Serious [Access to this thread is restricted to SMOGON GOLD subscribers only] (aka Net neutrality thread)

Empress

33% coffee / 33% alcohol / 34% estrogen
is a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnusis a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnus
For our American users, in approximately 21 days, the title is going to become reality. The United States is about to lose its net neutrality all for the benefit of a handful of billionaires. We enjoy sites like Smogon to waste time on, and other sites, such as Facebook, Google, and Twitter, among others, are extremely important for various reasons. When these sites no longer become free, I'm sure that several Americans who aren't that wealthy will be unable to access everyday essentials. Moreover, with ISPs in bed with our politicians, they basically are part of the government. Accordingly, I hope you guys are looking forward to having sites like CNN, NY Times, and even Wall Street Journal costing $39.99 per session, while sites like Breitbart, Infowars, Daily Caller, Daily Wire, and Fox News are totally free and fast. Soon our internet laws will literally mirror those of North Korea. Only the wealthy will be able to sniff sites that are vital to society, and anyone else who wishes to obtain news from the internet will have to look forward to being force-fed right wing propaganda.

What are your thoughts on this? For you Smogonites out there who aren't that wealthy, my fingers are crossed that you will somehow be able to access this place that you know and love, although Republican politicians are obviously never to be trusted. Of course, Smogon can always become a free site if it endorses right-wing propaganda. (Hopefully the fact that we have an official Discord is enough.)
 

Soul Fly

IMMA TEACH YOU WHAT SPLASHIN' MEANS
is a Contributor Alumnus
I think the open robbery of America and the rights of its citizens shows how much y'all like taking it up the ....

(for the full response, please purchase Smogon Gold: $0.99 for 24 hour unlimited access and $4.99 for the 5 month deluxe package and $9.99 for an annual "Elite 4" offering: Or have free unlimited access with Verizon4Gamers)
 
To be honest, all this is up to the internet companies. If they are merciful, it may not be THAT bad. But if they are as bad as you say, we may be in big trouble
 
so U.S.A supports liberty and competition tell me more

On a more serious note the internet is a fucking human necessity in this day and age and it has to be protected by laws enshrined in the most basic documents of any country Yeah that does mean that governments can censor shit monitor it and manipulate it freely but that already happens and you get the bonus of getting fucked by what are literally some of the scummiest companies on the planet.

This fight is gonna go on forever until we decide that a free and fast internet is as quintessential to the U.S.A as the right t̶o̶ ̶p̶u̶r̶c̶h̶a̶s̶e̶ ̶a̶ ̶g̶u̶n̶
 

Asek

Banned deucer.
t. Accordingly, I hope you guys are looking forward to having sites like CNN, NY Times, and even Wall Street Journal costing $39.99 per session, while sites like Breitbart, Infowars, Daily Caller, Daily Wire, and Fox News are totally free and fast. Soon our internet laws will literally mirror those of North Korea. Only the wealthy will be able to sniff sites that are vital to society, and anyone else who wishes to obtain news from the internet will have to look forward to being force-fed right wing propaganda.

any source on this tripe? or are you propaganda mongering like the trump regime you attack so readily. show me that the removal of the net neutrality laws (mind you - these were only offialized in 2015 by obama (sourceed from a .net not a .com site thank you) - before this it was just a accepted as a given) will result in the internet becoming a right wing hatred machine. other western democracies have no such laws in place and do not suffer from these problems.

i dont have anything else to contribute to this other then the increasing monopoly of internet traffic by few key groups (google, facebook, uhh i think amazons big as well? idk its not really in aus yet) is a much bigger concern for internet neutrality (to me) then government regulations at this point. its funny the op should mention these groups - the % share of all traffic going to these few has risen exponentially in the last 5 years - like it or not these groups set internet conduct for the majority of your browsing experience - and people flock to these outlets to protest against this(lol). the databases and profling these groups have on people are incredibly deep and more troubling to me then the repealing of any official internet neutrality law.

not to mention the rise of this 'social media' boom with crap like facebook / reddit has pretty much killed forums. grrrr!
 
Accordingly, I hope you guys are looking forward to having sites like CNN, NY Times, and even Wall Street Journal costing $39.99 per session, while sites like Breitbart, Infowars, Daily Caller, Daily Wire, and Fox News are totally free and fast.
Horseshit. This is liberal overreaction (and I'm a solid liberal democrat). Trump doesn't care about telecomms and the internet, he cares far more about immigration, coal jobs, the border wall, healthcare, tax cuts, players kneeling for the national anthem, how hot ivanka looks today, golfing, and a million other things. This is just a byproduct of the government being R in the house senate and executive wing. Tons of those guys hate Trump and in an ideal world would take President Ryan or President Jeb Bush over President Trump in a heartbeat, but that's not the situation. They have an R president who will greenlight anything the rest of the Republicans want. The US government is simply anti-regulation now, and sectors are simply taking advantage of it. It's hardly a Trump initiative. He might spout talking points but that's it.

I don't think paying for certain websites is a reality, and talk of it will only hurt the cause (future talking point: remember when those libs said we'd charge for every website? well we didn't, classic shill overreaction). Charging for websites is a hugely visible thing, and will be noticeable to an average consumer. Telecomms aren't stupid. What's likely to happen is the telecomms companies will extract an extra fee from website providers, and that explains the anger by Google and others because they'll owe Comcast and Verizon an extra fee, which they'll happily pay btw because it'll be a reasonable hit to their coffers but nothing absurd. But that's much more silent, and won't be noticeable to your average consumer. You know how it will impact things? It'll be harder to make a profit from a small to midsize website's ad revenue. That'll make it less likely people start websites and other projects, like discord, smogon, and regional sports sites, because there's an extra line item involved.

The only type of censorship I can see is anti-net neutrality and anti-telecomms op eds, but again not a Trump admin thing it's the industry that's being targeted sheltering themselves from criticism.
 
Last edited:

destinyunknown

Banned deucer.
For our American users, in approximately 21 days, the title is going to become reality. The United States is about to lose its net neutrality all for the benefit of a handful of billionaires. We enjoy sites like Smogon to waste time on, and other sites, such as Facebook, Google, and Twitter, among others, are extremely important for various reasons. When these sites no longer become free, I'm sure that several Americans who aren't that wealthy will be unable to access everyday essentials. Moreover, with ISPs in bed with our politicians, they basically are part of the government. Accordingly, I hope you guys are looking forward to having sites like CNN, NY Times, and even Wall Street Journal costing $39.99 per session, while sites like Breitbart, Infowars, Daily Caller, Daily Wire, and Fox News are totally free and fast. Soon our internet laws will literally mirror those of North Korea. Only the wealthy will be able to sniff sites that are vital to society, and anyone else who wishes to obtain news from the internet will have to look forward to being force-fed right wing propaganda.

What are your thoughts on this? For you Smogonites out there who aren't that wealthy, my fingers are crossed that you will somehow be able to access this place that you know and love, although Republican politicians are obviously never to be trusted. Of course, Smogon can always become a free site if it endorses right-wing propaganda. (Hopefully the fact that we have an official Discord is enough.)
Do you realize Fox News and Wall Street Journal are owned by the same person?

Net neutrality is a serious topic, but keep your bias and trolling out of this. It's funny that you complain about the future lack of information when you're clearly uninformed (or misinformed?) about this topic.
 

Solace

royal flush
is a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Senior Staff Member Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnus
truthfully, the way companies try and get around net neutrality right now is what they'd unveil first. for example, verizon has go90, their (mediocre) streaming service that you can use anywhere without using your data if you're a verizon customer. this technically skirts around net neutrality, because it gives priority to its own customers for what it claims is a free app (assuming you have any kind of wifi/data connection which you have to pay for). it also means that verizon users would be incentivized to use go90 over other streaming apps because of the data incentive. i can see a lot of companies continuing to expand those policies in the wake of this, rather than going instantly for a drastic change.

the things that i would say are most imminent are pay for play deals w/netflix, hulu, spotify, pandora, youtube, etc. that are popular sites with competitors that will feel threatened if their site isn't the fastest loading, which in turn hurts their competitors because they can afford to pay more money to the major telecom companies.

the idea of the subscription packages based on type of internet commodity would be pretty disastrous though, and apparently some other countries already have that because of a lack of net neutrality rules. the internet is pretty necessary for life now, and it's going to be less a question of pushing one political side's media vs another and more about how innovators and smaller competitors will get hurt because they just can't afford to compete with the big boys on the internet.

honestly, i wish the FCC would focus more on the real issues, which is the major monopolization of telecom companies. the fact that these companies all merge whenever and then screw the customer because there literally are no competitors in the area is complete garbage, and much more of a threat to everyone. idk the obsession with repealing net neutrality other than that theres probably some lobbyist money in play.
 
I'm actually kind of curious as to what the removal of Net Neutrality would look like. Lots of people are pushing the worst case scenario where every website you want to access is an additional $5/month (to start) or whatever, but more likely it's going to come out to be a couple bucks extra on your internet bill and life will go on.

Of course, it's still anti-consumer bullshit that only exists so that the richest people can squeeze more money out of everybody else, and more importantly it lays the groundwork for things to slowly get worse and worse. The fact that it's even in question is a bit disconcerting honestly, not for just how much it could potentially affect individuals but also smaller businesses. In today's world where the internet is only becoming more and more important, it's the sort of thing that could set America back several steps compared to other first world countries
 

Fireburn

BARN ALL
is a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Community Leader Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Top Contributor Alumnus
This is 100% getting challenged in court if it passes and I think there is a solid case to get it overturned. Advocates will likely attempt to argue that the rulechange is a violation of the Adminstrative Procedures Act, which prevents federal agencies from making "arbitrary and capricious" policy changes. There's a lot of evidence going against the FCC here: the rules were just enacted in 2015, have already survived multiple challenges in court claiming them to be invalid, and public opinion is overwhelmingly for keeping the net neutrality rules. And I do mean overwhelmingly: a telco-funded study (ironic hunh) found that 98.5% of unique comments submitted to the FCC were for keeping the rules, as well was 60% of the total number of comments. Furthermore, the NY attorney general is investigating a "massive scheme" to influence the comment system by impersonating citizens. The FCC has largely been stonewalling investigations and ignoring public opinion in repealing the rules, which will hopefully count against them in court. There's also probably a free speech argument in there too.

It's also worth noting that the FCC as part of their proposal is trying to prevent states from fighting back by passing their own net neutrality laws. I don't see how this provision in particular will survive litigation - the last time the FCC tried to block states from passing laws to regulate broadband, they got owned.

Really though, I don't think net neutrality would even be an issue if we had actual meaningful competition between ISPs here in the states. The monopoly the major telcos (Comcast, Verizon, AT&T, etc) have over the market is crushing and its way too hard for new ISPs to get in the game - even Google ran into trouble when it tried to launch Google Fiber. Unfortunately, I don't think meaningful progress will be made towards this unless the Dems retake control of government and either make good on their promise to crack down on monopolies (preferable) or at the minimum codify net neutrality into law so we can stop playing regulatory ping-pong.
 
This net neutrality shit singlehandedly made me despise everything the right stands for. As an 18 year old this is really the first time I've been fully aware of what's been going on in a Republican-controlled country, and this net neutrality shit is just saying:

You people are all sources of money! We don't wanna listen to you, but we do wanna charge you extra for everything you love and hold dear!

Perhaps not the most educated viewpoint but this big business stuff has opened my eyes and turned me into a bitter grumpy liberal. I sure hope to fuck that this net neutrality shit doesn't go the way they want it to, because I have a lot of livelihood to lose from it. I have hobbies I need the internet for, I have friends I need the internet to talk to, and in losing net neutrality I lose easy access to about three fourths of every resource I relied on. Call the last part pathetic or whatever, but hopefully, to whoever is reading, I think we can both agree we want the same thing

Every ISP monopoly to be crushed until the big heads behind all of it are trembling with fear wondering what happened to the days of being allowed to get away with corruption.
 

kilometerman

Banned deucer.
This net neutrality shit singlehandedly made me despise everything the right stands for. As an 18 year old this is really the first time I've been fully aware of what's been going on in a Republican-controlled country, and this net neutrality shit is just saying:

You people are all sources of money! We don't wanna listen to you, but we do wanna charge you extra for everything you love and hold dear!

Perhaps not the most educated viewpoint but this big business stuff has opened my eyes and turned me into a bitter grumpy liberal. I sure hope to fuck that this net neutrality shit doesn't go the way they want it to, because I have a lot of livelihood to lose from it. I have hobbies I need the internet for, I have friends I need the internet to talk to, and in losing net neutrality I lose easy access to about three fourths of every resource I relied on. Call the last part pathetic or whatever, but hopefully, to whoever is reading, I think we can both agree we want the same thing

Every ISP monopoly to be crushed until the big heads behind all of it are trembling with fear wondering what happened to the days of being allowed to get away with corruption.
Fun fact in the ideal right-wing world as soon as these regulations are lifted and cable companies begin slowing down the internet for certain sites, a new company would immediately show up offering what we have now--a fair internet that won't do that. Regulations only lead to more regulations, which inevitably leads to bigger government and occasionally more monopolies.

Also keep in mind that the majority of politicians are older and don't use the internet as a commodity or public service as us younger generations do. Politicians aren't evil.

And no, I don't want the big cable companies to be crushed. People worked hard to found those companies and it's unethical to take away other people's money and business because "they're too big".
 
Fun fact in the ideal right-wing world as soon as these regulations are lifted and cable companies begin slowing down the internet for certain sites, a new company would immediately show up offering what we have now--a fair internet that won't do that. Regulations only lead to more regulations, which inevitably leads to bigger government and occasionally more monopolies.

Also keep in mind that the majority of politicians are older and don't use the internet as a commodity or public service as us younger generations do. Politicians aren't evil.

And no, I don't want the big cable companies to be crushed. People worked hard to found those companies and it's unethical to take away other people's money and business because "they're too big".
yeah but homie we don't live in the ideal right wing world. there's a monopoly on the internet right now and so its hard as fuck for a new company to emerge.

no one gives a fuck if the majority of politicians are older. all old school democratic theory says that politicians represent the interest of the people. the people use internet.

ur last line was tough to read tbh ill let someone else get that.
 

kilometerman

Banned deucer.
yeah but homie we don't live in the ideal right wing world. there's a monopoly on the internet right now and so its hard as fuck for a new company to emerge.

no one gives a fuck if the majority of politicians are older. all old school democratic theory says that politicians represent the interest of the people. the people use internet.

ur last line was tough to read tbh ill let someone else get that.
My point was that in our effort to stop monopolies formed by incessant regulations, we create more monopolies which require more regulationz, etc etc. Government sucks at everything. The more power you leave to the free market, the more companies will be forced to cater to the consumer.

Surprise surprise, the world doesn't revolve around millenials. The politicians represent the interest of the people, and younger generations who use the internet as a public service/commodity rather than for entertainment are not the majority of the vote.

Last line said that it's unethical to take people's moneu
 

atomicllamas

but then what's left of me?
is a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Senior Staff Member Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Top Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnus
Surprise surprise, the world doesn't revolve around millenials. The politicians represent the interest of the people, and younger generations who use the internet as a public service/commodity rather than for entertainment are not the majority of the vote.
Do you seriously believe that only millennials use the internet as more than a source of entertainment? lol.

Even if that were the case, the websites and services most likely to be impacted by the end of net neutrality are sites that push a lot of data downstream, sites like pandora, spotify, youtube, and services like netflix and hulu, in other words, entertainment. So using your own logic, politicians representing the interest of the people should be for net neutrality. That being said your logic is actual garbage, even if ending net neutrality did only harm millennials, it doesn't benefit the older generation either, so even in your make believe world this would be a net negative for the people the politicians represent.

Fun fact in the ideal right-wing world as soon as these regulations are lifted and cable companies begin slowing down the internet for certain sites, a new company would immediately show up offering what we have now--a fair internet that won't do that. Regulations only lead to more regulations, which inevitably leads to bigger government and occasionally more monopolies.
What do you think prevents internet providers with being more competitive with each other right now? Do you think that ending net neutrality would somehow lead to more competition. That's what the following seems to imply:

My point was that in our effort to stop monopolies formed by incessant regulations, we create more monopolies which require more regulationz, etc etc. Government sucks at everything. The more power you leave to the free market, the more companies will be forced to cater to the consumer.
The monopolies existed before the net neutrality rules were implemented in the US, so this doesn't seem to be the case.
 
Sean Maloney introduced some legislation to try and fight off net neutrality. Anybody care to enlighten me what's going on with that?
 
So, getting rid of net neutrality, essentially, will make things like search results and clicks and search bars a money fueled rat race that only the massive, rich corporations can even hope to compete in, and could even be interpreted as the rich being able, at least to a certain extent, to control the press and what the most people see?

This would, by extension, stifle out smaller businesses overall, as they can’t even hope to get any sort of recognition without paying inordinate sums of money.

This also makes skepticism of media, corporations, and the press in general even more important, as people with money and agendas can now try and spoon feed the general public information that they want released.

Overall, net neutrality is helping smaller businesses stay afloat and not be immediately crushed, and getting rid of it will only help those who are already impossibly rich.

Tell me, why is the American government, which is supposed to be representative of the common people, the majority, so desperately appealing to the 1%? The extreme minority. The ones who need no help from them. That’s probably the weirdest part of this, to me. If everyone is so vehemently against this being passed, why is the government just ignoring that in favor of those who are already set for life, and making unimaginable amounts of money?

I could be wrong, but that just feels sort of odd to me.
 

EV

Banned deucer.
What's the main argument from us layfolk against net neutrality? So far I've seen arguments shoot down predictions about what might happen (from some people not even domiciled in the United States, no less!), but I don't have a solid grasp of why there are people who want to potentially pay more money to access the Internet, or who are willing to accept "fast/slow lanes".

No memeing, no articles, just your own words.
 

fanyfan

i once put 42 mcdonalds chicken nuggets in my anus
What's the main argument from us layfolk against net neutrality? So far I've seen arguments shoot down predictions about what might happen (from some people not even domiciled in the United States, no less!), but I don't have a solid grasp of why there are people who want to potentially pay more money to access the Internet, or who are willing to accept "fast/slow lanes".

No memeing, no articles, just your own words.
I support net neutrality, but the main arguments I’ve seen are either the isps wanting more money or from people that don’t actually understand what it is. Some conservatives I’ve seen are just that desperate to repeal something the Obama administration put in place. So basically, there have been no good arguments from what I’ve seen, just people being ignorant.
 

Oglemi

Borf
is a Top Contributoris a Tournament Director Alumnusis a Site Content Manager Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Researcher Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Top Smogon Media Contributor Alumnusis an Administrator Alumnusis a Top Dedicated Tournament Host Alumnus
The most common one i've seen is "the market will sort itself out" which comes from a misunderstanding of the regional monopolies that these companies currently have.

Time will tell how this will play out in the next year but I think should isps start throttling popular sites we'll see more outrage from the current layman that what we did in the months leading up to this vote. Personally i'm hoping for a huge dick move to get people to start protesting at the capitals, etc. but I have a feeling this will continue to play out as it has been, just boiling the frogs.
 

Acklow

I am always tired. Don't bother me.
I think the open robbery of America and the rights of its citizens shows how much y'all like taking it up the ....

(for the full response, please purchase Smogon Gold: $0.99 for 24 hour unlimited access and $4.99 for the 5 month deluxe package and $9.99 for an annual "Elite 4" offering: Or have free unlimited access with Verizon4Gamers)
Excuse me. We already have pricing for Smogon Gold. You can check our great deals here.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 0)

Top