It should be noted that they weren't slowing down *your* connection to tiktok, they were slowing down tik toks connection to everyone unless tik tok paid them more money. There is a HUGE difference. The reality of it was that it allowed the corporations to wiggle out of contractual obligations that would have lost them money and force other corporations to pay more money. What the end user would have noticed from their side was an uptick in advertising to pay the difference.
The thing that bothered me most about the old Net Neutrality bill was requiring the FCC to approve any net connected device... So, if you take your Raspberry Pi and invent the next greatest internet connected device - a bunch of bureaucrats could prevent you from releasing it if you aren't part of the donor class. (I recall quite a few videos pointing this out and how it was buried in there.)
My friend was moving into his house down here and his internet provider wouldn't cancel his last internet and they wouldn't send him a new box. And they basically told them you could either wait days or go somewhere else. Go somewhere else and original ISP blackballed him
Where I live, it's a total Monopoly between 2 companies. You have an Option for Cable Internet, or DSL, that's it. There's no Google, no Verizon or At&t. You have 2 options and 2 options alone, 3 if you count satilite ( but who uses that lol )
If I remember right from back when it was repealled, they got a lot of flak in california for throttling a fire department while they were trying to deal with a wildfire.
It's exactly the opposite. The net neutrality is a dual edge sword that way. They wouldn't be allowed to prioritize traffic which means that an ISP could not prioritize emergency traffic for the FD trying to deal with a wildfire because users rights to Netflix is just as important.
That's not what happened, they ran out of data on their plan, and Verizon wouldn't return their service until they paid up, regardless of how badly they needed it. Same thing could've happened with net neutrality
@@justinisorange Net neutrality has several good and bad things about what it means when in place. It means that traffic can't be throttled or prioritized. That's good and bad depending on the situation. Like the one the poster mentioned. Sometimes being able to prioritize traffic would be a good thing to be able to do. Sometimes being able to throttle a bandwidth hog like say Netflix because it is interfering with other traffic until they pay some so that the bandwidth can be expanded for their traffic would be good for customers. Like I said, dual edge. You think throttle and ignore latency. Some traffic needs priority for things to run well and some do not. This bill is not about stopping an ISP from throttling a user, it's about how they can treat types of traffic.
True... but just because a barbaric rule has been instated but not enforced does not mean it doesn't matter. You had every right to be afraid of your internet being messed eith by people interested in your money when the government repealed net neutrality, and if you want to be conspiratorial, you still do. What they'll do is slowly change policies in somewhat worrying but "ultimately meaningless" ways, over years and years, until the common man doesn't even recognize that it's wrong that AT&T delivers 20 mbps internet to Verizon users in their domain, or restricts access to sites deemed "allied with Verizon" or whatever (No shade to AT&T or Verizon, they're just what I thought up. Not even 100% sure they're ISPs, they do phones lmao.) Point still stands though. They'll work tirelessly to make slavery seem normal to all the world, and then they'll reap the benefits.
True, the market is regulating itself as competitive market. I literally just wrote a presentation on this stuff for my microeconomics course. If one isp charges more or offers worse service, a competing isp with a better deal can just come in and take the customer meaning even in states that didn't regulate it after isps didn't get much worse. The free market works out well for us a good 57.42% of the time.
Because most of the larger services were perfectly content with accepting any amount an ISP wanted for faster service. It was always the little guys we were fighting for. Turns out, though, most of our favorite websites grew enough to pay the gatekeepers, so they didn't care as much for the 2017 fight.
Ajit Pai... I still remember this going down, mainly due to the SiIvaGunner channel having an Ajit Pai takeover a little while back with a little cartoony drawing of him riding in a floating reece's mug while infecting the channel with mostly harlem shake for the event.
Oh I remember that dude From Europe here and even he got mention here in a topic about net neutrality (video was about Germany and how it drives in a 2-class internet with how provider for mobile phones offer special packs for certain stuff, like unlimited data for yt, spotify etc)
This is amazing news everyone! This means the internet runs the same for everyone for a while longer, and its one of the few things that make it fair and available to all. I'm so glad you're talking about this.
@@MattHudsonAtxI am so sorry, you're right, I got two documentaries twisted somehow.. I have adjusted my comment. Thanks Still, I like to think he was an activist for quite a similar cause, as he loved the internet and wanted everyone to be able to have the same access to data, Only in this case here its about data speed, not data amount
@@MattHudsonAtxI’m glad that University got he was in had their materials leaked as revenge but even so it sucks that he had to go when all he wanted was a free/open internet
Here in Canada, you either get the most expensive package, or you have to pay $5 extra per month to unlock HD streaming. That’s for mobile and home internet (Bell)
It was literally about Netflix and other VOD. Because Netflix ate insane amount of bandwith. And because it was treated equal, it slowed everyone else. Now you just pay extra for higher quality stream and nothing changed.
Technically Net Neutrality prevents ISPs from regulating traffic on their service. It's Actually doesn't do anything to help consumers, this is done to help big business get preferential treatment over your network legally. Follow the money when people tell you this is good, or should I say the product samples.
Back then (idk the numbers today) Netflix was something like 40% of all internet traffic but net neutrality meant that Netflix didn't have to pay their fair share. So those costs were passed down to those who couldn't pass it anymore, the consumer. Also when the biggest bandwidth users are the biggest voices to keep it, I question their motives, like you said.
Finally someone with a brain in this comment section. You're completely right. Net Neutrality was never a good thing, but like most things if you give people a pretty slogan and tell them the sky is falling, then you'll get plenty of supporters.
@@DPRacingWhereRacingLivesyes it was, I don't want my internet carrier throttling my streaming if I'm not using their partner service or paying for a streaming upgrade. I don't want my isp deciding porn or games or other content should be throttled. There are a lot of ways it is a good thing.
@nk-dw2hm Because yes, I remember the days when I wasn't allowed to play video games. Before 2015, video games were banned through internet providers.
Once traffic shaping and content suggestion algorithms penned you into their desired platforms, there was no reason to fence you in with internet speed slowdowns.
i remember everyone freaking out and then we realized nothing happened and the people saying net neutrality is bad were right and maybe we shouldnt support something every corporation suddenly wants when we are being told its "anti corporation"
The federal government should be the least intrusive government states can make it net neutrality law but the government shouldn't mess with it plus that law isn't as good as your hyping it up to be
I've argued for net neutrality for years. The one argument against net neutrality that I have heard that holds some water is basically how Netflix found a loophole and is abusing the system. The usual way that data is transmitted between ISPs is that there is a standard agreement that you pass my data through unmolested and I'll pass your data through unmolested. This has a built in assumption that the two ISPs would be generating and sharing roughly the same amount of data between them. IIRC, Netflix found an ISP that would charge them next to nothing -- and , for practical purposes, had no other customers. 25% to 50% of the internet traffic was being generated by Netflix at the time and Netflix and their ISP was effectively not giving back to the ISPs carrying the traffic. The counter argument to this is that the end-user customers would be paying for the service. This counter argument works as long as there are only two ISPs. However, if there were three ISPs: Netflix, intermediary, and customer; the intermediary ISP gets the short end of the stick of having to carry high bandwidth consuming stream with no compensation.
I have, yes. one of the first sites to be throttled was the internet archive where download speeds were throttled from 5 Mb/s to 100 kb/s. using a VPN now gives me back that 5mb/s download speed
I wonder If this will help with deprioritization. We have tmobile home internet which runs on their 5g network, but whenever network traffic gets too high they throttle home internet users first and prioritize cellular. It's annoying going from 100+mbps to 7 for sometimes hours at a time.
@@Not_Loading We used to rely on Verizon for the Internet as that was all we had in the area. It was super annoying, but that's what we get when we use a mobile carrier for home internet.
It was done a few times like milking the fire dept. in Cali while they were RISKING THEIR LIVES fighting WILDFIRES. I guarantee it wasn’t done more to avoid bad publicity.
They were but those states didn't have the provision that required existing ISPs to hold approval before new ISPs could be installed. This is monumentally important.
Thank goodness the government is here to help! Let’s give them more control! We really needed them for this! Let’s see how they abuse this instead of how they will help us!
@@Fergusnoot Net Neutrality allows big corporations to dominate the internet and pay nothing for it. It gave streaming services and big corporations more power. Without it, ISPs get more power. They could theoretically use it to charge the consumer more, but they know that wouldn't go down very well. So instead they just charge other corporations more money to use their Internet. It just moved power from one type of corporation to another. For the common man, Net Neutrality was useless.
You have misunderstood the problem of NOT having net neutrality. ISPs do not target end users, they target businesses like netflix. What they do is, charge netflix for their internet connection, which they fully pay for. Then the ISP goes "Ah, well you see, you're actually using the service you paid for because your product is popular, I'm a now going to charge you extra, if you don't pay me, I'm going to artificially throttle your traffic so your customers cut your service." They will also do things like, prioritize their own streaming service traffic over others, so that customers feel like the quality of the service from one provider is worse than it really should be.
Well technically they always had the option to prioritize. They simply offered them the option if they would like or not. Not sure why people were upset.
The healthcare itself is great, problem is insurance companies decided "what if we just made everything a tax write off?" and that's why it's so expensive.
@@shanerooney7288no we can get the best care in the world it just cost so much because the insurance companies write the laws. The rich come here from all over the world to get the best care
I was so excited for a second cus where I live which is just right outside a town where the average home gets 2gbps. I get bellow 1mbps, then I heard it was like just about the data. Still nice but man they need to regulate what they charge for stuff.i pay 300 a month to Verizon to have home internet because I have no other choice and I get speeds as low as 30 BITS per second. And the highest I’ve ever seen on my home was 2.4mbps. It’s unstable and fluctuates as hell. Like right now it’s at 47 kbps. And I have literally no other choice wheee I live besides Verizon or no internet which sucks in the digital age. It
@AngelA-mk5ty you mean the one that says if you step on a flower you can go to federal prison and pay thousands in fines even if you didn't know it was endangered? All while they let developers destroy anything and everything they want because they paid enough money. Yea. Totally good
@@Fergusnoot you should really read the punishment for killing a flower they deem endangered. Hope you like years in federal prison and thousands in fines.
I know 3 ppl who died because of the repeal. Net neutrality was not a trojan horse with a nice name. When has the federal government ever taken more power thru the fine print in giant bills?
A larg chunk of people have been having the issue of their download speeds being throttled cause their service providers don't like what they're searching or watching. Happens a lot to me, where just wanting to watch stuff on youtube can be thrown out the window because of one Political short. Unless its just a giant coincidence that my download speeds drop to just 2 mb a minute after politics happened on my shorts page.
That should be possible... https means they can only see the IP address you're connecting to (which can be reversed to find the domain), but they shouldn't be able to see what specific videos you're using
That's not possible. Like genuinely. It's the S in HTTPS (which TH-cam and basically every single website in the entire world uses) Secure Socket Layer. Only the end website will be able to tell what specifically you are searching for on their site. Your ISP can only tell if you're on TH-cam, they can't tell if you're being rickrolled or if you're watching funny cat videos. The specific domain requests are encrypted, and it's not static encryption either. What you are describing is a coincidence
Ha Comcast sucks with there 80 a month with a 1tb cap or with 50 extra you get unlimited. Or sweet water cable . No longer around thank God for caping speeds between night hrs and not even knowing how to bond channels .
![ลองสุ่มไอโฟน 990 โกงมั้ย? [ โกงมั้ยครับ ep.101 ] | DOM](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/bfsWe0j492k/mqdefault.jpg)
Flashing Ajit Pai awakened an old anger inside of me.
You mean A Shit Pie.
😅
Same here
@arron4749 errrrr no? I want net neutrally restored.
Shouldn't you be off cleaning a window with your tongue 😂
That "retired" verizon lawyer, Ajit Pai should NOT have been allowed to control telecommunication like that after being a lawyer for an isp company...
Yes never allow experts in their fields to practice, like Fauci right?
@@godzilla2k26 Dr faucci notorious CEO of ????
@@krookedkan Is his wiki blocked for you? Or do you not find merit in his work?
@@godzilla2k26 what are you talking about ajit and faucci had 2 totally different positions in their respective organizations.
@@krookedkan How so?
It should be noted that they weren't slowing down *your* connection to tiktok, they were slowing down tik toks connection to everyone unless tik tok paid them more money. There is a HUGE difference. The reality of it was that it allowed the corporations to wiggle out of contractual obligations that would have lost them money and force other corporations to pay more money. What the end user would have noticed from their side was an uptick in advertising to pay the difference.
And you can squeeze small companies out of existence.
Netflix consumed double digits of total bandwith.
Because it was free.
This was corpos fighting corpos, skinwalking little people
Nobody should be subjected to looking at Ajit Pai without significant warning
The thing that bothered me most about the old Net Neutrality bill was requiring the FCC to approve any net connected device... So, if you take your Raspberry Pi and invent the next greatest internet connected device - a bunch of bureaucrats could prevent you from releasing it if you aren't part of the donor class. (I recall quite a few videos pointing this out and how it was buried in there.)
Shh no that wasn't true, people get mad on this channel if you talk about that conspiracy theory.
There is no cactus tall enough to warrant Ajit Pai sitting on it. We need bigger cacti.
Pretty sure localized internet provider monopoly is a way bigger problem in the US
So much so.
Hard facts
My friend was moving into his house down here and his internet provider wouldn't cancel his last internet and they wouldn't send him a new box. And they basically told them you could either wait days or go somewhere else. Go somewhere else and original ISP blackballed him
Where I live, it's a total Monopoly between 2 companies.
You have an Option for Cable Internet, or DSL, that's it. There's no Google, no Verizon or At&t. You have 2 options and 2 options alone, 3 if you count satilite ( but who uses that lol )
@@KSI_Revelations lots of people are starting to use star link
You've reminded me of a war I fought like a grandpa being reminded of WW2...
RALSEI!
And you lost, and none of the crazy claims people made happened. The only people who lost anything were the rich tech CEO's that recruited you
@@vanilla8956 only due to states making stronger regulations, and guess the reason they did that
@@vanilla8956 what
@@LilHoss4k lmao
If I remember right from back when it was repealled, they got a lot of flak in california for throttling a fire department while they were trying to deal with a wildfire.
It's exactly the opposite. The net neutrality is a dual edge sword that way. They wouldn't be allowed to prioritize traffic which means that an ISP could not prioritize emergency traffic for the FD trying to deal with a wildfire because users rights to Netflix is just as important.
@@joee7452you have an affirmative duty to throttle one group of users to benefit the others?
That's not what happened, they ran out of data on their plan, and Verizon wouldn't return their service until they paid up, regardless of how badly they needed it. Same thing could've happened with net neutrality
@@justinisorange Net neutrality has several good and bad things about what it means when in place. It means that traffic can't be throttled or prioritized. That's good and bad depending on the situation. Like the one the poster mentioned. Sometimes being able to prioritize traffic would be a good thing to be able to do. Sometimes being able to throttle a bandwidth hog like say Netflix because it is interfering with other traffic until they pay some so that the bandwidth can be expanded for their traffic would be good for customers.
Like I said, dual edge. You think throttle and ignore latency. Some traffic needs priority for things to run well and some do not. This bill is not about stopping an ISP from throttling a user, it's about how they can treat types of traffic.
@@joee7452while I agree if that it still better to have than not lot of bigger ones wouldn’t be increase the speed for those sites without incentive
Literally forgot this happened since nothing happened to my Internet
True... but just because a barbaric rule has been instated but not enforced does not mean it doesn't matter. You had every right to be afraid of your internet being messed eith by people interested in your money when the government repealed net neutrality, and if you want to be conspiratorial, you still do. What they'll do is slowly change policies in somewhat worrying but "ultimately meaningless" ways, over years and years, until the common man doesn't even recognize that it's wrong that AT&T delivers 20 mbps internet to Verizon users in their domain, or restricts access to sites deemed "allied with Verizon" or whatever
(No shade to AT&T or Verizon, they're just what I thought up. Not even 100% sure they're ISPs, they do phones lmao.)
Point still stands though. They'll work tirelessly to make slavery seem normal to all the world, and then they'll reap the benefits.
True, the market is regulating itself as competitive market. I literally just wrote a presentation on this stuff for my microeconomics course. If one isp charges more or offers worse service, a competing isp with a better deal can just come in and take the customer meaning even in states that didn't regulate it after isps didn't get much worse. The free market works out well for us a good 57.42% of the time.
Because most of the larger services were perfectly content with accepting any amount an ISP wanted for faster service.
It was always the little guys we were fighting for. Turns out, though, most of our favorite websites grew enough to pay the gatekeepers, so they didn't care as much for the 2017 fight.
Yuuup.
Net Neutrality was the emancipation of the Internet, didn't you know.
The FCC had way more teeth. This will ensure that when they do it, the fines will be nothing
I love how the method for fighting Net Neutrality was lying about what side was Net Neutrality for awhile in the late 00's....
Don't you just love it when you can tell a "dude" actually means "dipshit"? It's very rare that a TH-cam short has that level of poetic artistry.
Regulations are always bad.
Net neutrality requires the same line of thinking as rent control.
what is rent control?
That it makes things way worse?
We are so back
Interesting that they waited for an election year to try this... hmm......
Ajit makes my blood boil. I swear. That man is ingrained in my hate pit
Letter organizations sanctioned by governments pulling strings on internet business could never happen...
Right!!!
Right????
Ajit Pai... I still remember this going down, mainly due to the SiIvaGunner channel having an Ajit Pai takeover a little while back with a little cartoony drawing of him riding in a floating reece's mug while infecting the channel with mostly harlem shake for the event.
Oh I remember that dude
From Europe here and even he got mention here in a topic about net neutrality (video was about Germany and how it drives in a 2-class internet with how provider for mobile phones offer special packs for certain stuff, like unlimited data for yt, spotify etc)
This is amazing news everyone!
This means the internet runs the same for everyone for a while longer, and its one of the few things that make it fair and available to all.
I'm so glad you're talking about this.
glad anyone remembers Aaron but this is not the issue he died for
@@MattHudsonAtxI am so sorry, you're right, I got two documentaries twisted somehow.. I have adjusted my comment. Thanks
Still, I like to think he was an activist for quite a similar cause, as he loved the internet and wanted everyone to be able to have the same access to data, Only in this case here its about data speed, not data amount
Literally nothing changed when it was repealed... oh wait it limited federal government overreach.
@@MattHudsonAtxI’m glad that University got he was in had their materials leaked as revenge but even so it sucks that he had to go when all he wanted was a free/open internet
Here in Canada, you either get the most expensive package, or you have to pay $5 extra per month to unlock HD streaming. That’s for mobile and home internet (Bell)
It has happend, especially with cellphone companies and video data
An Indian that was against net neutrality. Fitting
I love this dudes South African team shirts
It was literally about Netflix and other VOD.
Because Netflix ate insane amount of bandwith. And because it was treated equal, it slowed everyone else.
Now you just pay extra for higher quality stream and nothing changed.
Equity and equality is not possible... except for the internet.
Technically Net Neutrality prevents ISPs from regulating traffic on their service. It's Actually doesn't do anything to help consumers, this is done to help big business get preferential treatment over your network legally. Follow the money when people tell you this is good, or should I say the product samples.
Back then (idk the numbers today) Netflix was something like 40% of all internet traffic but net neutrality meant that Netflix didn't have to pay their fair share. So those costs were passed down to those who couldn't pass it anymore, the consumer.
Also when the biggest bandwidth users are the biggest voices to keep it, I question their motives, like you said.
Finally someone with a brain in this comment section. You're completely right. Net Neutrality was never a good thing, but like most things if you give people a pretty slogan and tell them the sky is falling, then you'll get plenty of supporters.
@@DPRacingWhereRacingLivesyes it was, I don't want my internet carrier throttling my streaming if I'm not using their partner service or paying for a streaming upgrade.
I don't want my isp deciding porn or games or other content should be throttled.
There are a lot of ways it is a good thing.
Finally, someone says the smart part out loud. It's actually screwing the consumer.
@nk-dw2hm Because yes, I remember the days when I wasn't allowed to play video games. Before 2015, video games were banned through internet providers.
ajit pai fills me with infinite anger
Once traffic shaping and content suggestion algorithms penned you into their desired platforms, there was no reason to fence you in with internet speed slowdowns.
The internet is going to be fixed… all the bad predictions didn’t happen because states laws took effect. So what’s being fixed?
How many states passed this?
Not all states can be held accountable and passed these laws.
The isp lawyer who’s already on his retirement fund, is allowed to mess with isp laws. Love murica
Remember when this was a thing? Yeah, literally nobody can tell the difference
Seeing Ajit with the mug just reminds me of when John Oliver got a mug 3 times the size just to mock him
ahh yes, the gallon-sized Reese's mug filled with "the blood of smaller mugs"
Sure as long as we read the fine print. I think last time they added stuff in that would give them more power
Good to know state laws stopped the chaos from happening
i remember everyone freaking out and then we realized nothing happened and the people saying net neutrality is bad were right and maybe we shouldnt support something every corporation suddenly wants when we are being told its "anti corporation"
Nice to see someone with no actual knowledge of a situation or how it worked solving problems that never existed.
The federal government should be the least intrusive government states can make it net neutrality law but the government shouldn't mess with it plus that law isn't as good as your hyping it up to be
why why chairman pai 😂
Oh god! What will they break this time?! 😂🤣😂
I respect Arati. Sachin mahajan shows how not to be a man.
I've argued for net neutrality for years. The one argument against net neutrality that I have heard that holds some water is basically how Netflix found a loophole and is abusing the system. The usual way that data is transmitted between ISPs is that there is a standard agreement that you pass my data through unmolested and I'll pass your data through unmolested. This has a built in assumption that the two ISPs would be generating and sharing roughly the same amount of data between them.
IIRC, Netflix found an ISP that would charge them next to nothing -- and , for practical purposes, had no other customers. 25% to 50% of the internet traffic was being generated by Netflix at the time and Netflix and their ISP was effectively not giving back to the ISPs carrying the traffic.
The counter argument to this is that the end-user customers would be paying for the service. This counter argument works as long as there are only two ISPs. However, if there were three ISPs: Netflix, intermediary, and customer; the intermediary ISP gets the short end of the stick of having to carry high bandwidth consuming stream with no compensation.
Sure, that can happen... but bandwidth basically costs peanuts to ISPs, so I can't feel bad for them.
@@Diviance a quick Google says it was 35% of all of the internet traffic ... sorry, that's not peanuts.
@@papasmurf9146
The cost of the bandwidth is peanuts compared to what they charge for it.
man I was hoping it would mean google can't give you 57 results that are sponsored
Has anyone actually experienced a negative from this before it was put in place?
I have, yes. one of the first sites to be throttled was the internet archive where download speeds were throttled from 5 Mb/s to 100 kb/s. using a VPN now gives me back that 5mb/s download speed
@@polinskitom2277 cool, when was this?
No there was never a confirmed circumstance of this happening. No documented throttling like what was claimed has actually been seen.
The cost of my internet went down.
I remember everyone was pissed about net neutrality, people thought you would have to start paying for stuff like TH-cam, but I guess not
It was only in effect for two years. It needs at least 5-10 years to show some real progress, and that is why it was sniped.
They slow my internet connection period, used to get 100-300Mbos, now i only get 1/10th that…
😂 the internet has always been chaos you
I wonder If this will help with deprioritization. We have tmobile home internet which runs on their 5g network, but whenever network traffic gets too high they throttle home internet users first and prioritize cellular. It's annoying going from 100+mbps to 7 for sometimes hours at a time.
Their exempt.
@@godzilla2k26 I hate that. It's so incredibly annoying
@@Not_Loading We used to rely on Verizon for the Internet as that was all we had in the area. It was super annoying, but that's what we get when we use a mobile carrier for home internet.
Ajit....Pai AJIT PAI!!!!!!!
If its just due to slowing tiktok connection, then its worthy of peace noble
Ah yes, tiktok speeds. What the world needs for peace….
It was done a few times like milking the fire dept. in Cali while they were RISKING THEIR LIVES fighting WILDFIRES. I guarantee it wasn’t done more to avoid bad publicity.
Except it's regulation that will do exactly what they say they won't do. This is an awful policy and should never be passed. KEEP THE INTERNET FREE
BRO IS A RUGBY FAN!!! LETS GOOOOOO!!!!!!!
Wait, didnt you just say that states were going ahead with laws of their own?
Unless I misunderstood what you said, I don't see the problem.
They were but those states didn't have the provision that required existing ISPs to hold approval before new ISPs could be installed. This is monumentally important.
Thank goodness the government is here to help! Let’s give them more control! We really needed them for this! Let’s see how they abuse this instead of how they will help us!
Would you rather a government or corporations have this kind of control of the internet.
@@BoneyMilesNet neutrality give the two of them more power
@@BoneyMilesNet Neutrality gives it to corporations.
@@godzilla2k26Did you watch the video? It does the exact opposite of that.
@@Fergusnoot Net Neutrality allows big corporations to dominate the internet and pay nothing for it. It gave streaming services and big corporations more power. Without it, ISPs get more power. They could theoretically use it to charge the consumer more, but they know that wouldn't go down very well. So instead they just charge other corporations more money to use their Internet. It just moved power from one type of corporation to another. For the common man, Net Neutrality was useless.
RIP Aaron Swartz.
Never forgot all those who died
Thank goodness
Ajit Pai the scourge of 2017
I am glad the states took this seriously.
they did throttle the fuck out of twitch a billion times since
You have misunderstood the problem of NOT having net neutrality. ISPs do not target end users, they target businesses like netflix. What they do is, charge netflix for their internet connection, which they fully pay for. Then the ISP goes "Ah, well you see, you're actually using the service you paid for because your product is popular, I'm a now going to charge you extra, if you don't pay me, I'm going to artificially throttle your traffic so your customers cut your service." They will also do things like, prioritize their own streaming service traffic over others, so that customers feel like the quality of the service from one provider is worse than it really should be.
Well technically they always had the option to prioritize. They simply offered them the option if they would like or not. Not sure why people were upset.
Maybe fix their healthcare system
We don't want another JFK incident
The healthcare itself is great, problem is insurance companies decided "what if we just made everything a tax write off?" and that's why it's so expensive.
@Not_interestEd-
"The healthcare itself is great"
Is it, though? Sounds like cope.
Best we can do is 80 billion to Israel
@@shanerooney7288no we can get the best care in the world it just cost so much because the insurance companies write the laws. The rich come here from all over the world to get the best care
The bigger problem in the US is lack of internet regulation not too much 😂
But honestly how was Ajit Pai even allowed to do that
Maybe someone with possible connections to a telecommunications company shouldn't be allowed to run the FCC.
They don't. I said the same about Fauci.
This was sponsored by net neutrality 😂😂😂
Net Neutrality is just Internet emancipation!
I suddenly remembered the that cringe Cody Ko Video
Springbok jersey 🎉
Gonna be honest, I didn't really notice a difference.
If you lived in California it’s probably because of the law that passed in 2018
When did Frankie Muniz get into tech?
Don’t listen to his lies
I was so excited for a second cus where I live which is just right outside a town where the average home gets 2gbps. I get bellow 1mbps, then I heard it was like just about the data. Still nice but man they need to regulate what they charge for stuff.i pay 300 a month to Verizon to have home internet because I have no other choice and I get speeds as low as 30 BITS per second. And the highest I’ve ever seen on my home was 2.4mbps. It’s unstable and fluctuates as hell. Like right now it’s at 47 kbps. And I have literally no other choice wheee I live besides Verizon or no internet which sucks in the digital age. It
It happened at Comcast😂
Can’t like a comment on this short as “Network Connection is Lost” is kind of ironic
Government control of anything is not good.
The Endangered Species Conservation Act 1969
@AngelA-mk5ty you mean the one that says if you step on a flower you can go to federal prison and pay thousands in fines even if you didn't know it was endangered?
All while they let developers destroy anything and everything they want because they paid enough money.
Yea. Totally good
@@AngelA-mk5ty You should watch the Bullshit episode about that one.
@@FergusnootPlants are classified into species.
@@Fergusnoot you should really read the punishment for killing a flower they deem endangered.
Hope you like years in federal prison and thousands in fines.
Man, the memories of A Shit Pie, what a time that was
Of all the problems with American internet this has nothing to do with any of them.
not true… elections are being manipulated
They wanted it to be a state by state basis not on a federal level. Everything they did was to push it back to the states .
Probably a catch somewhere
Cox does whatever they want and treats everyone of their customers like idiots.
Yes boss nice jersey
John Oliver saved the day...
Pretty sure Verizon is throttling torrents.
Nothing actually changed for us though?
I know 3 ppl who died because of the repeal. Net neutrality was not a trojan horse with a nice name. When has the federal government ever taken more power thru the fine print in giant bills?
Think of the children.
'net' neutrality'
yeah like ISP throttling streamers
A larg chunk of people have been having the issue of their download speeds being throttled cause their service providers don't like what they're searching or watching. Happens a lot to me, where just wanting to watch stuff on youtube can be thrown out the window because of one Political short. Unless its just a giant coincidence that my download speeds drop to just 2 mb a minute after politics happened on my shorts page.
You should record that.
@@godzilla2k26 I should
That should be possible... https means they can only see the IP address you're connecting to (which can be reversed to find the domain), but they shouldn't be able to see what specific videos you're using
That's not possible. Like genuinely. It's the S in HTTPS (which TH-cam and basically every single website in the entire world uses)
Secure Socket Layer. Only the end website will be able to tell what specifically you are searching for on their site. Your ISP can only tell if you're on TH-cam, they can't tell if you're being rickrolled or if you're watching funny cat videos. The specific domain requests are encrypted, and it's not static encryption either. What you are describing is a coincidence
Honestly bad rep for Reese's. I'd be mad if i were them
Man I forgot all about this, mainly because nothing even happened. Kinda like the whole 'he will bring back shock therapy', nothing happened.
All hail robocopyright
Torrenting?
net nuetraility was nueted within 3 years after it was inacted. so ya. right .
Bro tw if you’re going to flash a pic of Ajit
Ha Comcast sucks with there 80 a month with a 1tb cap or with 50 extra you get unlimited. Or sweet water cable . No longer around thank God for caping speeds between night hrs and not even knowing how to bond channels .
anyone else take part in the riots to try to get ajit pai fired? Just me?
We’re so back