Understandable, its a pretty hot topic usually, and if I my service was being affected because I know they doing a bad job I would be upset.
Pai is pointing out TOTAL investment is down since 2015.
http://www.insidesources.com/investment-down-among-internet-providers-since-net-neutrality-economist-says/
https://www.forbes.com/sites/washingtonbytes/2017/03/02/capital-flight-from-broadband-in-the-title-ii-era/#2c61c2a935cf
Proponents are not even debating this, they try to point at a small segment like fiber and say "see, looky here. Ignore the forest and check out this tree"
Public Utility:
Ma Bell was a Public Utility for decades, there was no innovation, everything was expensive and everything sucked but it sucked “equally”
Pai took his concerns to the Mobile World Congress in Barcelona, Pro-title II public utility clampdown supporters (so-called Net Neutrality) take their concerns to reddit, gaming forums, 4chan and CNN.
This is telling to me 
3 Likes
If someone claimed they could sell you 1000 chickens for a dollar, and the fine print said “up to 1000 chickens actually provided”, nobody would claim that was fair. So why is it that that’s just fine for ISPs?
I remember when AT&T forced a $10 (I think) surcharge on customers who did not want their data inspected or sold to others benefiting AT&T. Eventually they had to stop the practice.
One opt-in program is called Verizon Selects. It allows for “rewards” that customers can use to purchase various products.
They seriously spin this as:
You will receive ads that are relevant to you. And we don’t share information with outside companies!
Too bad their recently created corporation Oath has a ton of customer data from Yahoo and AOL, and it’s sole focus is to mine for more data. Then sell said services to other businesses at a premium in order to advertise a precise audience. My head hurts from this…
This site shows examples of what the basics Oath A.K.A Verizon Ad “Showcase” can do. These are some of the ways Oath services can modify a site in order to create Ad revenue for Verizon 
uhhh I meant relevant ads that will their customers will enjoy! Yep that sounds like what I was supposed to say… 
I have a feeling most major ISP’s are either already doing this, or are moving very quickly in order to catch the gravy train.
unrealistic situation
Unrealistic situation continued, apples to oranges comparison
Here I’ll water it down even further. Internet Service Providers have better lawyers than poultry farmers.
Because the throughput of a connection is determined by what else is in the way, and the ‘shortest’ path for data to travel changes constantly.
When a packet is sent it follows different data-grams or protocols which can affect the throughput.
Since bandwidth is distributed on a shared basis (except with DSL), physical server distance, and coupled with the highly dynamic nature of data traversal, there’s no real way to ensure a 100% consistent throughput every time.
I.E if I access a web server in China and don’t get my ‘advertised rate’ if they, the ISP, didn’t say ‘up to’ I could sue them for false advertising.
There’s no magic way to make data travel faster (latency), more bandwidth does not decrease latency, it simply means you can handle more data at once, but your effective throughput can still be low if you have a high latency.
And in 2015 people started using the bandwidth they pay for and guess what Comcast wanted Netflix to pay because people where using the data they paid for.
Now dont get me wrong Netflix is now a beast in itself. Made possible Because the carriers could not, wait where not allowed to crush it as an ant.
His face is so punchable.
1 Like
I’ve been saying this for almost 2 years now.
That, or just begging to have an egg smashed in it.
Quoting the source document:
as part of the European Union, Portugal does have net neutrality regulations!
EU net neutrality regulations are still too open for interpretation, and there are several ongoing court cases in EU countries about this interpretation, where multiple ISP:s allow for unlimited, free internet for some services (Facebook, Spotify etc.), and you pay for everything else. That is NOT net neutrality.
How full of shit is that fucking fucktard really? The fucker is a fucking troll. His “fact-checkers” have not even looked up the very definition of net neutrality. Damn that liar. Fuck.
I’m more into shoving a french baguette and a bottle of wine up his ass, but he may just choose to reinterpret it as a friendly act and go on to call it butt-neutrality.
3 Likes
If the main complaint people have is too little choice/competition for ISPs, wouldn’t it make sense to go after big internet companies like Comcast for anti-trust regulations under the FTC?
I feel that the FCC should never have gotten involved in anything relating to free speech. Their history has always been about censorship and putting a nice label like “net neutrality” on a piece of regulation doesn’t change the fact that the camel’s nose is now in the tent.
Net Neutrality only puts a band-aid on a larger problem and helps the big players while hurting the small players who lack resources to pay layers to comply with regulations.
I’m just going to leave this here. This has been a good conversation so far, but I’ve seen a fair number of logical fallacies on both sides.
Please see: Slippery Slope, False Cause, Appeal to Authority, Anecdotal, Burden of Proof.
4 Likes
If we followed this chart perfectly, there would be no arguments ever.
2 Likes
I doubt that.
A point can be valid while still containing a logical fallacy. The point of my post is that you should strive to avoid making them because they weaken your argument.
I didn’t mean to shut down the discussion either.
If you follow this guide, you can debate extremely effectively and most people will have a hard time rebutting your points.
1 Like