Search This Blog

Showing posts with label Internet. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Internet. Show all posts

July 20, 2017

White House offers support to take down Net Neutrality.

  1. Boards
  2. Politics
  3. White House offers support to take down Net Neutrality.
Real_Jigsaw 1 day ago#1
Of fucking course he does. He wouldn't have appointed Pai to the head of the FCC if he didn't.
I hope providers block access to 4chan and the_dipshit if this happens

let's see how they like no NN then
Switch FC: SW-0826-5923-7882 NNID: Seadrake
It is a remake, not my fault you people think ports are remakes (but only on Nintendo systems)-Demondog666
(edited 1 day ago)
carljenk 1 day ago#4
Muh regulations

-trumpublicans
Sorry if my posts make you feel emotional. It is not my intent.
Ellesarien 1 day ago#5
Trump Cult will slurp this down like always.
I will try and see it from your point of view, but I doubt we'll be able to fit both our heads up there.
LawnNinja 1 day ago#6
I'm sure Americans will be positively thrilled when their ISP charges a premium price for the "privilege" of using other internet services they already pay for, like Netflix.
"It is no measure of health to be well-adjusted to a profoundly sick society." - Jiddu Krishnamurti
Heineken14 1 day ago#7
carljenk posted...
Muh regulations

-trumpublicans


"I like Donnie because he's not establishment and wants to get rid of harmful regulations!" - Donniests
Rage is a hell of an anesthetic.
Ellesarien 1 day ago#8
How's that small Gov't working for you Republicans??
I will try and see it from your point of view, but I doubt we'll be able to fit both our heads up there.
kaiolino 1 day ago#9
B-b-but Hillary wants to ban Pepe!
Sojy 1 day ago#10
"We would never do anything bad to the customer, so we should receive permission to do bad things to the customer." ~ Corporations
acolytes 1 day ago#11
Trump probably has no idea what Net Neutrality is.

Someone should tell him that without NN, Twitter won't work as well. He'll put that baby in place permanently if he thinks that.
Empty the Tanks.
Ivory Free.
seriously, do the trumpanzeees know that net providers can throttle their favorite sites too?
Switch FC: SW-0826-5923-7882 NNID: Seadrake
It is a remake, not my fault you people think ports are remakes (but only on Nintendo systems)-Demondog666
Genericgamer667 posted...
seriously, do the trumpanzeees know that net providers can throttle their favorite sites too?


I've seen some people on some sites like Youtube literally state that their families can be tortured as long as it'd anger the liberals.

Some people hold feelings that strong so they probably won't kill.
The Only Sane Gamer. http://vgcollect.com/Bernkastelwitch My game Collection.
PSN Name: Gamenamebully Steam: BernkastelWitch
Ellesarien posted...
How's that small Gov't working for you Republicans??

Ellesarien posted...
How's that small Gov't working for you Republicans??

Ellesarien posted...
How's that small Gov't working for you Republicans??
Free thinkers are dangerous
Skasa 1 day ago#15
Good. Keep the Govt off of the internet.
Proud Communist
Genericgamer667 posted...
seriously, do the trumpanzeees know that net providers can throttle their favorite sites too?

They crave shared misery. Most of them are deranged loser fucks after all.
TomorrowDog posted...
Genericgamer667 posted...
seriously, do the trumpanzeees know that net providers can throttle their favorite sites too?

They crave shared misery. Most of them are deranged loser fucks after all.


Aye, but as they lack for actual human interaction, without net neutrality they will struggle to see the evidence of others' misery.
PSN: TheUndying84
Genericgamer667 posted...
seriously, do the trumpanzeees know that net providers can throttle their favorite sites too?


The best part of that non knowledge is that CNN/Time Warner & NBC/Comcast who have the largest networks own mostly liberal news media which means Fox News, Infowars, Brietbart are about to become very expensive to view and that's hilarious.
No no, we've gotta wait until someone edits it into the Wikipedia article, THEN it's irrevocable truth.
Mr_Church1313 posted...
Genericgamer667 posted...
seriously, do the trumpanzeees know that net providers can throttle their favorite sites too?


The best part of that non knowledge is that CNN/Time Warner & NBC/Comcast who have the largest networks own mostly liberal news media which means Fox News, Infowars, Brietbart are about to become very expensive to view and that's hilarious.


Hmmmm, this is a delicious thought.
TomorrowDog posted...
Genericgamer667 posted...
seriously, do the trumpanzeees know that net providers can throttle their favorite sites too?

They crave shared misery. Most of them are deranged loser fucks after all.


This, a thousand times this.
100% of white supremacists, white power and white hate groups are Trump fans and supporters
Sir Will 1 day ago#21
Mr_Church1313 posted...
Genericgamer667 posted...
seriously, do the trumpanzeees know that net providers can throttle their favorite sites too?


The best part of that non knowledge is that CNN/Time Warner & NBC/Comcast who have the largest networks own mostly liberal news media which means Fox News, Infowars, Brietbart are about to become very expensive to view and that's hilarious.

That would be sweet.
River Song: Well, I was off to this gay gypsy bar mitzvah for the disabled when I thought 'Gosh, the Third Reich's a bit rubbish, I think i'll kill the Fuhrer'
Unsurprisingly, an actual topic on Trump policy and not a single Trump supporter on this board shows up to support it.
// BEAUTY IS NOT LOVE - LOVE IS NOT MUSIC - MUSIC IS THE BEST - WISDOM IS THE DOMAIN OF THE WIZ--WHICH IS EXTINCT //
http://www.last.fm/user/Pogo92
Well we can see who threw more money at the White House.
Party leader, passive-aggressive doormat, pasta eater extraordinaire!
Topu_Kek 1 day ago#24
Won't it be hilarious when ISPs block every pro-trump site on the internet?
"My son is a high-quality person" -Donald J Trump
KD003 1 day ago#25
Pogo_Marimo posted...
Unsurprisingly, an actual topic on Trump policy and not a single Trump supporter on this board shows up to support it.


They're just scrounging for ways to deflect to Hillary or Obama. They'll be here any minute now.
There is no SFV Message Board. Only Reek now.
http://imgur.com/opZ0laf
(edited 1 day ago)
I eagerly await the spin from @Gobstoppers12 @knightmere122 @Knave @TheHonorableOne @Taishi_Ci_CCR @TaiIs82 @EuroKnight38


I probably missed some
The last one on that list has gone on the record saying NN is bad, so that one's covered.
Party leader, passive-aggressive doormat, pasta eater extraordinaire!
KD003 posted...
Pogo_Marimo posted...
Unsurprisingly, an actual topic on Trump policy and not a single Trump supporter on this board shows up to support it.


They're just scrounging for ways to deflect to Hillary or Obama. They'll be here any minute now.

Don't worry, I did a role call
Ellesarien 1 day ago#29
Pogo_Marimo posted...
Unsurprisingly, an actual topic on Trump policy and not a single Trump supporter on this board shows up to support it.



They are fucking cowards just like Dear Leader.
I will try and see it from your point of view, but I doubt we'll be able to fit both our heads up there.
omega bahumat posted...
I probably missed some


i dont know much about this topic one way or the other so I dont have an opinion. i dont think ive participated in any NN discusions.
"So you never wanted a regular type life?"
"What the **** is that...barbeques and ball games?"
(edited 1 day ago)
omega bahumat posted...
I eagerly await the spin from @Gobstoppers12 @knightmere122 @Knave @TheHonorableOne @Taishi_Ci_CCR @TaiIs82 @EuroKnight38


I probably missed some


Hey, how did you gain access to my list of ignored users?
TheHonorableOne posted...
omega bahumat posted...
I probably missed some


i dont know much about this topic on way or the other so I dont have an opinion. i dont think ive participated in any NN discusions.


@TheHonorableOne
Hey, that's a fair point!

Thank you for not mindlessly shilling. =]
(edited 1 day ago)
Sylph 1 day ago#33
In a way, this would just pave the way for Google to make real inroads in working to oust Comcast and Verizon finally in this arena. When Google is the only one not throttling speeds and charging extra, I think we will see an expansion happen there.
ZSB: We look so much better in a dress than you.
I wouldn't mind being alone if I could stand my own company.
I don't give a shit about this issue.
Ohio State Buckeyes: 2014-15 National Champions
kislev 1 day ago#35
Do you guys realise this is something Obama started?
We need a new Final Fantasy Tactics
kislev posted...
Do you guys realise this is something Obama started?


what? Obama admin defended net neutrality
Switch FC: SW-0826-5923-7882 NNID: Seadrake
It is a remake, not my fault you people think ports are remakes (but only on Nintendo systems)-Demondog666
kislev posted...
Do you guys realise this is something Obama started?


Are you on crack?

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jul/18/wh-back-fcc-reverse-obama-era-net-neutrality-rules/
ScottThang 1 day ago#38
Sylph posted...
In a way, this would just pave the way for Google to make real inroads in working to oust Comcast and Verizon finally in this arena. When Google is the only one not throttling speeds and charging extra, I think we will see an expansion happen there.


If Google ousts all the competitors, what will stop them from enacting worse policies than Comcast, et al ever had?
Only on LUE would people be talking about Captain Planet commandeering the magic school bus- bronzeshadow
There is no cure for cancer- LUE's slogan
ScottThang 1 day ago#39
Also, looks like we finally have the official Trumpster stances on this issue.

"Don't care"
"Obama did it"
"LA LA LA CAN'T HEAR YOU LA LA LA MAKE AMRICA GREAT AGAIN LA LA LA"
Only on LUE would people be talking about Captain Planet commandeering the magic school bus- bronzeshadow
There is no cure for cancer- LUE's slogan
Spooking 1 day ago#40
Time to support impeachment. Internet speed is more important than this bumbling fool who has no idea what he is doing.
Prism Ranger (Red): Isn't it obvious? We don't have any friends!
Disgaea: Hour of Darkness
Sylph 1 day ago#41
So far it hasn't been their style from any of their endeavors. They might force more advertising, maybe. But I don't believe they would throttle speeds or anything like that.
ZSB: We look so much better in a dress than you.
I wouldn't mind being alone if I could stand my own company.
LawnNinja 1 day ago#42
Spooking posted...
Time to support impeachment. Internet speed is more important than this bumbling fool who has no idea what he is doing.

It's not just about speed. It's really about free speech. Without net neutrality laws in place, service providers can effectively block content from any site they choose.
"It is no measure of health to be well-adjusted to a profoundly sick society." - Jiddu Krishnamurti
Net neutrality has been on the chopping block for quite awhile unfortunately. I mean we should consider ourselves lucky it lasted as long as it did considering the FCC has basically just been a cable industry lobbyist stashing zone for the last decade. Even Wheeler was a lobbyist for them and only turned because he actually cared about how people perceived him (not a dingo). 

And lol at the Hillary shills acting like they give a shit about this issue. You gonna let the class know how some of Hillary's largest donors are cable companies like Comcast? 

These cable companies don't give a shit about red or blue, all they care about is more green. Only way to stop them is to throw their cronies out of leadership roles on both sides of the aisle.
kislev posted...
Do you guys realise this is something Obama started?


Obama supported the net neutrality rules. You do realize that right?
This isn't funny Dean, the voice says I'm almost out of minutes!
~Alexandra
(edited 1 day ago)
Ellesarien 1 day ago#45
Russian Rocket posted...
kislev posted...
Do you guys realise this is something Obama started?


Are you on crack?

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jul/18/wh-back-fcc-reverse-obama-era-net-neutrality-rules/



They just don't care if they lie or not. His Cultists have seen Trump lie whenever he wants and just follow his lead
I will try and see it from your point of view, but I doubt we'll be able to fit both our heads up there.
Ellesarien 1 day ago#46
So I see the Trump Cult has come and blamed :


Obama and Hillary.

Never have seen C-holsters like these people. They simply lack any integrity to blame Trump for anything.
I will try and see it from your point of view, but I doubt we'll be able to fit both our heads up there.
I believe net neutrality is just a censorship-by-proxy regulation that makes it easier for pro-NN companies to do business (Google, Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, etc.) by banning ISPs from being able to throttle or charge them for fast lanes, thereby giving them an unfair advantage over companies who could compete in a free market.

So I'm okay with this.
LawnNinja 1 day ago#48
EuroKnight38 posted...
I believe net neutrality is just a censorship-by-proxy regulation that makes it easier for pro-NN companies to do business (Google, Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, etc.) by banning ISPs from being able to throttle or charge them for fast lanes, thereby giving them an unfair advantage over companies who could compete in a free market.

So I'm okay with this.

Goldice posted...

Quickest way to know that the person has no idea what net neutrality is and is only parroting the beliefs of "their team" is if they somehow equate keeping internet traffic neutral with censorship. As if that makes sense (and as if the alternative isn't more conducive to censorship, which it is)
"It is no measure of health to be well-adjusted to a profoundly sick society." - Jiddu Krishnamurti
EuroKnight38 posted...
I believe net neutrality is just a censorship-by-proxy regulation that makes it easier for pro-NN companies to do business (Google, Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, etc.) by banning ISPs from being able to throttle or charge them for fast lanes, thereby giving them an unfair advantage over companies who could compete in a free market.

So I'm okay with this.


Censorship would be allowing ISPs, who have in many areas monopolies on service, the ability to choose which sites they devote resources to and which they do not. 

You can't call for the free market to handle something when a free market does not exist for ISPs. That is the whole reason for classifying them as utilities in the first place.
Great, but just insulting me doesn't prove me wrong or change my mind. I explained why I think it's censorship. If you guys really cared about free speech, then why don't you call for "reddit neutrality" or "youtube neutrality", and why do you make fun of me whenever I complain about social media censorship or political correctness?

Revealed preference shows itself when you do that.
  1. Boards
  2. Politics 
  3. White House offers support to take down Net Neutrality.
    Ellesarien 1 day ago#51
    TheShadowViper posted...
    EuroKnight38 posted...
    I believe net neutrality is just a censorship-by-proxy regulation that makes it easier for pro-NN companies to do business (Google, Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, etc.) by banning ISPs from being able to throttle or charge them for fast lanes, thereby giving them an unfair advantage over companies who could compete in a free market.

    So I'm okay with this.


    Censorship would be allowing ISPs, who have in many areas monopolies on service, the ability to choose which sites they devote resources to and which they do not. 

    You can't call for the free market to handle something when a free market does not exist for ISPs. That is the whole reason for classifying them as utilities in the first place.



    When will you people understand that for Madfoot it all boils down to this :

    Does Dear Leader like it = Good
    Does Dear leader not like it = Bad.


    That's it. No other thinking goes on.
    I will try and see it from your point of view, but I doubt we'll be able to fit both our heads up there.
    EuroKnight38 posted...
    Great, but just insulting me doesn't prove me wrong or change my mind. I explained why I think it's censorship. If you guys really cared about free speech, then why don't you call for "reddit neutrality" or "youtube neutrality", and why do you make fun of me whenever I complain about social media censorship or political correctness?

    Revealed preference shows itself when you do that.


    Nobody insulted you, dipstick. He was EXPLAINING it to you, you fucking tool.
    TheShadowViper posted...
    EuroKnight38 posted...
    I believe net neutrality is just a censorship-by-proxy regulation that makes it easier for pro-NN companies to do business (Google, Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, etc.) by banning ISPs from being able to throttle or charge them for fast lanes, thereby giving them an unfair advantage over companies who could compete in a free market.

    So I'm okay with this.


    Censorship would be allowing ISPs, who have in many areas monopolies on service, the ability to choose which sites they devote resources to and which they do not. 

    You can't call for the free market to handle something when a free market does not exist for ISPs. That is the whole reason for classifying them as utilities in the first place.

    Interested in seeing you answer the above dilemma to.

    I don't understand the scapegoating of ISPs, since all the fearmongering about throttling abuses are purely hypothetical and I'm more concerned about the censorship that already exists, and affects me.
    Heineken14 1 day ago#54
    Russian Rocket posted...
    Nobody insulted you, dipstick. He was EXPLAINING it to you, you fucking tool.


    Explanations on how things work are an insult to stormfoot.
    Rage is a hell of an anesthetic.
    Red XlV 1 day ago#55
    TheHonorableOne posted...
    i dont know much about this topic one way or the other so I dont have an opinion.

    That's odd. You've never let ignorance about a topic stop you from forming an opinion on that topic before.
    A bad enough dude to save the President.
    "We chose more government instead of more freedom." - Marco Rubio (R-Florida) on the Bush administration
    Russian Rocket posted...
    EuroKnight38 posted...
    Great, but just insulting me doesn't prove me wrong or change my mind. I explained why I think it's censorship. If you guys really cared about free speech, then why don't you call for "reddit neutrality" or "youtube neutrality", and why do you make fun of me whenever I complain about social media censorship or political correctness?

    Revealed preference shows itself when you do that.

    Nobody insulted you, dipstick. He was EXPLAINING it to you, you fucking tool.

    Directed at the other poster. No need for insults.

    Ellesarien posted...
    TheShadowViper posted...
    EuroKnight38 posted...
    I believe net neutrality is just a censorship-by-proxy regulation that makes it easier for pro-NN companies to do business (Google, Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, etc.) by banning ISPs from being able to throttle or charge them for fast lanes, thereby giving them an unfair advantage over companies who could compete in a free market.

    So I'm okay with this.

    Censorship would be allowing ISPs, who have in many areas monopolies on service, the ability to choose which sites they devote resources to and which they do not. 

    You can't call for the free market to handle something when a free market does not exist for ISPs. That is the whole reason for classifying them as utilities in the first place.

    When will you people understand that for Madfoot it all boils down to this :

    Does Dear Leader like it = Good
    Does Dear leader not like it = Bad.


    That's it. No other thinking goes on.

    Wrong. How are you not more guilty of this my team good, your team bad logic?
    Red XlV 1 day ago#57
    EuroKnight38 posted...
    Great, but just insulting me doesn't prove me wrong or change my mind. I explained why I think it's censorship. If you guys really cared about free speech, then why don't you call for "reddit neutrality" or "youtube neutrality", and why do you make fun of me whenever I complain about social media censorship or political correctness?

    Revealed preference shows itself when you do that.

    You're literally arguing that it's censorship to ban ISPs from censoring. Any insults thrown your way are ones you've earned, Stormer.
    A bad enough dude to save the President.
    "We chose more government instead of more freedom." - Marco Rubio (R-Florida) on the Bush administration
    EuroKnight38 posted...
    Russian Rocket posted...
    EuroKnight38 posted...
    Great, but just insulting me doesn't prove me wrong or change my mind. I explained why I think it's censorship. If you guys really cared about free speech, then why don't you call for "reddit neutrality" or "youtube neutrality", and why do you make fun of me whenever I complain about social media censorship or political correctness?

    Revealed preference shows itself when you do that.

    Nobody insulted you, dipstick. He was EXPLAINING it to you, you fucking tool.

    Directed at the other poster. No need for insults.


    The only one that insulted you was me.
    Hyena 20 1 day ago#59
    The joke's on them. They'll either turn back net neutrality or at the very least ban tiered internet service for business websites, news sites, and social media once they have their right wing goodie and "news" sites blacklisted as hate sites by ISPs (and you know, their corporate overlords will pressure them to exempt business sites from the tiered and blacklisted services)
    Meet Captain Euro, the coolest superhero this side of Aquaman!~~Portal of Evil
    [Disillusioned Independent]
    LMAO @ the cultists in here with their obvious lies getting shredded to bits.

    "Yeah but Obama did it first!"

    "Uhhh...no."

    "MAGA libruls cuck free speech!"

    Ignorant trash tier human beings.
    100% of white supremacists, white power and white hate groups are Trump fans and supporters
    Ellesarien 1 day ago#61
    EuroKnight38 posted...
    Russian Rocket posted...
    EuroKnight38 posted...
    Great, but just insulting me doesn't prove me wrong or change my mind. I explained why I think it's censorship. If you guys really cared about free speech, then why don't you call for "reddit neutrality" or "youtube neutrality", and why do you make fun of me whenever I complain about social media censorship or political correctness?

    Revealed preference shows itself when you do that.

    Nobody insulted you, dipstick. He was EXPLAINING it to you, you fucking tool.

    Directed at the other poster. No need for insults.

    Ellesarien posted...
    TheShadowViper posted...
    EuroKnight38 posted...
    I believe net neutrality is just a censorship-by-proxy regulation that makes it easier for pro-NN companies to do business (Google, Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, etc.) by banning ISPs from being able to throttle or charge them for fast lanes, thereby giving them an unfair advantage over companies who could compete in a free market.

    So I'm okay with this.

    Censorship would be allowing ISPs, who have in many areas monopolies on service, the ability to choose which sites they devote resources to and which they do not. 

    You can't call for the free market to handle something when a free market does not exist for ISPs. That is the whole reason for classifying them as utilities in the first place.

    When will you people understand that for Madfoot it all boils down to this :

    Does Dear Leader like it = Good
    Does Dear leader not like it = Bad.


    That's it. No other thinking goes on.

    Wrong. How are you not more guilty of this my team good, your team bad logic?



    Only if my team is America. I am a country over party American which is why I am so fucking embarrassed right now. 

    I don't despise Trump because he chose to become Republican (you know he has leaned Democratic for most his life right?) to run for President but because he is an evil piece of shit human that is simply using the Presidency to bolster his own massive EGO. He doesn't care about policies, he cares about holding the pep-rally afterwards and bathing in the adoration of his cultists.

    He is playing his role in Celebrity Apprentice but his actions affect everyone now.
    I will try and see it from your point of view, but I doubt we'll be able to fit both our heads up there.
    Russian Rocket posted...
    EuroKnight38 posted...
    Russian Rocket posted...
    EuroKnight38 posted...
    Great, but just insulting me doesn't prove me wrong or change my mind. I explained why I think it's censorship. If you guys really cared about free speech, then why don't you call for "reddit neutrality" or "youtube neutrality", and why do you make fun of me whenever I complain about social media censorship or political correctness?

    Revealed preference shows itself when you do that.

    Nobody insulted you, dipstick. He was EXPLAINING it to you, you fucking tool.

    Directed at the other poster. No need for insults.

    The only one that insulted you was me.

    I interpreted the snarky "Anyone who has concerns about censorship is a Trump cultist who doesn't understand net neutrality" post as insulting, because it does not actually make any arguments and just shames and demeans people.

    BastionofStraz posted...
    "MAGA libruls cuck free speech!"

    Ignorant trash tier human beings.

    Sad that you're so dismissive of free speech.

    Hyena 20 posted...
    The joke's on them. They'll either turn back net neutrality or at the very least ban tiered internet service for business websites, news sites, and social media once they have their right wing goodie and "news" sites blacklisted as hate sites by ISPs (and you know, their corporate overlords will pressure them to exempt business sites from the tiered and blacklisted services)

    If you think thete's a good chance of this happening - and I guess anything's possible - then why has no one on this board ever defended us from corporate censorship before? Why do I only get mockery and hatred when I complain about political correctness, and why doesn't anyone support government intervention in other fields where our free speech is under attack? Why is net neutrality special? All serious questions.
    Ellesarien posted...
    Only if my team is America. I am a country over party American which is why I am so fucking embarrassed right now.

    I don't despise Trump because he chose to become Republican (you know he has leaned Democratic for most his life right?) to run for President but because he is an evil piece of shit human that is simply using the Presidency to bolster his own massive EGO. He doesn't care about policies, he cares about holding the pep-rally afterwards and bathing in the adoration of his cultists.

    He is playing his role in Celebrity Apprentice but his actions affect everyone now.

    Did you also say that Obama was an evil piece of shit human? What's with the vile language?
    Red XlV posted...
    EuroKnight38 posted...
    Great, but just insulting me doesn't prove me wrong or change my mind. I explained why I think it's censorship. If you guys really cared about free speech, then why don't you call for "reddit neutrality" or "youtube neutrality", and why do you make fun of me whenever I complain about social media censorship or political correctness?

    Revealed preference shows itself when you do that.

    You're literally arguing that it's censorship to ban ISPs from censoring. Any insults thrown your way are ones you've earned, Stormer.

    No, I'm arguing that the monetary incentive which pro-NN companies gain from this possibly facilitates their own enthusiastic censorship.
    Atombender 1 day ago#65
    acolytes posted...
    Trump probably has no idea what Net Neutrality is.

    Someone should tell him that without NN, Twitter won't work as well. He'll put that baby in place permanently if he thinks that.


    This
    "Another visitor! Stay a while! Stay forever!"
    The Trump administration is against Net Neutrality?
    This same group?
    https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/12/trump-and-his-advisers-net-neutrality
    With this same idiot?
    https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/532608358508167168?lang=en
    Shocking!

    And before Hilary supporters get too uppity, she was reportedly "ambivalent" about NN herself although to her credit she did at least pretend she supported it.
    http://i.imgur.com/szMsu.png
    Validate your purchases and discredit the purchases of others whenever possible. Numbers objectively define quality and enjoyment.
    (edited 1 day ago)
    EuroKnight38 posted...
    TheShadowViper posted...
    EuroKnight38 posted...
    I believe net neutrality is just a censorship-by-proxy regulation that makes it easier for pro-NN companies to do business (Google, Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, etc.) by banning ISPs from being able to throttle or charge them for fast lanes, thereby giving them an unfair advantage over companies who could compete in a free market.

    So I'm okay with this.


    Censorship would be allowing ISPs, who have in many areas monopolies on service, the ability to choose which sites they devote resources to and which they do not. 

    You can't call for the free market to handle something when a free market does not exist for ISPs. That is the whole reason for classifying them as utilities in the first place.

    Interested in seeing you answer the above dilemma to.

    I don't understand the scapegoating of ISPs, since all the fearmongering about throttling abuses are purely hypothetical and I'm more concerned about the censorship that already exists, and affects me.


    It is because ISPs are the ultimate gatekeeper. Reddit, YouTube, Pornhub, these are all just addresses on a registry that the ISPs control (note search engines are the next "step down" in power from ISPs). They can choose what you see and how fast that information gets to you. If net neutrality was to be removed, they would be able to decide (usually because they are paid large sums of money) which businesses succeed and which businesses you can't even open the webpages for. It allows them to extort internet companies for a place at the "decent service" table. In many cases there are not more options available.

    Imagine if someone owned all the roads in a city and were able to charge people for proceeding on these roads at a decent pace. There are no alternative roads, so you are forced to use these ones to get to work/school. If the owners of these roads charge you an absurd sum to use them, how are you to refuse? You can't. How about if they charge your company as well so that their employees can get to work on time? How about another charge for deliveries, etc. They are now able to financially massacre you, your employers, and anyone else who has any connection with those roads at all. They have the power to choose which businesses succeed and which businesses fail.

    As for ISPs abusing their power...Their is ample evidence of them already breaking the law in regards to net neutrality and they have routinely broken the law to aid the US government in spying on it's citizens. I don't think anyone has any doubt giving ISPs such power would lead to astronomical abuse.
    (edited 1 day ago)
    Minotaur92 1 day ago#68
    Ellesarien posted...
    Trump Cult will slurp this down like always.


    As opposed to bashing anything and everything he has done? Got'cha.
    Heineken14 1 day ago#69
    Minotaur92 posted...
    Ellesarien posted...
    Trump Cult will slurp this down like always.


    As opposed to bashing anything and everything he has done? Got'cha.


    Except the left has routinely given him credit where credit is due. Just because the piece of shit deserves almost quantum levels of credit doesn't mean it's OUR fault. We didn't vote for the asshole.
    Rage is a hell of an anesthetic.
    Pogo_Marimo posted...
    Unsurprisingly, an actual topic on Trump policy and not a single Trump supporter on this board shows up to support it.


    Yeah. We were all at work. You Liberals should try it sometime. It's not that bad.

    TheHonorableOne posted...
    omega bahumat posted...
    I probably missed some


    i dont know much about this topic one way or the other so I dont have an opinion. i dont think ive participated in any NN discusions.
    Which dystopia do you want to live in? Huxley or Orwell? - AtmosOmega
    You guys on this board can be a little biased...
    Red XlV 1 day ago#71
    @EuroKnight38 posted...
    No, I'm arguing that the monetary incentive which pro-NN companies gain from this possibly facilitates their own enthusiastic censorship.

    That "argument" is literally gibberish. There is no such "monetary incentive", and to think there could be shows you don't have the first clue what net neutrality even is. And you also seem to not know what censorship is.
    A bad enough dude to save the President.
    "We chose more government instead of more freedom." - Marco Rubio (R-Florida) on the Bush administration
    Heineken14 1 day ago#72
    Taishi Ci CCR posted...
    Yeah. We were all at work. You Liberals should try it sometime. It's not that bad.


    Maybe just get a job where you can use a computer?
    Rage is a hell of an anesthetic.
    Heineken14 posted...
    Minotaur92 posted...
    Ellesarien posted...
    Trump Cult will slurp this down like always.


    As opposed to bashing anything and everything he has done? Got'cha.


    Except the left has routinely given him credit where credit is due. Just because the piece of shit deserves almost quantum levels of credit doesn't mean it's OUR fault. We didn't vote for the asshole.


    No, you voted for the Clinton, who had Comcast donate and fundraise large sums of money for her. We know.
    Heineken14 posted...
    Taishi Ci CCR posted...
    Yeah. We were all at work. You Liberals should try it sometime. It's not that bad.


    Maybe just get a job where you can use a computer?


    If you use a work computer to shill on GameFAQs, you're not working.
    Which dystopia do you want to live in? Huxley or Orwell? - AtmosOmega
    You guys on this board can be a little biased...
    EuroKnight38 posted...
    I believe net neutrality is just a censorship-by-proxy regulation that makes it easier for pro-NN companies to do business (Google, Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, etc.) by banning ISPs from being able to throttle or charge them for fast lanes, thereby giving them an unfair advantage over companies who could compete in a free market.

    So I'm okay with this.


    Wait

    So you're against The Free Market(tm) when it comes to the internet? Because those sites being popular is just the free market at work.

    And you're in favor of the government allowing corporations to pick winners and losers, and to allow them to blackmail the losers by forcing them to pay extra money or die via throttled web traffic?

    And not to mention the ISPs will charge us, the consumer, extra fees on top of all that if we want to access those 'loser' sites.

    Fucking

    hypocritical

    shills
    Here, polish my spear. -- Crantius Colto
    http://i.imgur.com/HRWx28A.jpg
    Ellesarien 1 day ago#76
    EuroKnight38 posted...
    Ellesarien posted...
    Only if my team is America. I am a country over party American which is why I am so fucking embarrassed right now.

    I don't despise Trump because he chose to become Republican (you know he has leaned Democratic for most his life right?) to run for President but because he is an evil piece of shit human that is simply using the Presidency to bolster his own massive EGO. He doesn't care about policies, he cares about holding the pep-rally afterwards and bathing in the adoration of his cultists.

    He is playing his role in Celebrity Apprentice but his actions affect everyone now.

    Did you also say that Obama was an evil piece of shit human? What's with the vile language?



    Why would I? Obama is a decent human being that did make mistakes but he CARED about the office of the Presidency.

    I'll just ignore your crocodile tears about vile language as you support good ol' "Grab them by the pussy" and have no issues with that. Try that weak shit on your friends...that dog don't hunt with me.
    I will try and see it from your point of view, but I doubt we'll be able to fit both our heads up there.
    EuroKnight38 posted...
    I don't understand the scapegoating of ISPs, since all the fearmongering about throttling abuses are purely hypothetical


    ....except that's not true because fucking Verizon was doing exactly that to Netflix and YouTube before these NN protections were put in place a couple of years ago.

    Literally what?
    Here, polish my spear. -- Crantius Colto
    http://i.imgur.com/HRWx28A.jpg
    Red XlV posted...
    @EuroKnight38 posted...
    No, I'm arguing that the monetary incentive which pro-NN companies gain from this possibly facilitates their own enthusiastic censorship.

    That "argument" is literally gibberish. There is no such "monetary incentive", and to think there could be shows you don't have the first clue what net neutrality even is. And you also seem to not know what censorship is.

    Not being throttled and charged for fast lanes is a significant monetary incentive. The companies could lose hundreds of millions without net neutrality (there's a lot of ISPs).

    TheShadowViper posted...
    EuroKnight38 posted...
    TheShadowViper posted...
    EuroKnight38 posted...
    I believe net neutrality is just a censorship-by-proxy regulation that makes it easier for pro-NN companies to do business (Google, Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, etc.) by banning ISPs from being able to throttle or charge them for fast lanes, thereby giving them an unfair advantage over companies who could compete in a free market.

    So I'm okay with this.


    Censorship would be allowing ISPs, who have in many areas monopolies on service, the ability to choose which sites they devote resources to and which they do not. 

    You can't call for the free market to handle something when a free market does not exist for ISPs. That is the whole reason for classifying them as utilities in the first place.

    Interested in seeing you answer the above dilemma to.

    I don't understand the scapegoating of ISPs, since all the fearmongering about throttling abuses are purely hypothetical and I'm more concerned about the censorship that already exists, and affects me.


    It is because ISPs are the ultimate gatekeeper. Reddit, YouTube, Pornhub, these are all just addresses on a registry that the ISPs control (note search engines are the next "step down" in power from ISPs). They can choose what you see and how fast that information gets to you. If net neutrality was to be removed, they would be able to decide (usually because they are paid large sums of money) which businesses succeed and which businesses you can't even open the webpages for. It allows them to extort internet companies for a place at the "decent service" table. In many cases there are not more options available.

    Imagine if someone owned all the roads in a city and were able to charge people for proceeding on these roads at a decent pace. There are no alternative roads, so you are forced to use these ones to get to work/school. If the owners of these roads charge you an absurd sum to use them, how are you to refuse? You can't. How about if they charge your company as well so that their employees can get to work on time? How about another charge for deliveries, etc. They are now able to financially massacre you, your employers, and anyone else who has any connection with those roads at all. They have the power to choose which businesses succeed and which businesses fail.

    As for ISPs abusing their power...Their is ample evidence of them already breaking the law in regards to net neutrality and they have routinely broken the law to aid the US government in spying on it's citizens. I don't think anyone has any doubt giving ISPs such power would lead to astronomical abuse.

    I don't agree with ISPs being the bigger gatekeeper. You can always switch to another ISP, even if you have to move, but someone demonetize on youtube or banned from twitter is being deprived on a platform with practically a monopoly on content distribution in its own sphere, and necessarily losing out on many many opportunities.
    Ellesarien 1 day ago#79
    Argonian_Maid posted...
    EuroKnight38 posted...
    I don't understand the scapegoating of ISPs, since all the fearmongering about throttling abuses are purely hypothetical


    ....except that's not true because fucking Verizon was doing exactly that to Netflix and YouTube before these NN protections were put in place a couple of years ago.

    Literally what?



    I gave you the key for this guy in post #51. Ignore at your own mental peril.
    I will try and see it from your point of view, but I doubt we'll be able to fit both our heads up there.
    Ellesarien posted...
    Argonian_Maid posted...
    EuroKnight38 posted...
    I don't understand the scapegoating of ISPs, since all the fearmongering about throttling abuses are purely hypothetical


    ....except that's not true because fucking Verizon was doing exactly that to Netflix and YouTube before these NN protections were put in place a couple of years ago.

    Literally what?



    I gave you the key for this guy in post #51. Ignore at your own mental peril.


    Yeah, I saw that after I posted. I got madfoot'd.
    Here, polish my spear. -- Crantius Colto
    http://i.imgur.com/HRWx28A.jpg
    Argonian_Maid posted...
    EuroKnight38 posted...
    I don't understand the scapegoating of ISPs, since all the fearmongering about throttling abuses are purely hypothetical

    ....except that's not true because fucking Verizon was doing exactly that to Netflix and YouTube before these NN protections were put in place a couple of years ago.

    Literally what?

    I dont consider that abuse, though. That sounds like Silicon Valley being forced to compete in a free market. If ISPs started using throttling to damage small businesses or control content, that to me would be abusive.

    Argonian_Maid posted...
    Wait

    So you're against The Free Market(tm) when it comes to the internet? Because those sites being popular is just the free market at work.

    And you're in favor of the government allowing corporations to pick winners and losers, and to allow them to blackmail the losers by forcing them to pay extra money or die via throttled web traffic?

    And not to mention the ISPs will charge us, the consumer, extra fees on top of all that if we want to access those 'loser' sites.

    Fucking

    hypocritical

    shills

    I'm for the free market period. I just have a problem that people only seem to support government intervention when it actively hurts me, not when it helps me.

    Ellesarien posted...
    EuroKnight38 posted...
    Ellesarien posted...
    Only if my team is America. I am a country over party American which is why I am so fucking embarrassed right now.

    I don't despise Trump because he chose to become Republican (you know he has leaned Democratic for most his life right?) to run for President but because he is an evil piece of shit human that is simply using the Presidency to bolster his own massive EGO. He doesn't care about policies, he cares about holding the pep-rally afterwards and bathing in the adoration of his cultists.

    He is playing his role in Celebrity Apprentice but his actions affect everyone now.

    Did you also say that Obama was an evil piece of shit human? What's with the vile language?

    Why would I? Obama is a decent human being that did make mistakes but he CARED about the office of the Presidency.

    I'll just ignore your crocodile tears about vile language as you support good ol' "Grab them by the pussy" and have no issues with that. Try that weak shit on your friends...that dog don't hunt with me.

    Literally hates a guy because he says politically incorrect stuff.
    Taishi Ci CCR posted...
    Pogo_Marimo posted...
    Unsurprisingly, an actual topic on Trump policy and not a single Trump supporter on this board shows up to support it.


    Yeah. We were all at work. You Liberals should try it sometime. It's not that bad.


    Maybe if you listened to Gradieus's investing advice like the rest of us, you wouldn't have to deliver pizzas any longer/
    Ellesarien 1 day ago#83
    EuroKnight38 posted...
    Literally hates a guy because he says politically incorrect stuff.



    Umm...Einstein...you've already replied to the post where I gave you my reasoning. I was showing you your own hypocrisy which of course you lack the courage to even look at.

    Not the brightest bulb on the tree I suppose.
    I will try and see it from your point of view, but I doubt we'll be able to fit both our heads up there.
    LawnNinja 1 day ago#84
    Taishi Ci CCR posted...
    Heineken14 posted...
    Taishi Ci CCR posted...
    Yeah. We were all at work. You Liberals should try it sometime. It's not that bad.


    Maybe just get a job where you can use a computer?


    If you use a work computer to shill on GameFAQs, you're not working.

    Well hey now, that's a kick to my nuts. Pretty much every Dune conversation we've had has been typed from a work computer on my end ;-)
    "It is no measure of health to be well-adjusted to a profoundly sick society." - Jiddu Krishnamurti
    EuroKnight38 posted...

    Not being throttled and charged for fast lanes is a significant monetary incentive. The companies could lose 
    I don't agree with ISPs being the bigger gatekeeper. You can always switch to another ISP, even if you have to move, but someone demonetize on youtube or banned from twitter is being deprived on a platform with practically a monopoly on content distribution in its own sphere, and necessarily losing out on many many opportunities.


    Then you don't agree with reality. ISPs have the ultimate say in if and to what you have access to on the internet. To argue that it isn't a big deal because you could just move to another area with a different ISP is ridiculous on its face. Furthermore, even if you did move, you would only move to another regional monopoly since that is how ISPs in the US function. The result would be exactly the same. There is no free market with ISPs in the US, as free markets require perfect competition which does not exist in that industry. 

    Google and many other companies that provide internet service are also capable of abuses of their position and power, and they too must be watched and regulated closely. That doesn't mean that ISPs should be allowed to abuse consumers.
    Heineken14 1 day ago#86
    Taishi Ci CCR posted...
    Heineken14 posted...
    Taishi Ci CCR posted...
    Yeah. We were all at work. You Liberals should try it sometime. It's not that bad.


    Maybe just get a job where you can use a computer?


    If you use a work computer to shill on GameFAQs, you're not working.


    Learn how to multitask.
    Rage is a hell of an anesthetic.
    TheShadowViper posted...
    EuroKnight38 posted...

    Not being throttled and charged for fast lanes is a significant monetary incentive. The companies could lose 
    I don't agree with ISPs being the bigger gatekeeper. You can always switch to another ISP, even if you have to move, but someone demonetize on youtube or banned from twitter is being deprived on a platform with practically a monopoly on content distribution in its own sphere, and necessarily losing out on many many opportunities.


    Then you don't agree with reality. ISPs have the ultimate say in if and to what you have access to on the internet. To argue that it isn't a big deal because you could just move to another area with a different ISP is ridiculous on its face. Furthermore, even if you did move, you would only move to another regional monopoly since that is how ISPs in the US function. The result would be exactly the same. There is no free market with ISPs in the US, as free markets require perfect competition which does not exist in that industry. 

    Google and many other companies that provide internet service are also capable of abuses of their position and power, and they too must be watched and regulated closely. That doesn't mean that ISPs should be allowed to abuse consumers.

    I have multiple ISPs here. I can't really imagine ISPs using their throttling powers to irresponsibly to censor content. There's already so much public outcry over merely repealing net neutrality, that the first time someone does something really authoritarian, people will instantly be upset about it.

    Comparatively, people seem to either be silent about social media censorship or actively okay with it. That upsets and disturbs me. When you consider how net neutrality is in these companies' best interests, by banning ISPs from using throttling to essentially extort them, I become skeptical of the whole plan. I can probably admit that some form of throttling regulation would be reasonable, but it concerns me that my own free speech rights seem to be thrown aside as less important.
    And I can't imagine a madfoot post that isn't profoundly stupid and wrong.
    Orlando City/USA Soccer 
    Dukat/Madred 2020. Make Cardassia Great Again!
    Notice how you can't offer a counterargument...
    I don't need to. You've already been shredded by everyone who has bothered to treat you as the honest, genuine person you are not.
    Orlando City/USA Soccer 
    Dukat/Madred 2020. Make Cardassia Great Again!
    I have honest concerns about net neutrality, and as I said when the pro NN people tend to be the same as the anti free speech people, it looks a little suspicious.
    theAteam 1 day ago#92
    I think this is a good thing. Most of the issues the WH has supported die a painful, fiery death.
    Buffalo Bills Playoff Tracker
    Status: 17 years and counting
    (edited 1 day ago)
    EuroKnight38 posted...
    I have honest concerns about net neutrality, and as I said when the pro NN people tend to be the same as the anti free speech people, it looks a little suspicious.

    Except ending NN is more conductive to censoring free speech than having it.
    Red XlV 1 day ago#94
    EuroKnight38 posted...
    I have honest concerns about net neutrality, and as I said when the pro NN people tend to be the same as the anti free speech people, it looks a little suspicious.

    No, you don't have honest concerns. You have blatantly dishonest concerns. And your claim that "the pro NN people tend to be the same as the anti free speech people" is an obvious lie. Expressing disagreement with what you say is not "anti free speech".
    A bad enough dude to save the President.
    "We chose more government instead of more freedom." - Marco Rubio (R-Florida) on the Bush administration
    Kaliesto 1 day ago#95
    Guys, I think at the end of the day if NN were to be abolished that there will be a huge worldwide backlash.

    We really shouldn't be worried, the GOP is digging their own graves for doing this.
    It's not stupidity, it's something much worse. It's... the GameSpot comment section!-Stebsis
    Gimme dat, gimme dat, gimme dat DramaFAQs-misterbum
    guerrillakidney posted...
    EuroKnight38 posted...
    I have honest concerns about net neutrality, and as I said when the pro NN people tend to be the same as the anti free speech people, it looks a little suspicious.

    Except ending NN is more conductive to censoring free speech than having it.

    And yet, you don't seem to have an answer for protecting my free speech from corporations like Google, Facebook, or Twitter. Some of you are even being like Red and lying about it:

    Red XlV posted...
    EuroKnight38 posted...
    I have honest concerns about net neutrality, and as I said when the pro NN people tend to be the same as the anti free speech people, it looks a little suspicious.

    No, you don't have honest concerns. You have blatantly dishonest concerns. And your claim that "the pro NN people tend to be the same as the anti free speech people" is an obvious lie. Expressing disagreement with what you say is not "anti free speech".

    Censorship isn't mere disagreement. :)
    Red XlV posted...
    EuroKnight38 posted...
    I have honest concerns about net neutrality, and as I said when the pro NN people tend to be the same as the anti free speech people, it looks a little suspicious.

    No, you don't have honest concerns. You have blatantly dishonest concerns. And your claim that "the pro NN people tend to be the same as the anti free speech people" is an obvious lie. Expressing disagreement with what you say is not "anti free speech".

    Nor is expressing disgust, scorn, and contempt at the things you choose to be madfoot. Btw, I have it on good authority that you're getting banned very soon.
    Orlando City/USA Soccer 
    Dukat/Madred 2020. Make Cardassia Great Again!
    Kaliesto 1 day ago#98
    Madf00t will just find another bootleg to login with if he were to get banned.
    It's not stupidity, it's something much worse. It's... the GameSpot comment section!-Stebsis
    Gimme dat, gimme dat, gimme dat DramaFAQs-misterbum
    SaikyoStyle posted...
    Red XlV posted...
    EuroKnight38 posted...
    I have honest concerns about net neutrality, and as I said when the pro NN people tend to be the same as the anti free speech people, it looks a little suspicious.

    No, you don't have honest concerns. You have blatantly dishonest concerns. And your claim that "the pro NN people tend to be the same as the anti free speech people" is an obvious lie. Expressing disagreement with what you say is not "anti free speech".

    Nor is expressing disgust, scorn, and contempt at the things you choose to be madfoot. Btw, I have it on good authority that you're getting banned very soon.

    What would I get banned for?
    Probably losing control and saying some awful, racist thing that's against the ToU.
    Orlando City/USA Soccer 
    Dukat/Madred 2020. Make Cardassia Great Again!
    1. Boards
    2. Politics
    3. White House offers support to take down Net Neutrality.
      1. Boards
      2. Politics
      3. White House offers support to take down Net Neutrality.
      The problem with NN, particularly in its current form, is that is stifles competition at the ISP level. Heavy regulations that are put on utilities (and now ISPs) virtually guarantee no additional competition will enter the market. Also, it stifles new ideas on how to save consumers money.

      For example, say a company has a plan to provide access to Netflix, Hulu, and Youtube at high enough speeds to guarantee 1080P or 4K Streaming, but you agree to have 5mbps for everything else. This could lower a customer's bill while still allowing for the services they desire. That is not something that can be done with NN in place. 

      People always assume the worst, but the free market will eventually sort itself out. If a company is doing something horrifically bad, bad press and losing customers will affect them. Net neutrality only existed for the past 5ish years in law, but ISPs had never taken massive advantage of it before, because a competitor could enter their market and take their market share.
      "In science as in love, too much concentration on technique can often lead to impotence." -P.L. Berger
      Wydileie2000 posted...
      People always assume the worst, but the free market will eventually sort itself out.



      Unreal this myth continues to get championed for everything.
      I will try and see it from your point of view, but I doubt we'll be able to fit both our heads up there.
      Ellesarien posted...
      Wydileie2000 posted...
      People always assume the worst, but the free market will eventually sort itself out.



      Unreal this myth continues to get championed for everything.


      Well, generally speaking, it created the greatest nation in the history of the world. Weird we only seem to be losing ground now that we have heavy regulation and corporatism taking over.
      "In science as in love, too much concentration on technique can often lead to impotence." -P.L. Berger
      EuroKnight38 posted...
      I have honest concerns about net neutrality, and as I said when the pro NN people tend to be the same as the anti free speech people, it looks a little suspicious.

      "Anti free speech people" don't exist lol.
      "Hodor" -Hodor
      Wydileie2000 posted...
      Ellesarien posted...
      Wydileie2000 posted...
      People always assume the worst, but the free market will eventually sort itself out.



      Unreal this myth continues to get championed for everything.


      Well, generally speaking, it created the greatest nation in the history of the world. Weird we only seem to be losing ground now that we have heavy regulation and corporatism taking over.


      Was it necessarily the greatest country in the world when it was being built on the backs of slave labor?
      Rage is a hell of an anesthetic.
      Sir_RaZZo 1 day ago#106
      acolytes posted...
      Trump probably has no idea what Net Neutrality is.


      Conservadipshits don't know what it is either. They just hear "HURR DURR OBAMMER'S GONNA TAKE OVER THE INTERNET HURR DURR!" from FOX.

      Oh and you can bet scrapping net neutrality regulations is gonna have an impact on online gaming. Time for the kiddos with the "idgaf politics it doesn't affect me" mindset to get a rude awakening.
      It will rain soon. Blood will fall like rain...-Karel
      Member of The Phoenix Force
      Welcommatt posted...
      EuroKnight38 posted...
      I have honest concerns about net neutrality, and as I said when the pro NN people tend to be the same as the anti free speech people, it looks a little suspicious.

      "Anti free speech people" don't exist lol.


      Apparently you haven't met Antifa and SJWs.
      "In science as in love, too much concentration on technique can often lead to impotence." -P.L. Berger
      Welcommatt posted...
      EuroKnight38 posted...
      I have honest concerns about net neutrality, and as I said when the pro NN people tend to be the same as the anti free speech people, it looks a little suspicious.

      "Anti free speech people" don't exist lol.


      Stormfoot thinks that when you call him out on his bullshit racism and lies, that means you are "anti-free speech." He's just supposed to spout any old garbage he wants completely unfettered.
      Rage is a hell of an anesthetic.
      Wydileie2000 posted...
      Welcommatt posted...
      EuroKnight38 posted...
      I have honest concerns about net neutrality, and as I said when the pro NN people tend to be the same as the anti free speech people, it looks a little suspicious.

      "Anti free speech people" don't exist lol.


      Apparently you haven't met Antifa and SJWs.


      Oh, you mean anti hate speech people.
      "Hodor" -Hodor
      (edited 1 day ago)
      Jabraham 1 day ago#110
      Wydileie2000 posted...
      Ellesarien posted...
      Wydileie2000 posted...
      People always assume the worst, but the free market will eventually sort itself out.



      Unreal this myth continues to get championed for everything.


      Well, generally speaking, it created the greatest nation in the history of the world. Weird we only seem to be losing ground now that we have heavy regulation and corporatism taking over.

      It probably had more to do with the US emerging unscathed from WWI and WWII. Weird how we're losing ground now that our competitors aren't bombing each other.
      I ain't trippin cause the truth is really you don't know me.
      acolytes posted...
      Trump probably has no idea what Net Neutrality is.

      Someone should tell him that without NN, Twitter won't work as well. He'll put that baby in place permanently if he thinks that.


      This isn't a bad idea.... honestly, this might be the ONLY way he listens to reason.
      Confidence? It's nothing but an illusion.
      EuroKnight38 posted...
      guerrillakidney posted...
      EuroKnight38 posted...
      I have honest concerns about net neutrality, and as I said when the pro NN people tend to be the same as the anti free speech people, it looks a little suspicious.

      Except ending NN is more conductive to censoring free speech than having it.

      And yet, you don't seem to have an answer for protecting my free speech from corporations like Google, Facebook, or Twitter. Some of you are even being like Red and lying about it:

      Red XlV posted...
      EuroKnight38 posted...
      I have honest concerns about net neutrality, and as I said when the pro NN people tend to be the same as the anti free speech people, it looks a little suspicious.

      No, you don't have honest concerns. You have blatantly dishonest concerns. And your claim that "the pro NN people tend to be the same as the anti free speech people" is an obvious lie. Expressing disagreement with what you say is not "anti free speech".

      Censorship isn't mere disagreement. :)

      What about google, facebook etcs freedom to control their platform? You feel you should be able to do whatev you want with someone else's property?
      Heineken14 posted...
      Was it necessarily the greatest country in the world when it was being built on the backs of slave labor?


      This really has nothing to do with my argument whatsoever, and is just a strawman. 

      In any case, black people hardly built the US. Very few people, even in the South, owned slaves. Agriculture was hardly the backbone of the US anyway, as the Industrial Revolution moved us forward significantly, which was mainly a Northern phenomena. If you are speaking of the Chinese and the railroads, there is a reason so many came to the US to work, because it was worse in China. That doesn't excuse the way they were treated, but that certainly didn't stop them from coming here in droves.

      All of that is to say, the US was certainly not "built on the backs of slave labor", to say that is showing total ignorance of US history.
      "In science as in love, too much concentration on technique can often lead to impotence." -P.L. Berger
      Also "the companies will bear the cost, not the consumer!" is a terrible arguement. It will be passed to the consumer.
      Oliver_Oliver 23 hours ago#115
      LawnNinja posted...
      I'm sure Americans will be positively thrilled when their ISP charges a premium price for the "privilege" of using other internet services they already pay for, like Netflix.


      Now this has me wondering..... what does this mean for large downloads of games?
      I was just thinking about that recent HUGE PC update for DOOM which is about 35 GB.... wouldn't net neutrality cause a HUGE problem like making data caps a LOT more strict?
      Confidence? It's nothing but an illusion.
      Oliver_Oliver posted...
      LawnNinja posted...
      I'm sure Americans will be positively thrilled when their ISP charges a premium price for the "privilege" of using other internet services they already pay for, like Netflix.


      Now this has me wondering..... what does this mean for large downloads of games?
      I was just thinking about that recent HUGE PC update for DOOM which is about 35 GB.... wouldn't net neutrality cause a HUGE problem like making data caps a LOT more strict?


      Yup.
      100% of white supremacists, white power and white hate groups are Trump fans and supporters
      Wydileie2000 23 hours ago#117
      Jabraham posted...
      It probably had more to do with the US emerging unscathed from WWI and WWII. Weird how we're losing ground now that our competitors aren't bombing each other.


      We were already a pretty big powerhouse pre-WW1. There is a reason that both sides tried recruiting us to the endeavor. We kicked the Spanish's ass in the Spanish-American War, and the Spanish were a pretty highly regarded military force at the time. Teddy Roosevelt was one of the main reasons for the rise of military power pre-WW1. 

      Also, our manufacturing was basically fueling all of WW1 on both sides until we entered the war. 

      About the only country before the world wars that could claim superiority over the US was England, and that was still only militarily. Economically the US was pretty close to matching them, and we didn't have colonies spread across the world like they did. In production and innovation, no other country could really match us, even then.
      "In science as in love, too much concentration on technique can often lead to impotence." -P.L. Berger
      Heineken14 23 hours ago#118
      Wydileie2000 posted...
      In any case, black people hardly built the US.


      I suppose I should have clarified "slavery" as not meaning JUST black people. All the indentured servitude of immigrants counts as well. Child labor. Unsafe working conditions. All of it counts. Without evil regulations, we get more kids dying in factories or Triangle fires. 

      It may make jobs more unpredictable, but I'd really prefer not to be looked upon as "lucky" at my place of work because I have more whole fingers than missing.
      Rage is a hell of an anesthetic.
      Wydileie2000 23 hours ago#119
      Heineken14 posted...
      I suppose I should have clarified "slavery" as not meaning JUST black people. All the indentured servitude of immigrants counts as well. Child labor. Unsafe working conditions. All of it counts. Without evil regulations, we get more kids dying in factories or Triangle fires. 

      It may make jobs more unpredictable, but I'd really prefer not to be looked upon as "lucky" at my place of work because I have more whole fingers than missing.


      That was a natural extension of the changing of the economy, and led to the rise of unions, which is the free market answer to these issues. There are times when unions take things to far, to the detriment of the company, and ultimately their members (see the UAW); nevertheless, unions are there to balance out these issues. Child labor laws may be a legitimate government regulation. I don't really see a way to avoid that if you want children to be educated and not forced to make money for those parents that lack morals.
      "In science as in love, too much concentration on technique can often lead to impotence." -P.L. Berger
      Ellesarien 23 hours ago#120
      BastionofStraz posted...
      Oliver_Oliver posted...
      LawnNinja posted...
      I'm sure Americans will be positively thrilled when their ISP charges a premium price for the "privilege" of using other internet services they already pay for, like Netflix.


      Now this has me wondering..... what does this mean for large downloads of games?
      I was just thinking about that recent HUGE PC update for DOOM which is about 35 GB.... wouldn't net neutrality cause a HUGE problem like making data caps a LOT more strict?


      Yup.



      It would be a deathblow to digital gaming.
      I will try and see it from your point of view, but I doubt we'll be able to fit both our heads up there.
      Zeratul75 23 hours ago#121
      Most Trump supporters are conservative so they'd generally be against government regulations. Wouldn't it make sense for them to oppose net neutrality?
      SaikyoStyle 23 hours ago#122
      Everything Wyd says proves that not only does he know nothing, he has no capacity to learn.
      Orlando City/USA Soccer 
      Dukat/Madred 2020. Make Cardassia Great Again!
      Cynyn 23 hours ago#123
      EuroKnight38 posted...
      SaikyoStyle posted...
      Red XlV posted...
      EuroKnight38 posted...
      I have honest concerns about net neutrality, and as I said when the pro NN people tend to be the same as the anti free speech people, it looks a little suspicious.

      No, you don't have honest concerns. You have blatantly dishonest concerns. And your claim that "the pro NN people tend to be the same as the anti free speech people" is an obvious lie. Expressing disagreement with what you say is not "anti free speech".

      Nor is expressing disgust, scorn, and contempt at the things you choose to be madfoot. Btw, I have it on good authority that you're getting banned very soon.

      What would I get banned for?

      EuroKnight38 is no longer an active member.

      LMFAO
      "You know, I dunno if they wasted the rape scene on Sansa...but if they had used it on Arya, she'd have more character development." -Wormy/PinkRanger
      Wydileie2000 23 hours ago#124
      SaikyoStyle posted...
      Everything Wyd says proves that not only does he know nothing, he has no capacity to learn.


      At least your trolling got more descriptive. I enjoy the full thought out sentence instead of the couple words.
      "In science as in love, too much concentration on technique can often lead to impotence." -P.L. Berger
      Jabraham 23 hours ago#125
      Wydileie2000 posted...
      We were already a pretty big powerhouse pre-WW1. There is a reason that both sides tried recruiting us to the endeavor. We kicked the Spanish's ass in the Spanish-American War, and the Spanish were a pretty highly regarded military force at the time. Teddy Roosevelt was one of the main reasons for the rise of military power pre-WW1. 

      Also, our manufacturing was basically fueling all of WW1 on both sides until we entered the war. 

      About the only country before the world wars that could claim superiority over the US was England, and that was still only militarily. Economically the US was pretty close to matching them, and we didn't have colonies spread across the world like they did. In production and innovation, no other country could really match us, even then.

      It's a bit of a leap to go from "powerhouse" to "greatest country in the history of the world." The point is, it's not as simple as just "capitalism!" There are many factors to consider.
      I ain't trippin cause the truth is really you don't know me.
      Wydileie2000 23 hours ago#126
      Ellesarien posted...
      BastionofStraz posted...
      Oliver_Oliver posted...
      LawnNinja posted...
      I'm sure Americans will be positively thrilled when their ISP charges a premium price for the "privilege" of using other internet services they already pay for, like Netflix.


      Now this has me wondering..... what does this mean for large downloads of games?
      I was just thinking about that recent HUGE PC update for DOOM which is about 35 GB.... wouldn't net neutrality cause a HUGE problem like making data caps a LOT more strict?


      Yup.



      It would be a deathblow to digital gaming.


      Because "digital gaming" didn't exist before 2012?
      "In science as in love, too much concentration on technique can often lead to impotence." -P.L. Berger
      EuroKnight39 23 hours ago#127
      Apparently I was suspended for arguing against net neutrality. Bewildering.
      Bat178 23 hours ago#128
      EuroKnight39 posted...
      Apparently I was suspended for arguing against net neutrality. Bewildering.

      And this is an example of why account bans should also be IP bans.
      Awww, isn't that cute? He thinks he can beat me!
      Wydileie2000 23 hours ago#129
      Jabraham posted...
      It's a bit of a leap to go from "powerhouse" to "greatest country in the history of the world." The point is, it's not as simple as just "capitalism!" There are many factors to consider.


      Well, we are the longest running democracy in history without a change in government. We have the most powerful military in the world by a pretty huge margin. Despite having the most powerful military in the world, we avoided the colonization and imperialistic efforts which nearly every other major power in world history used to their advantage in subjugating other peoples. The US is attributed with many of the worlds major inventions of the past couple centuries, or at least contributing significantly to nearly all of them.

      It would be hard to argue there is another "greatest country in the history of the world" outside of the US. Despite our long term strength and growth, we have maintained our basic freedoms and have not endeavored on a world conquering mission. In fact, we were a driving force behind establishing general world peace since 1945.
      "In science as in love, too much concentration on technique can often lead to impotence." -P.L. Berger
      SaikyoStyle 23 hours ago#130
      EuroKnight39 posted...
      Apparently I was suspended for arguing against net neutrality. Bewildering.

      You're gonna get banned madfoot.
      Orlando City/USA Soccer 
      Dukat/Madred 2020. Make Cardassia Great Again!
      Bat178 23 hours ago#131
      Wydileie2000 posted...
      Jabraham posted...
      It's a bit of a leap to go from "powerhouse" to "greatest country in the history of the world." The point is, it's not as simple as just "capitalism!" There are many factors to consider.


      Well, we are the longest running democracy in history without a change in government. We have the most powerful military in the world by a pretty huge margin. Despite having the most powerful military in the world, we avoided the colonization and imperialistic efforts which nearly every other major power in world history used to their advantage in subjugating other peoples. The US is attributed with many of the worlds major inventions of the past couple centuries, or at least contributing significantly to nearly all of them.

      It would be hard to argue there is another "greatest country in the history of the world" outside of the US. Despite our long term strength and growth, we have maintained our basic freedoms and have not endeavored on a world conquering mission. In fact, we were a driving force behind establishing general world peace since 1945.

      You didn't avoid the imperialistic efforts. Remember what happened to the Native Americans and the slavery of Africans?
      Awww, isn't that cute? He thinks he can beat me!
      EuroKnight39 23 hours ago#132
      Bat178 posted...
      Wydileie2000 posted...
      Jabraham posted...
      It's a bit of a leap to go from "powerhouse" to "greatest country in the history of the world." The point is, it's not as simple as just "capitalism!" There are many factors to consider.

      Well, we are the longest running democracy in history without a change in government. We have the most powerful military in the world by a pretty huge margin. Despite having the most powerful military in the world, we avoided the colonization and imperialistic efforts which nearly every other major power in world history used to their advantage in subjugating other peoples. The US is attributed with many of the worlds major inventions of the past couple centuries, or at least contributing significantly to nearly all of them.

      It would be hard to argue there is another "greatest country in the history of the world" outside of the US. Despite our long term strength and growth, we have maintained our basic freedoms and have not endeavored on a world conquering mission. In fact, we were a driving force behind establishing general world peace since 1945.

      You didn't avoid the imperialistic efforts. Remember what happened to the Native Americans and the slavery of Africans?

      Native Americans died of disease and a series of wars waged between both sides over the course of several centuries. Slavery was evil, but that alone doesn't discount from the rest of Wyld's post.
      Welcommatt 23 hours ago#133
      EuroKnight39 posted...
      Apparently I was suspended for arguing against net neutrality. Bewildering.


      Wait, surely Eroknight39 and Euroknight38 aren't the same person, right?
      "Hodor" -Hodor
      UnsteadyOwl 22 hours ago#134
      Wydileie2000 posted...
      The problem with NN, particularly in its current form, is that is stifles competition at the ISP level. Heavy regulations that are put on utilities (and now ISPs) virtually guarantee no additional competition will enter the market. Also, it stifles new ideas on how to save consumers money.

      For example, say a company has a plan to provide access to Netflix, Hulu, and Youtube at high enough speeds to guarantee 1080P or 4K Streaming, but you agree to have 5mbps for everything else. This could lower a customer's bill while still allowing for the services they desire. That is not something that can be done with NN in place. 

      People always assume the worst, but the free market will eventually sort itself out. If a company is doing something horrifically bad, bad press and losing customers will affect them. Net neutrality only existed for the past 5ish years in law, but ISPs had never taken massive advantage of it before, because a competitor could enter their market and take their market share.

      If you're right, that would still only be applicable to more populated areas though. There are still parts of rural America that have no access to any broadband internet, and many more that really only have one choice. People in these places are more vulnerable to being exploited by ISPs as the cost of laying new infrastructure versus the relatively small number of potential customers makes it unlikely that new competitors will move in. In some cases even if a competitor wants to move in they can still be blocked by local governments if they refuse to provide "right of way" access.

      In urban areas there's more of an opportunity for competition to prevent abuses by ISPs. However, I still can't help but feel uneasy about it. Even in those places you have oligopolies at best, because the barrier to entry for any new competitor is very high. Direct collusion is of course illegal, but broadband providers in major cities would still be in a good position to throttle parts of the internet if they feel confident their few competitors will do so as well. It could work out fine as you say (depending especially on how fast Google can expand into more areas), but I don't think it's a given.
      Courage is not the absence of fear, but rather the assessment that something else is more important than fear.
      Shinobi120 22 hours ago#135
      Mr_Church1313 posted...
      Genericgamer667 posted...
      seriously, do the trumpanzeees know that net providers can throttle their favorite sites too?


      The best part of that non knowledge is that CNN/Time Warner & NBC/Comcast who have the largest networks own mostly liberal news media which means Fox News, Infowars, Brietbart are about to become very expensive to view and that's hilarious.


      And I can't wait for that to happen just to see the looks on all of those dumb, Trump supportin' faces.

      Topu_Kek posted...
      Won't it be hilarious when ISPs block every pro-trump site on the internet?


      Very.
      (edited 22 hours ago)
      Disrespector 22 hours ago#136
      Holy fuck I hope it actually happens. People need to learn the hard way that elections have consequences.
      "Dammit, Smithers! This isn't rocket science, it's brain surgery!"
      PostCrisisJ2 22 hours ago#137
      ...Why are people bringing up Hillary? I doubt her stance on NN is any better but she's not the one in charge in anything.

      This is in regard to all of the Hillary shills stuff.
      spritual powah will never die
      Don't be shy to drop a PM to me, I'm always open for conversation.
      (edited 22 hours ago)
      mario2000 22 hours ago#138
      Mr_Church1313 posted...
      Genericgamer667 posted...
      seriously, do the trumpanzeees know that net providers can throttle their favorite sites too?


      The best part of that non knowledge is that CNN/Time Warner & NBC/Comcast who have the largest networks own mostly liberal news media which means Fox News, Infowars, Brietbart are about to become very expensive to view and that's hilarious.

      dang i almost wanna support getting rid of NN now
      Arrrr the SS Goku, Mighty fine boat... -fatmatt
      Hope Frieza doesn't chuck an Iceberg at the Goku, otherwise it's all over. -Nekoslash
      ROCKS_21 22 hours ago#139
      Why would providers block pro trump sites when his administration gave them the keys to the kingdom? Their so called "liberal" networks are hot air or only slightly less sensationalist or racist than Fox News at best, as well. They actually promoted Trump, giving him nothing but free coverage while estranging the likes of Ron Paul(Who I also don't like, but still.). They have been stocked with corporatist assholes behind the scenes for some time, despite any token rhetoric. They still pretend the elections are real as opposed to reality programming/social engineering, and tell the peasants to put their support behind another corporatist puppet like Hilary. So that the corporatist model is always pushed forward regardless.
      Comcast is particularly awful, I see them jizzing in their pants and slurping Trump's penis under his desk because of this.
      Though the trump cheerleaders probably won't retain the more uncensored versions they cherish so dear, and I hear demands of actual ID registry coming.

      Sylph posted...
      In a way, this would just pave the way for Google to make real inroads in working to oust Comcast and Verizon finally in this arena. When Google is the only one not throttling speeds and charging extra, I think we will see an expansion happen there.



      Google are compromised toadies who give your info to Intelligence such as the NSA, I would not count on them to be saviors, I would count on them to be agents, just as they are in China. Don't buy any old ironic marketing slogans like "Don't be evil.". They will also back down from shit providers like Comcast when told.
      (edited 22 hours ago)
      GritBusters 22 hours ago#140
      All you have would to do to convince Trumpanzees and Deplorables to oppose ending Net Neutrality is to remind them that Ajit V. Pai isn't White.
      Bustin' Justin makes us feel good!
      Topu_Kek 21 hours ago#141
      @EuroKnight39 posted...
      Apparently I was suspended for arguing against net neutrality. Bewildering.

      I want a screenshot
      "My son is a high-quality person" -Donald J Trump
      HOW DOES this help promote a free market ?
      On my business card, I am a corporate president. In my mind, I am a game developer. But in my heart, I am a gamer.
      Satoru Iwata, 1959 - 2015 RIP GP God bless
      Charocks 20 hours ago#143
      I can't wait till the s*** hits the fan and Don-Don is holding onto the soap for dear life.
      Fluffy Pony Abuse is deranged - GT AN EWOKS WRATH
      Official Arrow in the Knee of the Skyrim board (360)
      zzeennoolloo 18 hours ago#144
      Ellesarien posted...
      BastionofStraz posted...
      Oliver_Oliver posted...
      LawnNinja posted...
      I'm sure Americans will be positively thrilled when their ISP charges a premium price for the "privilege" of using other internet services they already pay for, like Netflix.


      Now this has me wondering..... what does this mean for large downloads of games?
      I was just thinking about that recent HUGE PC update for DOOM which is about 35 GB.... wouldn't net neutrality cause a HUGE problem like making data caps a LOT more strict?


      Yup.



      It would be a deathblow to digital gaming.


      Not only would it destroy / severely harm digital gaming, but physical games would also be in the shit hole.
      For example, if you buy a physical game which has a patch and / or DLC or something else which happens to be a certain amount of GB to download, this could be a HUGE problem if the data cap is set at a horrendous limit.
      Creator of the most talked about 500 post topic on the Wii U board, the most populated board on Gamefaqs. http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/631516-wii-u/72708411
      Bat178 18 hours ago#145
      zzeennoolloo posted...
      Ellesarien posted...
      BastionofStraz posted...
      Oliver_Oliver posted...
      LawnNinja posted...
      I'm sure Americans will be positively thrilled when their ISP charges a premium price for the "privilege" of using other internet services they already pay for, like Netflix.


      Now this has me wondering..... what does this mean for large downloads of games?
      I was just thinking about that recent HUGE PC update for DOOM which is about 35 GB.... wouldn't net neutrality cause a HUGE problem like making data caps a LOT more strict?


      Yup.



      It would be a deathblow to digital gaming.


      Not only would it destroy / severely harm digital gaming, but physical games would also be in the shit hole.
      For example, if you buy a physical game which has a patch and / or DLC or something else which happens to be a certain amount of GB to download, this could be a HUGE problem if the data cap is set at a horrendous limit.

      This is one of the main reasons why I stick to retro gaming. You didn't have patches and DLC back then and generally didn't need them, as most devs back then actually made sure the games were actually finished before they released them and focused a lot more on single-player along with local multiplayer which doesn't need the internet.
      Awww, isn't that cute? He thinks he can beat me!
      (edited 18 hours ago)
      luigi33 18 hours ago#146
      NN ending would definitely would have a major negative impact on Gaming in terms of prices starting to skyrocket, less content updates for fear of you hitting your ISP caps.

      Online gaming would be the equiv of driving a car. The longer you play the more you start to reach the cap.
      3DS FC: 5370-0672-9935
      Steam ID: Xcyper33
      I just realized, if we truly lose Net Neutrality....Anonymous is going to raise some hell. No telling what they might do, but hopefully it'll be a step towards getting the open internet back.
      Come check out Iido's Gaming Den for let's plays 'n other stuff! Tons 'n tons 'o games! :D https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqZW13u9eQiTvhqKG1L6Eg
      Bat178 17 hours ago#148
      luigi33 posted...
      NN ending would definitely would have a major negative impact on Gaming in terms of prices starting to skyrocket, less content updates for fear of you hitting your ISP caps.

      Online gaming would be the equiv of driving a car. The longer you play the more you start to reach the cap.

      You'll probably see a rise of Retro Gaming (Particularly from Gens 3 to 6), too, as most retro games don't rely on online (And the ones that did had their servers shut down long ago), and were actually finished before being released. They tend to be of better quality, more fun and have more replay value than most modern games anyways.
      Awww, isn't that cute? He thinks he can beat me!
      (edited 17 hours ago)
      luigi33 17 hours ago#149
      WindMouseHanpan posted...
      I just realized, if we truly lose Net Neutrality....Anonymous is going to raise some hell. No telling what they might do, but hopefully it'll be a step towards getting the open internet back.

      Psh most of Anon were Trumpsters. Fuck them, and fuck their help.
      3DS FC: 5370-0672-9935
      Steam ID: Xcyper33
      zzeennoolloo 17 hours ago#150
      Bat178 posted...
      zzeennoolloo posted...
      Ellesarien posted...
      BastionofStraz posted...
      Oliver_Oliver posted...
      LawnNinja posted...
      I'm sure Americans will be positively thrilled when their ISP charges a premium price for the "privilege" of using other internet services they already pay for, like Netflix.


      Now this has me wondering..... what does this mean for large downloads of games?
      I was just thinking about that recent HUGE PC update for DOOM which is about 35 GB.... wouldn't net neutrality cause a HUGE problem like making data caps a LOT more strict?


      Yup.



      It would be a deathblow to digital gaming.


      Not only would it destroy / severely harm digital gaming, but physical games would also be in the shit hole.
      For example, if you buy a physical game which has a patch and / or DLC or something else which happens to be a certain amount of GB to download, this could be a HUGE problem if the data cap is set at a horrendous limit.

      This is one of the main reasons why I stick to retro gaming. You didn't have/need patches and DLC back then, as most devs made sure the games were actually finished before they released them.


      I also retro game as well, I've been playing games since the 8-bit Sega Master System (I was playing Breakers, which was originally a Neo Geo MVS arcade game, on Sega Dreamcast this morning. Great game, I highly recommend it if you enjoy 2D one-on-one fighting games). 

      The problem is that because games tend to be much more complex to make these days due to various reasons, they pretty much have to release stuff like patches. Granted, there are LAZY efforts where a company will purposely rush out a broken product that needs a patch or else the game is an unplayable glitch fest from hell (Assassin's Creed: Unity comes to mind) but sometimes they will release the game with good intentions thinking they released a glitch-free product and later on after the release will find a serious glitch that the play testers never found and will need to release a patch for it (That one major glitch in Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword comes to mind. Nintendo was legit shocked they missed it after extensively play testing that game. They released a patch for it). 

      Point I'm trying to make is that for big budget modern games (especially for games that are hours upon hours long) patching is essential these days.
      It's not something they can get away from with modern gaming these days.
      Creator of the most talked about 500 post topic on the Wii U board, the most populated board on Gamefaqs. http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/631516-wii-u/72708411
      (edited 17 hours ago)
      1. Boards
      2. Politics 
      3. White House offers support to take down Net Neutrality.