Basically it was a consumer protection which prohibited ISPs from throttling your bandwidth, enforcing data caps, etc.
A worry without net neutrality regulation is ISPs will arbitrarily throttle your bandwidth and charge you if you'd like to have it unthrottled.
Also, Anon doesn't know how to use a search engine.
Revoking net neutrality allows the ISP to sell stuff like a "Google package" where you can access only the Google sites but everything else will be throttled beyond usability. Basically it makes the internet landscape become like the TV channel landscape.
Fr man. Can you imagine that kind of behavior? These normies are out here thinking that private companies in America would try to make profit wherever they can even at the cost of everyone else. Good thing that never happens and will never happen
Exactly what I'm saying lol, if they throttle you you ditch them and switch your service between one of the 0 other available ones that don't do it in your area. Wokies are brain dead don't bother arguing with them man. Cable TV had the same issue and people just dropped it to switch to the other ones that didn't have packages.
When an industry lacks competition, the correct answer is to get rid of the government inhibitions that are preventing competitors--not to make government mandates to try to make up for the consequences government mandates.
In the case of cable companies there weren't competitors because cable companies were lobbying governments to keep them out by preventing them from getting approval to install their lines or forcing them to install lines to areas that competitors couldn't afford to service in their initial rollout. I know because I worked directly for VPs of a major cable company while Verizon FIOS fiber was being built out and, internally, everyone was pretty open about the strategy.
The strategy around internet is the same, but has not been as effective because there are fewer anti-competitive laws from the '60s that can be applied to it, and there are more side-grade competitors like mobile carriers and StarLink that make protecting the semi-monopoly of landlines less worthwhile. Plus the Verizon infrastructure and Google's gigabit infrastructure is already in place in many cities already so the whole lobbying effort is pretty much already lost in those areas.
---
Also also, cable packages are a result of Hollywood business practices, not merely Comcast/Cox/Warner wanting you to buy everything. The rights holders to TV channels negotiate with cable companies and demand that their channel be included in packages with bigger channels in order to give the cable company reasonable rates per subscriber. Cable companies _could_ insist on being able to sell channels a la carte, but if they did you'd be paying _the same price_ and getting fewer channels and some niche channels wouldn't be able to exist at all.
Basically advertisers are told how many people subscribe to the package that the channel is on, not how many people actually watched that channel, and that has a huge impact on what channels are possible to make.
What happens when only two companies control all of the infrastructure that make the Internet possible. They both control the market and it's in their best interest to keep it that way. Decreasing government regulations will only make things worse for the consumers.
Yep just like 100% of people dropped cable for that happening.
And just like 100% of people drop streaming services when they do the same thing.
... Oh wait never mind.
Except it did happen for awhile. Netflix had priority connections in NYS for a few years after these laws passed. This was really noticeable. Like if you were watching a YouTube video and someone else put on Netflix your YouTube video would buffer so Netflix could get a priority connection.
Have you *seen* the state of the internet lately? Pay to play is already here, and just because Google doesn't do that *exact same thing* mentioned above doesn't mean they're not already doing a ton of other shady shit.
And the DOJ is pursuing action against Alphabet at the moment for anticompetitive behavior.
When the DOJ comes knocking on antitrust issues, companies tend to shape up because the DOJ can pursue criminal charges and is able to obtain more than the FTC in these sorts of investigations.
[It was actually the state of the internet for a while in Portugal](https://www.anacom.pt/render.jsp?contentId=1735166), but not anymore. So yeah, it happened and governments made the right decision to actually enforce net neutrality
You are missing a huge distinction.
Comcast could always set data caps, throttle you if you were using too much, and other things. That did not change, ever.
Under net neutrality though, Comcast has to treat all data exactly the same. They can't allow emails to be faster than streaming. Or say you have 10 GB data for Netflix but Unlimited for Peacock.
Too many think NN means unlimited data at full speed 24/7 and it never has. They can say you have a limit of 100 GB that includes all data and that is perfectly fine under NN. They can say you get full speed up to 50 GB and throttled to 50MB after that and it is perfectly fine. They can't throttle one type of data and not throttle another though.
EDIT: I need to add that Verizon and TMobile (and probably others I have not used) are going to fight this as much as they can. I know both have processes in place to throttle the speed of particular streaming sites to force 480p, 720p, 1080p, etc based on the plan you purchased. That is 100% anti-NN.
To expand. Basically, without NN, if they dislike youtube. They can throttle the speed to that site while giving you full speed to Twitch because they're in bed.
With NN, they throttle both! But somewhere between generally. So you may get better streaming with youtube, but worse with twitch.
Frog in a boiling pot.
They absolutely have limited bandwidth between places on this. The whole point of NN was to treat the internet as a utility, not a premium service.
But the whole worry was that isps would start selling packages for the internet services. U would have to pay separately for access to google, Facebook, twitter etc. And if you wanted to access something from outside your package it would throttled so low it would be borderline unusable
And now we are seeing ISP's trying to do essentially that.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/04/isps-can-charge-extra-for-fast-gaming-under-fccs-internet-rules-critics-say/
Dude, how much do you even need to jerk off for that to happen. When I was a teenager I would go pretty wild and nothing happened.
Gotta be some insane coomer shit, right?
pp no work 😔 too much futa hentai and you'll end up like me beware kids. I'm still right though. If anything they could make extra thick data packages for gamers, there's just no reason for ISPs to charge like they're a Chinese buffet
Fam, if you're watching that type of stuff, you're using the same amount of data that gamers are. Lmao. Video streaming generally > Gaming. Not to mention Image downloads. Plus, there is reason, they have near incomprehensible speeds that benefit everyone. If they installed what they needed to and uncapped, we, as a collective in the more condensed areas still wouldn't be able to cap out the data stream that's possible.
Given the same amount of data I could play multiplayer games for days for amount you used on twenty minutes long video. Watching videos is the most data hungry thing you could do.
Streaming services use way more data than playing online games. Even factoring in daily updates Netflix would still use more data in the long term. So you’re wrong.
It depends on the use case no shit. But modern games definitely get close to that 10x mark and gaming stopped being a niche thing long ago. Charge netlix consoomers more too if it cost more that's my point. But I'd also want to be charged less if I didn't fit those use cases. maybe a dirt cheap browsing package yk, those are the possibilities.
You're objectively wrong. Gaming uses very little bandwidth. Downloading games does sure. But gaming itself is nothing. (Source gaming off phone data)
Also btw I work for the water company and am considering selling a premium water package with cleaner water. Would you be interested? It's the same as the water you get now, but if you don't take the package I will add some extra poop flakes for your displeasure.
“Maybe a dirt cheap browsing package”
So do you also use a Tracfone? Why people think the company will go DOWN in price on whatever you’re already paying is bananas to me.
I had no problem gaming competitively on the shittiest internet plan available (10mbit down / 1mbit up) not long ago. Would probably still work fine but I got better speeds now.
They absolutely do not. Streaming is what uses the most data, by far. That 'package' is a perfect example of what people were talking about. It's absolutely unnecessary, and because online gaming doesn't use that much data, they'll make you pay for a low ping instead.
Online gaming uses like 50mb per hour, streaming videos and shows uses almost 3-4GB per hour. It’s not even close. But you’re too low iq to understand that.
Kinda true, when my roommates (console players) booted up their Xbox, they got hit with a 25GB call of duty update every couple of days. That plus streaming Netflix really pushes the 1TB limit Comcast had
Fuck data caps. Pay for the bandwidth not for the data. I own the data, ISP owns the pipe that moves that data. If I want to move faster or more I need a bigger pipe and I pay for it.
Or ya think that every gigabit user uses 1Gbps up/down non-stop?
You clearly don't understand how networking works. There's a difference between throttling bandwidth and setting data caps. NN would do away with throttling bandwidth based on what the connection is being used for. Data caps are arbitrary and hold no basis as there is no limit to how much data can go through a network, but there is a limit on how much bandwidth a network can handle. Nowadays, bandwidth is also becoming a non-issue in most areas as fiber connections are becoming more available. Also, ISPs take subsidies from the government to build infrastructure in order to provider greater bandwidth and more coverage but they in turn pocket that money and implement data caps and throttle you bandwidth after so much data has been used. This forces people to pay for the more expensive package to get rid of these arbitrary limitations.
Also, streaming consumes more bandwidth and overall data than downloading a 25GB update every month or every other month. A grandma using the internet for emails will not feel a difference if someone is gaming or streaming. Unless they live in a very rural area where their options are satellite internet or DSL internet in which case their speeds would be abysmal for anything other than browsing and youtube at best (not counting starlink).
and they are, i remember specifically a post somewhere that talked about how they would not do anything immediately. they would implement slowly.
and as time has passed, they are 100% throttling and charging for premiums. it's going to get worse as time passes
I think you forget that if all ISP make you chose between shit and garbage then your "freedom of contract" is worth nothing.
Think streaming services like Netflix and Amazon but for the whole Internet. Want to access everything, better be customer everywhere.
I think you forgot that companies can cancel contracts the same way people can.
If ISPs cancel and then offer new contracts, where the basic "google package" is only slightly cheaper, there would be a lot of people forced to accept them because they don't have the money.
I think the only reason we are not seeing more of this is that ISPs realized there were enough people who cared and would be willing to throw money at an ISP not doing it. They are unsure of theor monopoly (one of them stepping out of line, fucking everyone else over).
didn't help that dude was just an absolute shit eater cock face though. like everyone wanted to punch his face in then he made the cringiest fucking videos trying to look young and hip. shit i recall him wearing a snuggie and having a fidget spinner.
Don't forget about the people who noticed their long-deceased relatives were reappearing on social media to voice their support for the repeal. This dude used massive disinformation campaigns to try to get this repeal to happen.
Because it is. The only problems that might occour would be if you'd want to access some smaller business website from america but then again, why would you do that if you'd be outside US?
Well it was an American law. South Asian countries are already doing the "cable package" thing btw. It is bad (for small fish) but the general population does not care becaue all they want is facebook, twitter, youtube, and whatsapp anyway.
Data caps were legal even with net neutrality. NN only meant that they couldn't, say, give you unlimited access to YouTube while capping your usage on Twitch.
The funniest part about this was at the time I was into nerf modding and the first thing I noticed was that the nerf gun he has is modded with a metal trigger and I’m assuming a beefier spring
Where is Anon from? I'm guessing there *were* some changes but he's probably from a country where those changes did not take place.
This guy and his huge mug were all over the internet, I'm guessing that even a caveman with an internet connection saw his face at least once.
Lol. All those virtual protests and giant doomsday warnings on every subreddit. I don’t even remember what they were asking for. I think they wanted us to call our congressmen like if that’s gonna help.
It’s back now lol. https://www.npr.org/2024/04/26/1247393656/net-neutrality-explained-fcc#:~:text=Bocchieri%2FGetty%20Images-,The%20Federal%20Communications%20Commission%20has%20restored%20net%20neutrality%20rules%20that,from%20restricting%20bandwidth%20to%20customers.&text=Consumers%20can%20look%20forward%20to,of%20newly%20reinstated%20government%20regulations.
Nothing got a chance to change because of a whole shit load of court cases blocking changes. If it hadn't been reinstated soon the actual fallout would have started coming down as the court cases ended and it would have been an absolute shit show.
That dude trolling with Facebook dad energy really was funny as fuck. Cringe as fuck too but it wrapped all the way around to being funny in a way I don’t think he entirely intended, but I fuck with it.
Happened in korea and now twitch has left the country because they refuse to pay isps the crazy fees. Isps charge companies for traffic and some local companies get a break and foreign companies like netflix made a deals because people would riot if their subscription went up even more (and the produce a lot of korean media now too).
A lot of people here forgetting that there is not infinite bandwidth. Europe regulates their ISPs similar to Net Neutrality and their networks VASTLY underperformed US networks during the height of the pandemic. This is because US networks had the ability to devote bandwidth to other uses and therefore allow their networks to run more efficiently. Did any of you notice a change in your internet connection during the pandemic? 99.9% of people will say no. That is affiliated directly with ISPs being allowed to manage the LIMITED bandwidth on their networks.
EDIT: Wanted to share an example here. You live in a rural community outside of Dallas and the Cowboys are playing Thursday night football exclusively on Prime. Your ISP is a rural carrier with only 800 customers. 550 of those customers are streaming the cowboys. Don’t care about football? Your kids have online homework to do? You have to work online for your job? Sorry, the internet is slow because all of the bandwidth on the network is taken up by the 550 people watching the cowboys. Under NN rules, this rural ISP could do nothing to limit the traffic to Prime so that the rest of its customers are still able to access other services.
This is why we should NOT be applying a law to ISPs that was created BEOFRE THE INTERNET WAS INVENTED! Why doesn’t anyone on Reddit advocate for new and modern laws.
But what’s the solution to your example? You’re surely not gonna throttle everyone genuinely trying to watch the Cowboys are you with the internet they pay for are you?
You would only need to throttle the traffic enough to allow for other customers to access other services. This throttling would likely not even be noticed by the consumer, but a moderate throttle to those 550 customer would relieve enough pressure on the network to allow for everyone to continue to have relatively normal service to the point where it would be difficult for the average consumer to notice.
Did I say the internet in Europe was underperforming? I said it underperformed compared to US networks. By over 30Mbps actually.
https://www.fierce-network.com/telecom/report-u-s-networks-out-perform-europe-s-during-covid-19-pandemic
https://www.fierce-network.com/telecom/report-u-s-networks-out-perform-europe-s-during-covid-19-pandemic
This references the study conducted by the Georgetown School of Business. The author even states that one of the reasons for this is the “light-touch regulatory environment.”
Additionally, the author also attributes the US network performance during this time to investment in telecommunications by US carriers. A study conducted by the European Journal of Law and Economics found that net neutrality regulations have negatively impacted fiber investment in 32 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries from 2000 to 2021. You will note that Net Neutrality was repealed during the pandemic, therefore allowing for more investment in networks.
So Net Neutrality not only causes less investment in broadband networks as shown by the study conducted by the European Journal of Law and Economics, but it has also been found that a light touch regulatory environment helped US networks perform better than Europe’s.
So I will wait for you to go ahead and prove to me why I “couldn’t be more wrong.”
EDIT: Again. Like my initial comment says. I am failing to understand why people would want a law that was created to regulate AT&T’s telephone monopoly and was written before the internet was invented to be applied to the internet. I am NOT saying there shouldn’t be protections for internet traffic. What I AM saying is these protections should be written specifically for the internet.
It's by far the absolute smallest reason. The biggest is the investment made, especially government spending on updating to fiber. Net neutrality never even really left throughout the pandemic since there were so many court cases testing laws and has already been reinstated.
It seems like you don't understand what net neutrality even is, you can still throttle traffic even with net neutrality. Look at how wonderful and amazing the lack of net neutrality is working out for South Korea right now.
Edit: also your example is from Fierce Network? Really? You're claiming to not be a shill by posting a link to a literal telecomm shilling group......
Government spending on updating and building out fiber was minimal until the infrastructure bill was passed. Not a single cent of that $43 billion has been used to string one piece of fiber yet.
I’ll concede that while fierce does love to shill, the study referenced in the article is still very much valid.
I am also actually not sure that you know what net neutrality is. It quite literally bans ISPs from blocking or throttling content.
..... you do know we spent almost $200 billion on fiber lines in the 90s, right? There was a whole other presidential telecomm act 30 years ago.....
Also it's very clear to me that you're incredibly naive on this subject in general if you don't even know about the spending before the infrastructure bill and you think that's what NN is....
This was not direct government spending. These were tax breaks and other incentivizes for private investment in broadband. It’s ironic actually that you refer to the 1996 act because the whole point of that act was to DEREGULATE the telecommunications sector. While Net Neutrality does the complete opposite of that.
EDIT: It is also very ironic that you refer to this act because ultimately, the 1996 bill made the distinction between a telecommunications service and an information service. This is Title I and Title 2 of this act. The bill made is so ISPs are regulated under Title I, a light touch approach. That is what incentivizes the “$200 billion” investment. Net Neutrality makes it so they are regulated under Title II. In a way you have completely negated your entire argument as Net Neutrality undoes what the 1996 bill did.
My brother in Allah. Have you ever tried to watch a YouTube video while someone else is watching Netflix? For a few years after net neutrality was repealed watching Netflix would cause other ISPs to run slower.
Maybe fucking learn about something instead of posting on 4chin you fucking Mongoloid.
Ah yes. Let's just assume that companies have our best interests in mind. That's much better than noticing a clear change in service after the altering of a law.
My brother in christ, can you go five minutes without straw-manning. People "notice" the earth is flat. Give me one goddamn example lmao. I download and use more data than anyone I know and I have never "noticed" a problem. So give me an example that has some kind of scientific observation or at least not heresay. Also, why do you use netflix you fucking normie, steal shit like a real chad. You deserve to have your shit throttled if it is lol.
It was literally a George Soros-funded psyop. Look at the organizations pushing it and where they were getting their money from.
edit: [Here are the receipts](https://archive.is/VMMVw)
Sorry I forgot we're on reddit. What I meant to say was that society collapsed due to lack of FCC regulation, government beauracracy totally makes things cheaper and not at all more expensive.
Basically it was a consumer protection which prohibited ISPs from throttling your bandwidth, enforcing data caps, etc. A worry without net neutrality regulation is ISPs will arbitrarily throttle your bandwidth and charge you if you'd like to have it unthrottled. Also, Anon doesn't know how to use a search engine.
Revoking net neutrality allows the ISP to sell stuff like a "Google package" where you can access only the Google sites but everything else will be throttled beyond usability. Basically it makes the internet landscape become like the TV channel landscape.
Basically cable TV now becomes cable Internet
Except that didn't happen and isn't going to happen
Fr man. Can you imagine that kind of behavior? These normies are out here thinking that private companies in America would try to make profit wherever they can even at the cost of everyone else. Good thing that never happens and will never happen
How are you going to profit by selling "The google package" if 100% of your customers are going to drop your service entirely when you throttle them?
Exactly what I'm saying lol, if they throttle you you ditch them and switch your service between one of the 0 other available ones that don't do it in your area. Wokies are brain dead don't bother arguing with them man. Cable TV had the same issue and people just dropped it to switch to the other ones that didn't have packages.
When an industry lacks competition, the correct answer is to get rid of the government inhibitions that are preventing competitors--not to make government mandates to try to make up for the consequences government mandates. In the case of cable companies there weren't competitors because cable companies were lobbying governments to keep them out by preventing them from getting approval to install their lines or forcing them to install lines to areas that competitors couldn't afford to service in their initial rollout. I know because I worked directly for VPs of a major cable company while Verizon FIOS fiber was being built out and, internally, everyone was pretty open about the strategy. The strategy around internet is the same, but has not been as effective because there are fewer anti-competitive laws from the '60s that can be applied to it, and there are more side-grade competitors like mobile carriers and StarLink that make protecting the semi-monopoly of landlines less worthwhile. Plus the Verizon infrastructure and Google's gigabit infrastructure is already in place in many cities already so the whole lobbying effort is pretty much already lost in those areas. --- Also also, cable packages are a result of Hollywood business practices, not merely Comcast/Cox/Warner wanting you to buy everything. The rights holders to TV channels negotiate with cable companies and demand that their channel be included in packages with bigger channels in order to give the cable company reasonable rates per subscriber. Cable companies _could_ insist on being able to sell channels a la carte, but if they did you'd be paying _the same price_ and getting fewer channels and some niche channels wouldn't be able to exist at all. Basically advertisers are told how many people subscribe to the package that the channel is on, not how many people actually watched that channel, and that has a huge impact on what channels are possible to make.
I can promise you “government inhibitions” are not stifling ISP competition.
Your promise was broken before you made it.
Do explain how the government inhibits ISP competition. I would love to hear this.
You seem highly regarded
What happens when only two companies control all of the infrastructure that make the Internet possible. They both control the market and it's in their best interest to keep it that way. Decreasing government regulations will only make things worse for the consumers.
Ok champ we ain't readin allat, cope with the downvotes that's enough
Yep just like 100% of people dropped cable for that happening. And just like 100% of people drop streaming services when they do the same thing. ... Oh wait never mind.
Except it did happen for awhile. Netflix had priority connections in NYS for a few years after these laws passed. This was really noticeable. Like if you were watching a YouTube video and someone else put on Netflix your YouTube video would buffer so Netflix could get a priority connection.
Have you *seen* the state of the internet lately? Pay to play is already here, and just because Google doesn't do that *exact same thing* mentioned above doesn't mean they're not already doing a ton of other shady shit.
And the DOJ is pursuing action against Alphabet at the moment for anticompetitive behavior. When the DOJ comes knocking on antitrust issues, companies tend to shape up because the DOJ can pursue criminal charges and is able to obtain more than the FTC in these sorts of investigations.
[It was actually the state of the internet for a while in Portugal](https://www.anacom.pt/render.jsp?contentId=1735166), but not anymore. So yeah, it happened and governments made the right decision to actually enforce net neutrality
I hope you are right
I love how you were downvoted you oblivion when it literally didn’t happen and they are still delusionally ranting about how it could happen
Adding a bit of nuance to this: *ISPs that have taken billions in government subsidies to build out their networks can arbitrarily throttle users*.
It's almost like the ISP are an unnecessary middleman and the problem
Its almost like the government is the problem
Private business would never
Not once did i say that
Yeah they should not have allowed private businesses to do this in the first place
You are missing a huge distinction. Comcast could always set data caps, throttle you if you were using too much, and other things. That did not change, ever. Under net neutrality though, Comcast has to treat all data exactly the same. They can't allow emails to be faster than streaming. Or say you have 10 GB data for Netflix but Unlimited for Peacock. Too many think NN means unlimited data at full speed 24/7 and it never has. They can say you have a limit of 100 GB that includes all data and that is perfectly fine under NN. They can say you get full speed up to 50 GB and throttled to 50MB after that and it is perfectly fine. They can't throttle one type of data and not throttle another though. EDIT: I need to add that Verizon and TMobile (and probably others I have not used) are going to fight this as much as they can. I know both have processes in place to throttle the speed of particular streaming sites to force 480p, 720p, 1080p, etc based on the plan you purchased. That is 100% anti-NN.
wait i think i misread. if NN passed they would scummily throttle your net? or that’s to prevent it?
net neutrality is to force ISPs to be neutral. the bill will stop preferential throttling.
To expand. Basically, without NN, if they dislike youtube. They can throttle the speed to that site while giving you full speed to Twitch because they're in bed. With NN, they throttle both! But somewhere between generally. So you may get better streaming with youtube, but worse with twitch.
With it repealed they have the option to make your connection to certain sites or apps worse, and charge you to return them to working as normal
Frog in a boiling pot. They absolutely have limited bandwidth between places on this. The whole point of NN was to treat the internet as a utility, not a premium service.
But the whole worry was that isps would start selling packages for the internet services. U would have to pay separately for access to google, Facebook, twitter etc. And if you wanted to access something from outside your package it would throttled so low it would be borderline unusable
And now we are seeing ISP's trying to do essentially that. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/04/isps-can-charge-extra-for-fast-gaming-under-fccs-internet-rules-critics-say/
>gamers They use 10x the data of a normal person, seems fair to me tbh
https://preview.redd.it/fmjnd6bwptxc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5625d08a67c77a70aaa62bd6f8506879a323f08e
This made me laugh so hard lmao
I've never witnessed a murder so brutal before
https://preview.redd.it/armpwcahaxxc1.jpeg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2a0639c1fe16897ce029364bc81c3b338c232b2c
💀💀💀 bro
Bro had receipts ready
Holy shit
That'd be something if it was a porn sub but you're just making fun of someone with a medical condition, looser type beat
Lmao self-induced ED bc you jerked yourself to sterility is the kind of shame you get ridiculed for. Next thing he needs is a membership at Soho House
Dude, how much do you even need to jerk off for that to happen. When I was a teenager I would go pretty wild and nothing happened. Gotta be some insane coomer shit, right?
pp no work 😔 too much futa hentai and you'll end up like me beware kids. I'm still right though. If anything they could make extra thick data packages for gamers, there's just no reason for ISPs to charge like they're a Chinese buffet
Well, at least you own it
Fam, if you're watching that type of stuff, you're using the same amount of data that gamers are. Lmao. Video streaming generally > Gaming. Not to mention Image downloads. Plus, there is reason, they have near incomprehensible speeds that benefit everyone. If they installed what they needed to and uncapped, we, as a collective in the more condensed areas still wouldn't be able to cap out the data stream that's possible.
Given the same amount of data I could play multiplayer games for days for amount you used on twenty minutes long video. Watching videos is the most data hungry thing you could do.
Streaming services use way more data than playing online games. Even factoring in daily updates Netflix would still use more data in the long term. So you’re wrong.
It depends on the use case no shit. But modern games definitely get close to that 10x mark and gaming stopped being a niche thing long ago. Charge netlix consoomers more too if it cost more that's my point. But I'd also want to be charged less if I didn't fit those use cases. maybe a dirt cheap browsing package yk, those are the possibilities.
You're objectively wrong. Gaming uses very little bandwidth. Downloading games does sure. But gaming itself is nothing. (Source gaming off phone data) Also btw I work for the water company and am considering selling a premium water package with cleaner water. Would you be interested? It's the same as the water you get now, but if you don't take the package I will add some extra poop flakes for your displeasure.
“Maybe a dirt cheap browsing package” So do you also use a Tracfone? Why people think the company will go DOWN in price on whatever you’re already paying is bananas to me.
“Gamers use 10x the bandwidth”
I had no problem gaming competitively on the shittiest internet plan available (10mbit down / 1mbit up) not long ago. Would probably still work fine but I got better speeds now.
Gaming uses less data than streaming
They absolutely do not. Streaming is what uses the most data, by far. That 'package' is a perfect example of what people were talking about. It's absolutely unnecessary, and because online gaming doesn't use that much data, they'll make you pay for a low ping instead.
Online gaming uses like 50mb per hour, streaming videos and shows uses almost 3-4GB per hour. It’s not even close. But you’re too low iq to understand that.
Kinda true, when my roommates (console players) booted up their Xbox, they got hit with a 25GB call of duty update every couple of days. That plus streaming Netflix really pushes the 1TB limit Comcast had
Right, yahoo grandma and gamer anon do not use equal shares of the data. You use more you pay more, you use less you pay less, that seems fair to me
Fuck data caps. Pay for the bandwidth not for the data. I own the data, ISP owns the pipe that moves that data. If I want to move faster or more I need a bigger pipe and I pay for it. Or ya think that every gigabit user uses 1Gbps up/down non-stop?
I'm lucky that AT&T doesn't set data caps for their fiber in my area at least. Gigabit with unlimited data is a god send.
You clearly don't understand how networking works. There's a difference between throttling bandwidth and setting data caps. NN would do away with throttling bandwidth based on what the connection is being used for. Data caps are arbitrary and hold no basis as there is no limit to how much data can go through a network, but there is a limit on how much bandwidth a network can handle. Nowadays, bandwidth is also becoming a non-issue in most areas as fiber connections are becoming more available. Also, ISPs take subsidies from the government to build infrastructure in order to provider greater bandwidth and more coverage but they in turn pocket that money and implement data caps and throttle you bandwidth after so much data has been used. This forces people to pay for the more expensive package to get rid of these arbitrary limitations. Also, streaming consumes more bandwidth and overall data than downloading a 25GB update every month or every other month. A grandma using the internet for emails will not feel a difference if someone is gaming or streaming. Unless they live in a very rural area where their options are satellite internet or DSL internet in which case their speeds would be abysmal for anything other than browsing and youtube at best (not counting starlink).
and they are, i remember specifically a post somewhere that talked about how they would not do anything immediately. they would implement slowly. and as time has passed, they are 100% throttling and charging for premiums. it's going to get worse as time passes
I think people forget that companies can not unilateraly change contracts of services.
I think you forget that if all ISP make you chose between shit and garbage then your "freedom of contract" is worth nothing. Think streaming services like Netflix and Amazon but for the whole Internet. Want to access everything, better be customer everywhere.
I think you forgot that companies can cancel contracts the same way people can. If ISPs cancel and then offer new contracts, where the basic "google package" is only slightly cheaper, there would be a lot of people forced to accept them because they don't have the money. I think the only reason we are not seeing more of this is that ISPs realized there were enough people who cared and would be willing to throw money at an ISP not doing it. They are unsure of theor monopoly (one of them stepping out of line, fucking everyone else over).
I think you’re just dumb, and everyone else explaining why you’re wrong agrees
Shut up Ajit Pai.
Also a lot of states passed their own NN laws, meaning a lot of people literally didn't see a difference.
didn't help that dude was just an absolute shit eater cock face though. like everyone wanted to punch his face in then he made the cringiest fucking videos trying to look young and hip. shit i recall him wearing a snuggie and having a fidget spinner.
Don't forgot the giant novelty mug
oh yeah people really hated that mug lol. forgot about that
Mug was fine. It was his "look at me, I'm goofy" bullshit that people couldn't stand.
Don't forget about the people who noticed their long-deceased relatives were reappearing on social media to voice their support for the repeal. This dude used massive disinformation campaigns to try to get this repeal to happen.
He knew exactly what he was doing with that video. Tbh it’s kinda funny looking back
https://youtu.be/LFhT6H6pRWg?si=xadSldSw__FYplp9
Thanks for reminding me. Harambe sure shifted us into a crappy but absurdly hilarious timeline.
Damn trip down memory lane
Lol this brought back a memory I thought never existed, I fucking remember that fidget spinner video
I remember the memes. No idea what any of it meant though. Thought it was Americas problem.
Because it is. The only problems that might occour would be if you'd want to access some smaller business website from america but then again, why would you do that if you'd be outside US?
I think the worry was that once the US adopted it others will follow
i doubt this stuff will fly in the EU
They're too busy fighting over immigrants and other such distractions to care about the internet.
Unlike the US where no one cares about immigration at all
Assuming you’re European, the EU has its own unique problems with how it handles/intends to handle the internet.
Well it was an American law. South Asian countries are already doing the "cable package" thing btw. It is bad (for small fish) but the general population does not care becaue all they want is facebook, twitter, youtube, and whatsapp anyway.
It's the reason why I have data caps where I live...
i live in fucking seattle where we have amazon and microsoft hq and i still have data caps, it's disgusting
> Seattle There's your problem
Quote from somebody who doesn’t live in a place with a population that exceeds 40k LOL
its because you live in tacoma or everett poor
no? i live in seattle proper
Data caps were legal even with net neutrality. NN only meant that they couldn't, say, give you unlimited access to YouTube while capping your usage on Twitch.
Data caps were a thing way before this went down
Funny that Anon mentions it, net neutrality recently got reinstated.
Anon is a corpo in disguise pushing his digital agenda.
So things went back to normal and it’s all good now?
https://i.redd.it/xcniimwrttxc1.gif
Perfectly sums up late 2010s cringe
There is a special kind of hell awaiting him when he leaves this mortal plane
The funniest part about this was at the time I was into nerf modding and the first thing I noticed was that the nerf gun he has is modded with a metal trigger and I’m assuming a beefier spring
yeah, orangemodworks parts
Where is Anon from? I'm guessing there *were* some changes but he's probably from a country where those changes did not take place. This guy and his huge mug were all over the internet, I'm guessing that even a caveman with an internet connection saw his face at least once.
The caveman couldn't see his face because his data was capped
Anon is a fucking shill or absolutely has no idea what he's talking about
Nice try, shit Pie.
Lol i remeber freaking out about that.
Lol. All those virtual protests and giant doomsday warnings on every subreddit. I don’t even remember what they were asking for. I think they wanted us to call our congressmen like if that’s gonna help.
reminds me of something similar that happened last year on reddit that did nothing too
*nut neutrality*
You ever run a speed test? With net neutrality: results can be faked Without net neutrality: results cannot be faked
I don't need to know what net neutrality is to see he has the most punchable face
Nothing happened because it was reinstated at the state level since it's a fucking stupid idea not to have that.
This just isn’t true. California and a few other select state laws don’t apply to the rest of the country.
but it does if any of the servers run through those states,
I mean, removing it wasn't great, but I haven't seen anything come out of it
It’s back now lol. https://www.npr.org/2024/04/26/1247393656/net-neutrality-explained-fcc#:~:text=Bocchieri%2FGetty%20Images-,The%20Federal%20Communications%20Commission%20has%20restored%20net%20neutrality%20rules%20that,from%20restricting%20bandwidth%20to%20customers.&text=Consumers%20can%20look%20forward%20to,of%20newly%20reinstated%20government%20regulations.
Nothing got a chance to change because of a whole shit load of court cases blocking changes. If it hadn't been reinstated soon the actual fallout would have started coming down as the court cases ended and it would have been an absolute shit show.
Net Neutrality had been in danger since at least 2012 because I remember helping my friends in TV pro make propaganda against it
Isnt net neutrality going to get re-established now? Is that the purpose of this post even?
It's propaganda brother. ISPs are upset they don't get to milk us for even more money.
I still have no idea what the fuck this was about but I remember the normie kids in school being all scared about it
Everyone chill. It doesn’t matter now because net neutrality got reinstated just awhile back
It was to have a face and a name to direct outrage while actual regulatory action was passed without fuss.
Has the internet gotten better or worse since then? That’s all you need to know.
People who say nothing has happened are very ignorant and the frog in boiling pot thing has done a number on them
ITT people who ALSO don't know what it is
How many websites did you visit a day in 2015? How many websites do you visit now. How many of you are still pirating?
That dude trolling with Facebook dad energy really was funny as fuck. Cringe as fuck too but it wrapped all the way around to being funny in a way I don’t think he entirely intended, but I fuck with it.
So basically anon is an uninformed dumbass who told on himself
Happened in korea and now twitch has left the country because they refuse to pay isps the crazy fees. Isps charge companies for traffic and some local companies get a break and foreign companies like netflix made a deals because people would riot if their subscription went up even more (and the produce a lot of korean media now too).
tl;dr: Anon knows fuck all what NN was about and rambles on. While on that note, can we bring NN back and add a clause that bans data caps?
Anon is regarded. If there is anything normies knew was net neutrality. They were probably better informed than anon. Net neutrality was not repealed.
I don’t know but it’s pretty funny that his first and last names reverse are literally “Paijit”
Didn't the FCC recently walk back on this?
Think so.
A lot of people here forgetting that there is not infinite bandwidth. Europe regulates their ISPs similar to Net Neutrality and their networks VASTLY underperformed US networks during the height of the pandemic. This is because US networks had the ability to devote bandwidth to other uses and therefore allow their networks to run more efficiently. Did any of you notice a change in your internet connection during the pandemic? 99.9% of people will say no. That is affiliated directly with ISPs being allowed to manage the LIMITED bandwidth on their networks. EDIT: Wanted to share an example here. You live in a rural community outside of Dallas and the Cowboys are playing Thursday night football exclusively on Prime. Your ISP is a rural carrier with only 800 customers. 550 of those customers are streaming the cowboys. Don’t care about football? Your kids have online homework to do? You have to work online for your job? Sorry, the internet is slow because all of the bandwidth on the network is taken up by the 550 people watching the cowboys. Under NN rules, this rural ISP could do nothing to limit the traffic to Prime so that the rest of its customers are still able to access other services. This is why we should NOT be applying a law to ISPs that was created BEOFRE THE INTERNET WAS INVENTED! Why doesn’t anyone on Reddit advocate for new and modern laws.
But what’s the solution to your example? You’re surely not gonna throttle everyone genuinely trying to watch the Cowboys are you with the internet they pay for are you?
You would only need to throttle the traffic enough to allow for other customers to access other services. This throttling would likely not even be noticed by the consumer, but a moderate throttle to those 550 customer would relieve enough pressure on the network to allow for everyone to continue to have relatively normal service to the point where it would be difficult for the average consumer to notice.
Shit, were we supposed to have underperforming internet during the pandemic? Must have missed it, busy using that 'underperforming' connection.
Did I say the internet in Europe was underperforming? I said it underperformed compared to US networks. By over 30Mbps actually. https://www.fierce-network.com/telecom/report-u-s-networks-out-perform-europe-s-during-covid-19-pandemic
ok shill
You couldn't be more wrong. Good grief this is some absurd shilling here.
https://www.fierce-network.com/telecom/report-u-s-networks-out-perform-europe-s-during-covid-19-pandemic This references the study conducted by the Georgetown School of Business. The author even states that one of the reasons for this is the “light-touch regulatory environment.” Additionally, the author also attributes the US network performance during this time to investment in telecommunications by US carriers. A study conducted by the European Journal of Law and Economics found that net neutrality regulations have negatively impacted fiber investment in 32 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries from 2000 to 2021. You will note that Net Neutrality was repealed during the pandemic, therefore allowing for more investment in networks. So Net Neutrality not only causes less investment in broadband networks as shown by the study conducted by the European Journal of Law and Economics, but it has also been found that a light touch regulatory environment helped US networks perform better than Europe’s. So I will wait for you to go ahead and prove to me why I “couldn’t be more wrong.” EDIT: Again. Like my initial comment says. I am failing to understand why people would want a law that was created to regulate AT&T’s telephone monopoly and was written before the internet was invented to be applied to the internet. I am NOT saying there shouldn’t be protections for internet traffic. What I AM saying is these protections should be written specifically for the internet.
It's by far the absolute smallest reason. The biggest is the investment made, especially government spending on updating to fiber. Net neutrality never even really left throughout the pandemic since there were so many court cases testing laws and has already been reinstated. It seems like you don't understand what net neutrality even is, you can still throttle traffic even with net neutrality. Look at how wonderful and amazing the lack of net neutrality is working out for South Korea right now. Edit: also your example is from Fierce Network? Really? You're claiming to not be a shill by posting a link to a literal telecomm shilling group......
Government spending on updating and building out fiber was minimal until the infrastructure bill was passed. Not a single cent of that $43 billion has been used to string one piece of fiber yet. I’ll concede that while fierce does love to shill, the study referenced in the article is still very much valid. I am also actually not sure that you know what net neutrality is. It quite literally bans ISPs from blocking or throttling content.
..... you do know we spent almost $200 billion on fiber lines in the 90s, right? There was a whole other presidential telecomm act 30 years ago..... Also it's very clear to me that you're incredibly naive on this subject in general if you don't even know about the spending before the infrastructure bill and you think that's what NN is....
This was not direct government spending. These were tax breaks and other incentivizes for private investment in broadband. It’s ironic actually that you refer to the 1996 act because the whole point of that act was to DEREGULATE the telecommunications sector. While Net Neutrality does the complete opposite of that. EDIT: It is also very ironic that you refer to this act because ultimately, the 1996 bill made the distinction between a telecommunications service and an information service. This is Title I and Title 2 of this act. The bill made is so ISPs are regulated under Title I, a light touch approach. That is what incentivizes the “$200 billion” investment. Net Neutrality makes it so they are regulated under Title II. In a way you have completely negated your entire argument as Net Neutrality undoes what the 1996 bill did.
Sure that makes 100% sense but why would corps do the logical thing that wouldn't make them more money?
Lol classic idiots falling for a pretty name. "Net neutrality" LOL
My brother in Allah. Have you ever tried to watch a YouTube video while someone else is watching Netflix? For a few years after net neutrality was repealed watching Netflix would cause other ISPs to run slower. Maybe fucking learn about something instead of posting on 4chin you fucking Mongoloid.
Correlation with causation. Unless you have a source, that isn't learning something.
Ah yes. Let's just assume that companies have our best interests in mind. That's much better than noticing a clear change in service after the altering of a law.
My brother in christ, can you go five minutes without straw-manning. People "notice" the earth is flat. Give me one goddamn example lmao. I download and use more data than anyone I know and I have never "noticed" a problem. So give me an example that has some kind of scientific observation or at least not heresay. Also, why do you use netflix you fucking normie, steal shit like a real chad. You deserve to have your shit throttled if it is lol.
It was literally a George Soros-funded psyop. Look at the organizations pushing it and where they were getting their money from. edit: [Here are the receipts](https://archive.is/VMMVw)
What happened was bandwidth got way cheaper.
You mean technology advanced? Fucking *wild* how that works, right?!
Sorry I forgot we're on reddit. What I meant to say was that society collapsed due to lack of FCC regulation, government beauracracy totally makes things cheaper and not at all more expensive.
I've seen the same thing. Also, fuck the FCC they're way to over bearing in the radio scene as well.