty specific examples, but as long as we use American services, and most big internetty services are American, we will definitely notice. Not to mention the effect on the stock market. Most stocks are sold electronically through algorithms. A computer calculates what a stock might do and acts on it. If one of those pc's ping goes up he might act too late and buy stocks when it's at a higher price. Plenty companies sell for countless millions a day this way. If you give an ISP control (even if indirect and very inprecise) over the stock market you're giving them too much power. It's also a way for them to make many billions on those 'extortion fees' from those companies. And I'm sure some politicians residing in the recently 'drained' swamp will take a nice cut too. It's such an obvious scam, but some people eat it up because 'small businesses!' xD
Ok first of all: Everyone acts like ending net neutrality is a bad thing. Consider this: Every single ISP has to load every website at the same speed no matter what. For example, Netflix has to be loaded at he same speed as say, BeamNG.com. The end of net neutrality means that every ISP will have the option to prioritize those more demanding sites, like Neflix. This will mean that ISPs can have faster streaming speeds, because they aren't limited by a law that says they have to load every site at the same speed. The CEO of an ISP has the right to run their company however they like. It is their decision to make. So, if their decision is that they want to make a special internet plan for streaming sites like Netflix, or a special internet plan for people who don't use those services, the ISP can do that. If you don't like that decision, then either quit your subscription to that company, find another ISP, Choose a plan, or don't use the Internet at all. Also, the end of net neutrality means that the ISP can target more people with plans that are more relevant to the customer. This means that the ISP is not stuck offering some bundle-in-one package with TV and Internet. This means that the ISP can offer a plan to the customers who want to watch TV, or another plan for those who only want Internet, or a plan that has everything.
it seems like you kinda proved why ending net neutrality is indeed a bad thing lol also not everyone can change ISPs because some places you only have one option (like where we used to live)
I have to admit that after reading several responses from the (obviously) younger fellows on this forum, I really am having doubts, who actually "won" the ColdWar. Because so much socialism I have only seen during democratic presidental election rallies. Seriously, all of you 90's kids should re-read the thing(s) you have written here; and compare them with Marxism-Leninism. You sound exactly like that. You should also know, that this way of thinking literally destroyed many countries. If in doubt, just go to duckduckgo.com and look up recent news from Venezuela. It is very disturbing picture, I tell ya'. This happens if this way of thinking goes too far and makes it into upper political structure(s) of -any- country, including USA. I am not afraid to say, that most of you are living personification of everything, that Joseph Raymond McCarthy was fighting against. The hypocrisy of some of you, however, goes even further. There is right now absolutely no credible reason to panic about "what ifs" when (and IF) the so called NetNeutrality would be repealed. Most of you have been silent during last EIGHT years when your taxes went up, most of you were silent when your health care costs raised from hundreds to thousands, most of you were silent when your national debt was skyrocketing (up to 105% GDP - look it up) .... but now, most of you, will have to pay about ten dollars more monthly, to get "neutral" internet access. If. The most funny thing is, none of you probably have any clue about these numbers, because -none- of you actually had to pay any of this nor fill out tax forms, but your parents have to. Or are you perhaps one of the "entitled" and state pays it all for you? You still are not capable of understanding the principle, that Internet might be free (and neutral), but you are paying for access to it. That is indeed a paid service. None of the metallic lines, wireless signal towers, optical cables, servers, hubs ... none of this infrastructure belongs to you. Not a single screw. You have literally no right to decide what will happen with it. The ISP is a private company, as a private company it has right to decide, what terms of service it will offer to customer. And you, as a customer, have the right to ... refuse or accept. And there it ends. At least it should, but I still see and feel that some of you have the need to regulate, to dictate way of how something "has to be", but ... from what title? Who holds you back from starting your own ISP company? Who does?
Here's what you're forgetting: not everybody in the United States can afford such an increase in price, so it wouldn't be cheap to them. You'll have a group that can easily afford it, and then there will be another group that can't. That's what they want you to believe. The FCC wants you to think that Net Neutrality is the devil and that we should all want it gone. I know so far they've succeeded with some people, and I feel bad for those people. Another article you might find interesting. https://finance.yahoo.com/news/more-republicans-congress-criticize-fcc-200445389.html And here's some comments from this article that I'll highlight.
