This is the aftermath, of a post I picked up by a Marxist-Leninist Anime Girl, who was right.
- The net-naturality felt like it was a pys-op by Netflix.
@naijeieoas Dec 14, 2017
"They uh… they could do this before the NN scare and they never did. Even with the rules in place they still track you with packet injections.It has actually *never* been about getting charged for social media, because companies could always do that too and they haven't. Not that Comcast is innocent in this, since what they were charging for Netflix's access certainly hasn't been lowering the cost of service or building out better infrastructure. The price I'm paying them now for a whole 3 MB/s down should be criminal.
Long story short, #NetNeutrality is a scam by tech companies to go after ISPs for eating into their profits and you're all being duped by these scare tactics.Latest take I saw today was that if NN was repealed, then how would “families with multiple children” be able to afford Internet access. 😂Who in the world is delusional enough to think wired ISPs are going to be able to charge per user, as if that's even technically feasible.
Most wired ISPs only see a router anyway. There was a time (way before NN was a thing) when some of them didn't like home users using a router, but the routers came with MAC address spoofing to get around that problem and the ISPs could do literally nothing about it.So they stopped caring. And besides, do people really not realize how expensive it is *now*? I'm a single person and Comcast has been $60–$80 the whole time I've had them, for 3 MB/s down! Hell I get better speeds for only slightly more on my phone!NN rules have had (___) ALL to do with the actual pricing of websites or ISPs. They've always been able to charge anything they've wanted. The FCC rules never changed that. All NN says is that an ISP can't charge extra for access to a website (which they never did to end users)
I will keep yelling that the origin of the current situation is Netflix whining about having to pay Comcast for data center access and making a big political issue out of it so it didn't eat into their profit. Everything else is ahistorical, metaphysical, emotional appeal."
This is, of course, related to their side of the inter-bourgeois fight called net neutrality, they being the first to really push the idea that it has anything to do with end users. In reality, they simply don't want to pony up any revenue to the companies servicing this traffic.
Most people don't even know what QoS and network traffic shaping are (and how much they're used on today's Internet) but will still cry about “treating bits equally”. It's such a liberal trap like “free speech” but even communists are taking it at face value.
It all started when the well off middle class people realized they might have to pay slightly extra for Netflix because the large ISPs are competitors in that market, then got morphed into some dorky human rights campaign. Staaaaaaahp."
"I will never forgive this nation for making such a big deal about net neutrality but not about poor infrastructure or monopolistic ISPs."
The inter-bourgeois conflict of “net neutrality” is trending again. She goes. Link
Then, in 2020, she moved away, went to another plane of existence. Thank you for enlightening me and stopping me being so twitter brained with American spectacle. (You don't have to agree with the ideology, btw, )itass commercial polarization meant to sell you of prosumer activism.
I must continue with my sociology.