Also, the government doesn't "own" the internet. Nobody owns the internet. The internet is merely the name given to a series of computers connected to each other. Most people don't know that no matter how the internet streams information to them be it via radio signal, satellite, cable etc., there is a physical place called a "server" where people connect. A server is literally just another computer that runs whatever programs are installed on it. When I watch a Youtube video, I am merely running this video on another computer and streaming what is going on on *that* computer onto my screen. The way in which all computers have the capability of connecting to each other is described as the internet, but really, the "internet" is not a separate entity. It's just a bunch of computers connected to each other.

Sent!

Not sure how much impact I'll have as a Canadian, but I hope it helps anyway.
I'd hate for this to happen in the states and then see Canada follow suit. :T

Friendly reminder that if you voted for Trump, you 100% approved of all of this, and yes, it is your fault for putting these corrupt idiots in power. In the end it's Trump's appointment that caused these issues to be in jeopardy and it's Republican unwavering cult-like support for literally anything that they say is "conservative," even if it ends up being a LESS free internet that chokes everyone's quality of life, that caused them to be able to try and pull this off.

I say this knowing that a good chunk of people around here thought they were voting for something different.

I signed on change.org, planning on using the
https://petitions.signforgood.com/ProtectNetNeutrality/ also. cool thing about the NG one was it had a template. I'm not eloquent enough so the template worked.

Signed the petition and called my representative today.

Let's cross our fingers and hope that shit doesn't hit the fan on this.

@TomFulp

Here's something non-US citizens can use.

At 7/12/17 02:37 PM, SurgeAction wrote: Tom Fulp, I'm surprised that you of all people are a supporter of net neutrality. I've followed your website for years with all of its amazing content and diverse array of time wasting opportunities and I am befuddled as to how this site isn't at least in the top 50 globally. Looking at your comments on this issue, it's plain to see why that's the case

Great points, I was also surprised to see this type of thing show up on NG.

In addition to those points:

The main benefactors of N.N. are big corporations like Google, Facebook and Netflix which stream tons of GB of content every day. They want to make sure that the same pipe is used to stream all content, whether you're a small website company, or a massive one.

Socialism of the internet, is all this is. If you want Net Neutrality, you're advocating slow internet speeds for all instead of varying speeds based on how much you upload. It's either that or charge more towards the consumer, which is why you're starting to see data caps rise up.

Alas, no one seems to want to form arguments about this issue. People hear "Net Neutrality" and think "That sounds pretty nice to my ear holes, I'll sign that for sure!"

Someone please tell me a reasonable argument against net neutrality, because I really can't think of ANYTHING. I have no idea why the people behind Verizon are greedy enough to shut down the sources of creativity and ANYTHING new on the Internet, because that ruins the point of the internet.
Seriously, I want to hear your arguments against it.
Look, this is a monopoly situation. There's really no arguing around that.

Tom, you ought to throw a banner on the Front Page, as well. The kind that's used for games/movies.

At 7/12/17 05:18 PM, GearWax wrote: Someone please tell me a reasonable argument against net neutrality, because I really can't think of ANYTHING. I have no idea why the people behind Verizon are greedy enough to shut down the sources of creativity and ANYTHING new on the Internet, because that ruins the point of the internet.
Seriously, I want to hear your arguments against it.
Look, this is a monopoly situation. There's really no arguing around that.

There have been several arguments made above, reply to any of them and give a proper rebuttal.

If Verizon is being greedy and shutting down sources, their users will stop subscribing to Verizon. That is why they would never do such a thing. The shutdown of small businesses by an ISP has never happened, and if you want to make sure that doesn't happen, it's vital that more competition is created. You do that by getting rid of regulations, not adding something like N.N. which will create more monopolies.

Remember, monopolies only exist when a government exists to shut down companies because the bigger companies don't like competition.

At 7/12/17 05:14 PM, Izzy-A wrote: The main benefactors of N.N. are big corporations like Google, Facebook and Netflix which stream tons of GB of content every day. They want to make sure that the same pipe is used to stream all content, whether you're a small website company, or a massive one.

Socialism of the internet, is all this is. If you want Net Neutrality, you're advocating slow internet speeds for all instead of varying speeds based on how much you upload. It's either that or charge more towards the consumer, which is why you're starting to see data caps rise up.

Alas, no one seems to want to form arguments about this issue. People hear "Net Neutrality" and think "That sounds pretty nice to my ear holes, I'll sign that for sure!"

Companies like Google and Netflix are already paying a FORTUNE to transit their bandwidth across the Internet. Companies like Verizon and Comcast only represent the final connection to the end user's door and that end user is paying them for a specific bandwidth allotment. It shouldn't matter if that user is pumping a gig of YouTube, a gig of music or a gig of porn - they are paying Verizon and Comcast so that they can have a download pipe to their house and companies like Google and Netflix are paying to transit content from their servers across the Internet so it can reach that final destination to the home consumer.

Everyone else is doing their part to get this data from point A to point B, it's just that companies like Comcast and Verizon are the lucky ducks who own that final connection to point B, the connection already being paid for by their subscribers. There is a lot of power in that connection and most consumers only have one choice of broadband provider in their area, hence why it is necessary there are checks in place to prevent them from abusing that power.

Everyone else is doing their part to get this data from point A to point B, it's just that companies like Comcast and Verizon are the lucky ducks who own that final connection to point B, the connection already being paid for by their subscribers. There is a lot of power in that connection and most consumers only have one choice of broadband provider in their area, hence why it is necessary there are checks in place to prevent them from abusing that power.

What do you mean it's 'luck'? They are the ones who built the pipes, they should get to determine how to use them.

If you want to ensure that companies don't charge more for services, it's vital that you are in favor of competition. That involves removing regulations from ISPs so smaller companies can rise up. The reason why Comcast has such a monopoly is all because of government collusion. They see Google coming in with fiber and they do everything they can to stop them through government.

At 7/12/17 06:33 PM, Izzy-A wrote: ...it's vital that more competition is created. You do that by getting rid of regulations, not adding something like N.N. which will create more monopolies.

Are you daft or just confused?

Net Neutrality is the very thing protecting smaller companies. Removing it allows a company like Comcast to legally demand every site pays an additional fee to maintain optimized speed between them and their consumers. There's already the cost to use their service, but without N.N. that service can be further regulated to favor the highest bidder. With regard to Newgrounds, Comcast would be allowed to choke this site in order to encourage viewers towards Youtube by causing the connection between your computer and this site to slow down, because Youtube would be able to pay the provider considerably more money than Tom. As a result, Youtube would suffer a little, Newgrounds would suffer significantly, the viewers will likely suffer, because service fees for these individual sites would go up to cover that additional fee, and ONLY Comcast would benefit from all of it.

Think of a monopoly company, like Comcast, as Moneybags the Bear, except there is no justice in the end. No punishment for being disgustingly greedy. They win, and you're just some poor chump who supported that greed.

Visual example:

• 

  Spyro Does A Thing

  by Wolfmercenary

  Spyro deals with his greatest challenge yet (and it's going to be expensive)

  Movie

  169,636 Views

  (Everyone)

*Note: those last seven seconds do not exist if Net Neutrality is removed.*

I don't think I could do anything here in Canada because "America first" xd.

I just hope that you guys figure this shit out. I wouldn't suggest you guys to go to Canada just yet because our internet is crap, and really needs an upgrade.

Au revoir I guess.

SJW genocide, are you implying that merely throwing money at something is all it takes to compete? Because if so, you have a terrible understanding of basic economics like supply, demand, scarcity, returns,implicit costs, explicit costs, opportunity costs, etc. Are you aware of how many fortune 100-500 companies go into and out of business on the regular? The titans that you see today, like Google, Facebook, and Twitter, were not always "monolithic" and will not be monolithic forever. And let's say the brand "Apple" survives for several millennia: 9/10 of these enormous businesses are publicly traded and the board changes as frequently as a year to year basis. Apple is not the same business it was when it started. As we speak, hundreds, maybe even thousands of people are transferring ownership of that one business piece by piece. You can make a living doing this, just ask Wall Street.. But as your name denotes, you don't care about the facts. All you care about is the feels. But Tom. Why you do dis?

Are you daft or just confused?

Typically I ignore people who respond like this, but let's give it a shot. Next time, if you want a proper rebuttal, leave out the insults.

Net Neutrality is the very thing protecting smaller companies. Removing it allows a company like Comcast to legally demand every site pays an additional fee to maintain optimized speed between them and their consumers. There's already the cost to use their service, but without N.N. that service can be further regulated to favor the highest bidder. With regard to Newgrounds, Comcast would be allowed to choke this site in order to encourage viewers towards Youtube by causing the connection between your computer and this site to slow down, because Youtube would be able to pay the provider considerably more money than Tom. As a result, Youtube would suffer a little, Newgrounds would suffer significantly, the viewers will likely suffer, because service fees for these individual sites would go up to cover that additional fee, and ONLY Comcast would benefit from all of it.

Why on earth would Comcast encourage traffic towards youtube? Google is their competitor, if anything, they will do the opposite. But too many consumers enjoy these products, including NG. If Comcast were to do such a thing, the consumer would switch over to a different ISP who does offer all the content. The answer, again, is more competition.

Think of a monopoly company, like Comcast, as Moneybags the Bear, except there is no justice in the end. No punishment for being disgustingly greedy. They win, and you're just some poor chump who supported that greed.

Monopolies don't exist in a free market. Monopolies are the result of corporations lobbying to get laws passed so smaller companies can't compete. Why do you think Comcast got so big and took over? It has the power to follow all the regulations necessary. Remove the regulations and smaller companies can thrive.

Now, if you are looking to continue the discussion, feel free to reply. If you choose to use insults again, I will assume you don't care to have a civil discourse, and I will ignore you.

At 7/12/17 06:33 PM, Izzy-A wrote: If you want to ensure that companies don't charge more for services, it's vital that you are in favor of competition. That involves removing regulations from ISPs so smaller companies can rise up. The reason why Comcast has such a monopoly is all because of government collusion. They see Google coming in with fiber and they do everything they can to stop them through government.

They want the government's collusion to end net neutrality. Why would Comcast or Verizon want to end net neutrality if it's actively aiding them and preventing competition? Bullet + foot =/= 2 + 2.

At 7/12/17 08:09 PM, Psychopath wrote:

At 7/12/17 06:33 PM, Izzy-A wrote: If you want to ensure that companies don't charge more for services, it's vital that you are in favor of competition. That involves removing regulations from ISPs so smaller companies can rise up. The reason why Comcast has such a monopoly is all because of government collusion. They see Google coming in with fiber and they do everything they can to stop them through government.

They want the government's collusion to end net neutrality. Why would Comcast or Verizon want to end net neutrality if it's actively aiding them and preventing competition? Bullet + foot =/= 2 + 2.

N.N. is specifically harming them with their business dealings, but nice try. A regulation such as "You're not allowed to put down fiber 100 feet from a native america reservation" is what helps them. How is a company with 2 people supposed to flip through 100s of pages of regulations to know that? They'll be shut down within a week because they broke all the rules.

At 7/12/17 07:53 PM, Izzy-A wrote: Typically I ignore people who respond like this, but let's give it a shot. Next time, if you want a proper rebuttal, leave out the insults.

That's not an insult. That's a legitimate question. If I wanted to insult you, I'd ask that you kindly remove your head from your ass and stop littering this thread with narrow-minded, limp-dick responses. No, I'm merely wondering if you realize what Net Neutrality actually is. There are many who have it backwards. I just wasn't sure if you are one of them. I apologize if you misunderstood me.

If Comcast were to do such a thing, the consumer would switch over to a different ISP who does offer all the content. The answer, again, is more competition.

In most places, there is no competition. There is no option to "switch over" for many Americans. Companies like Verizon and Comcast have already won. If they want to make you and your business suffer, you have no choice if you want to stay alive. But, hey, why take my word for it? There are plenty of videos on the battleforthenet.com website to argue against your viewpoint on this matter.

Here, I'll even provide a link specifically countering your "switch over" argument.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpbOEoRrHyU#t=7m14s

Now, if you are looking to continue the discussion, feel free to reply. If you choose to use insults again, I will assume you don't care to have a civil discourse, and I will ignore you.

It's not really a discussion until you actually bring something to the table. Right now, your current argument is that Verizon, Comcast, and AT&T deserve more money at the expense of everyone else on the internet. Battle for the Net gives you proof of that. What about you? Where's your proof? Where's your site full of videos and information arguing in your favor? Feel free to reply when you actually have something of value.

I honestly don't know why cable companies do it. It just makes me never want to do business with them. Comcast is kinda pushing it with the cap limit. Luckily I do most of my internet stuff at work through one of their towers instead of my connection at home.

For once I sent something to them without complaining, but more of my point of view.

"Look, guys. I understand you have probably only experienced sites like Deviantart and 4chan and cringed at the awful content. But the internet has an even larger abundance of amazing things like art, music, literature, knowledge, and wisdom. Don't go and destroy something so beneficial for just that little bit of monetary gain. Instead you could contribute to the internet. Help make it better and gain more customers through excellent service to not only yourselves, but to the people of the world. Don't let me and a bunch of people down , guys. God bless."

At 7/12/17 11:42 AM, TomFulp wrote:

At 7/12/17 11:32 AM, Ganon-Dorf wrote: I would sign, but I'm a Canadian and I don't think my signature should be apart of another countries legal proceedings regardless if I agree with them or not.

I'm sure there's a joke about Russia somewhere in here.

I'm not dedicated enough to keep up the troll unfortunately, fuck Ajit Pai.

At 7/12/17 08:27 PM, Izzy-A wrote:

At 7/12/17 08:09 PM, Psychopath wrote:

At 7/12/17 06:33 PM, Izzy-A wrote: If you want to ensure that companies don't charge more for services, it's vital that you are in favor of competition. That involves removing regulations from ISPs so smaller companies can rise up. The reason why Comcast has such a monopoly is all because of government collusion. They see Google coming in with fiber and they do everything they can to stop them through government.

They want the government's collusion to end net neutrality. Why would Comcast or Verizon want to end net neutrality if it's actively aiding them and preventing competition? Bullet + foot =/= 2 + 2.

N.N. is specifically harming them with their business dealings, but nice try. A regulation such as "You're not allowed to put down fiber 100 feet from a native america reservation" is what helps them. How is a company with 2 people supposed to flip through 100s of pages of regulations to know that? They'll be shut down within a week because they broke all the rules.

How does removing net neutrality solve the problem of competition? If net neutrality is actively harming their competition, then why are Verizon, Comcast and Time Warner fighting so hard to get rid of it? Do you mean to tell me they want upstarts taking their terf? That makes no fucking sense. None of your arguments have substantially tied net neutrality to this other problem of competing service providers.

When net neutrality goes, we, the consumer lose access to websites that can't afford the gatekeeper's toll. If that's wrong, then please feel free to explain how.

At 7/12/17 10:40 PM, Psychopath wrote:

How does removing net neutrality solve the problem of competition?

N.N. doesn't exist, it's a piece of regulation that people on the left want to push through. We are currently living in an age without N.N.

At 7/12/17 10:50 PM, Izzy-A wrote:

At 7/12/17 10:40 PM, Psychopath wrote:

How does removing net neutrality solve the problem of competition?

N.N. doesn't exist, it's a piece of regulation that people on the left want to push through. We are currently living in an age without N.N.

At 7/12/17 10:54 AM, TomFulp wrote: On February 26, 2015, the FCC ruled in favor of net neutrality by reclassifying broadband as a common carrier. Since then, we've had Net Neutrality and there has been no need to re-legislate it, despite a lot of shady efforts by broadband providers to do so.

Gee, I wonder which one of these two knows what they're talking about. And golly gee willikers, when I paste "February 26, 2015 Net Neutrality" into my search engine of my choice, all the search results tell whispers of net neutrality being a real thing that was ruled into office two years ago.

Oh boy, oh boy, what could this be?

did it, first time i ever have, i didn't know newgrounds suffers from this, so now its time to actually do this shit!!! ID LIKE NEWGROUNDS TO LIVE!!!

Tom,

I've already spent a few hours with my state representative (in a group, of course) busting the issue as wide open as I could.

The other attack lane I'm looking at is proving that even when you live in a neighborhood which has Verizon and Comcast available but none other, you don't really have a choice. (A lawyer buddy of mine has been wallpapering the FTC and the FCC with things of this nature.)

Could you please turn that irritating panel off, or at least limit it to once a day? Your computer can tell how many times my computer signs on, and I don't need it every time I open a page.

Thanx!

Wrote an email and helped spread the word. If my phone wasn't acting up, I'd call as well.

Don't fuck with my internet!

At 7/12/17 11:08 PM, Psychopath wrote: Oh boy, oh boy, what could this be?

The FCC is leftist fake news paid off by liberal politicians

At 7/12/17 01:24 PM, TomFulp wrote:

At 7/12/17 01:04 PM, Slint wrote: How come your text is always in brighter colors than the rest of the plebeian scum population on this website?

Ya know that's a good question... Staff has always been a brighter white, maybe we should ditch that when the forums move to the new layout. Or make it... a supporter feature...

Yeah you should make it a "BE TOM FULP FOR A DAY" feature.
All with the ever necessary self destruct button rigged to the servers. It's only fair everyone gets a chance to blow everything up.
Think about it: (Blow) Everything, By Everyone