Andrew Auernheimer (weev) wrote,
Andrew Auernheimer
weev

Net neutrality

http://www.boingboing.net/2010/05/11/leaked-telcos-secret.html

Businesses should be allowed to run their business how they please, and the Jewish-run FCC should not have the right to muscle them out of business with tyrannical policies. If you don't want to do business with comcast you should go elsewhere, not go crying to the government for free shit you fucking welfare niggers. The essential issue is that you don't like the options that the market presents to you, and you aren't an effective enough person to create your own alternative to the market options, so you cry to the government for help. Kill yourself.

Imagine you are a restaraunt owner. You own a greasy spoon place. you serve chili and hash browns and hamburgers. Suddenly there's a law that says you have to serve foie gras and pheasant a la ronge for the same price as your hamburgers. Are you going to be pissed? Yes, and you're likely going to raise the price of your hamburgers.

The vast (55-95% in less populous areas, 100% in competitive urban areas) expenditure of laying cable has always been laid upon the ISP. There is no state-sanctioned monopoly, there are only localities where the margins are so small it makes starting local competition not lucrative. There are countless similar circumstances. You don't whine that there isn't a local competitor to your gas company.

Despite how the Boingboing types like to portray it, net neutrality is not a censorship issue at all. The issue is whether Comcast has a right to shape Bittorrent traffic. Do I think Comcast should be able to block access to say, Encyclopedia Dramatica if it does not pay them or fit some absurd content standard? No. Absolutely not, and I would like to see that ratified in national law if Comcast ever began doing it.

That isn't the issue at hand. Certain protocols (filesharing) will occupy every single bit of excess capacity your network has. I, as a past and likely future network operator feel that it is reasonable to implement QoS upon or prohibit a protocol that launches excessive sockets, consumes 80% of my bandwidth, causes 95% of my legal department's expenditures and is only used by 20% or less of my users.

I am not a copyright zealot. I fully support people's piracy, as it takes money right out of the pockets of the Jews. Personally, I get my entertainment from books and IRC which cost next to nothing, but I support your right to get free shit. Just not on my network. And now these goddamned hippies are crying that businesses dare pay for clever marketing. Hilarious.
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 8 comments