I think we found the final boss

Adjust content blockingContent Blocking

creepybaby Rank: #107

next random

Comment

Microtransactions in
games
Micro transactions
for the entire internet

...

+1296

Views: 24861 Submitted: 11/23/2017

Block User's Content

Hide Comments

Add Comment Refresh (61)

Top Rated Controversial Best Lowest Rated Newest

Live Updates: On

Options

asd

#1 - bugkiller

Reply+148

(11/23/2017)[-]

That *********** smile is such a giveaway thay he's a scumbag

#15 to #1 - ssjkirby

Reply+43

(11/23/2017)[-]

#16 to #15 - shekelsteinberg#117 on contentRank#117

Reply+27

(11/23/2017)[-]

POO

#27 to #16 - defski

Reply+26

(11/23/2017)[-]

#28 to #27 - bramy

Reply+26

(11/23/2017)[-]

LOO

#2 - rockmanfan

Reply+28

(11/23/2017)[-]

so hold up: have they actually said that sites you get to go to are going to be randomly selected by your ISP, or is that just a meme?

#3 to #2 - thattessachick

Reply+74

(11/23/2017)[-]

It's just a meme, but could you ******* imagine?

#14 to #3 - yunch#104 on commentsRank#104

Reply+37

(11/23/2017)[-]

One law at a time. It'll be gradual.

#61 to #14 - bellrunner

Reply0

(11/24/2017)[-]

Have you ready Pai's statement on ending Net Neutrality? It's anything but gradual.

#8 to #2 - reaperriley

Reply+23

(11/23/2017)[-]

its kind of a slippery slope thing. From my understanding they are basically lowering the governments grip on the internet so alot of people assume that means big companies are getting a tigher grip on it.

#10 to #2 - erkas

Reply+17

(11/23/2017)[-]

This is from portugal. Soon in a country near you!

#62 to #10 - anon id: 52a0ead8

Reply0

(11/25/2017)[-]

Gotta love that 99999999999999999999 . If i ever run a buisiness **** the .99 .95 .90 .98 etc. Its deliberate desception and its amazing people still eat it up every day at... 99 percent of "stores" . Any buisiness doing this wth their prices is giving you the middle finger , witch they pulled out of their ass and ask you to suck it. And you do.

#17 to #2 - bellrunner

Reply+10

(11/23/2017)[-]

It isn't just a meme. Telecoms already hold and have held various companies hostage (RIOT and Netflix being notable examples) by throttling their connection (and killing their services) until they paid millions in fees. That was already illegal, but the lawsuit would have taken far too long, so both companies acquiesced.

If net neutrality is killed, ISPs could start to slow down service to select websites, or to, say, youtube videos they disagree with. Even if they don't go the route of TV channel payments (and they ******* want to), they can punish you with slow speeds if you use unapproved websites. Imagine google suddenly taking 5+ seconds to load every page, while Yahoo works fine. Imagine certain games working fine, but others being unplayable.

#29 to #17 - anon id: f7aab16b

Reply0

(11/23/2017)[-]

even taking that at face value WHY would the solution be to have more govt regulation? how many examples do we need in the world to show what horrible idea that is? coal vs solar industry? dmv? utility companies? housing crisis? dept of commerce? airports? do any of these sound amazing to anyone? let the ISPs do what they want so they can compete with each other. our access to the internet is not a right and doesn't need to be enforced by law.

#30 to #29 - leftistbastard

Reply+5

(11/23/2017)[-]

the thing is, ISPs *don't* compete with eachother. They found out it's more profitable to simply monopolize an area rather than try to compete with established giants in other areas- so a lot of places have one, maybe two options. that's not an environment where competition works.

#59 to #29 - bellrunner

Reply0

(11/24/2017)[-]

The housing crisis came about because we didn't have ENOUGH regulation and oversight. The ratings agencies gave AAA ratings to traunches of 80% and up subprime garbage. Banks KNEW what they were doing, and reacted to it by doubling down as hard as possible to make as much money as they could before the crash.

Net Neutrality is WHAT WE HAVE ALREADY. The fight to maintain net neutrality is the fight to keep things AS THEY ARE, not to 'invite more regulation.' And the abuses aren't potentials or hypotheticals - the ISPs have already acted illegally multiple times.

www.techdirt.com/articles/20171122/09...

#13 to #2 - sketchE

Reply+5

(11/23/2017)[-]

its literally just a meme. theyre only removing rules put in place 2 years ago. in 2004 the FCC created the four freedoms and one of which states websites cant prevent access to a legal website

#34 to #13 - middlemunson

Reply0

(11/23/2017)[-]

Source for the rules they are removing

#60 to #34 - bellrunner

Reply0

(11/24/2017)[-]

www.techdirt.com/articles/20171122/09...

#6 - nanako

Reply+33

(11/23/2017)[-]

Here is the full text of the declaratory ruling issued by the FCC. It's very human readable and i'd encourage everyone to at least skim the introduction section

apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch...

It's good to understand exactly what the FCC is doing, and make your own judgements about the matter.

Here's also the manifesto from the FTC, detailing how they're going to handle regulating ISPs and protecting consumer rights
www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/docum...

#9 to #6 - bonkersta

Reply+5

(11/23/2017)[-]

Okay I'm confused. Is this good or bad because that was writen to make it look like it's trying to do good.

#11 to #9 - nanako

Reply+20

(11/23/2017)[-]

I think you should look at the evidence and make up your own mind.

Theres been far too much telling people how to think lately

#12 to #11 - bonkersta

Reply+6

(11/23/2017)[-]

Well in that case I am indifferent to all of this. If it goes through then it sounds as though it is a freer internet, if it doesn't nothing changes for better or worse.

#18 to #12 - bellrunner

Reply-8

(11/23/2017)[-]

Uh no. If it goes through you're free to get ********* by your ISP.

Not that you can do much about it, but it will change the internet for the worse in a massive way if it passes.

#19 to #18 - bonkersta

Reply+8

(11/23/2017)[-]

How so, all information I have read hasn't pointed to that?

#31 to #19 - themaninacan

Reply+1

(11/23/2017)[-]

Do you even know what net neutrality is?

#32 to #31 - bonkersta

Reply+3

(11/23/2017)[-]

That's what I'm asking so I can get an unbiased opinion!

#33 to #32 - themaninacan

Reply+3

(11/23/2017)[-]

You can see tons of stuff whenever you look up.
Monopolist ISPs not only wsnt the perks of being a Commpn Carrier, but absolutely NONE of the responsibility. Data is more like gas and electricity than a book or a movie- more like a truck that delivers those in fact.

'Net Neutrality Explained- will ending it free the internet?' for ex.

#26 to #6 - eeech

Reply0

(11/23/2017)[-]

medium.com/@AGSchneiderman/an-open-le...
I dunno it doesn't seem like the FCC is the most trustworthy.

#56 to #26 - nanako

Reply0

(11/24/2017)[-]

I'm not certain how the FCC getting DDOSed makes THEM untrustworthy.

You've seen all the posts about this issue here in the past weeks. Imagine that on a larger scale, all over the internet. Millions of people are riled up by misinformation and are spamming the FCC constantly

Half of the posts about net neutrality, as well as many TV ads, include the details of some person that readers are encouraged to mail, call and generally harass. No surprise their comment system is flooded and they cant respond to calls.

New york is a blue state fwiw.

#25 to #6 - eeech

has deleted their comment [-]

#21 to #6 - kenshirokisame

Reply-1

(11/23/2017)[-]

Thank you. This site has been just constantly pushing one side of the story while people who try and bring up the other side get downed to oblivion.

#40 to #21 - donatelo

Reply+4

(11/23/2017)[-]

Think about it this way...i hvae friends who are SJW legbeards, and some conservative friends. This is the one ******* issue they agree on.

#20 - mortuz#23 on contentRank#23

Reply+7

(11/23/2017)[-]

The whole idea with the net neutrality that is going: /channel/FJNN/Net+neutrality+title+ii...

And JGKingpin said it the best:
/channel/politics/Lets+talk+internet/...
/channel/FJNN/Daily+news+may+18+17/pu...

And of course seniorawesomesauce:
/Let+s+keep+the+internet+open/funny-p...

#23 to #20 - anonasdaasdasd

Reply+4

(11/23/2017)[-]

The "everything was fine until 2015" claim is wrong
www.freepress.net/blog/2017/04/25/net...

And the last source is really bad as well, the internet in America is a huge joke.

Americans don't have fast or cheap internet, it's common knowledge,and every source stating otherwise is trying to mislead you

#36 to #23 - JGKingpin#37 on commentsRank#37

Reply+6

(11/23/2017)[-]

The everything was fine, is a point that it wasn't the wild west as people are making it out to be. Where were the ISPs blocking and throttling sites without facing any kind of repercussion? Of course companies try **** /channel/funny/Pornhub+agrees/ywnrLlj... , but the point is were we able to hold them accountable or not prior to Title II, which we could. But now companies get an exempt from anti trust laws, which has allowed companies like AT&T to throttle and get away with it.

#24 to #23 - anon id: f7aab16b

Reply0

(11/23/2017)[-]

idk 80mbs for $60 is light years better than what it was 20 years ago. i dont even know what the average consumer would even do with more bandwidth? like what the **** do you want? ponies shooting out of your fiber optics?

#35 to #24 - fatsigurd

Reply+1

(11/23/2017)[-]

$60 is ******* expensive, dude.

#37 to #35 - anon id: 700076e1

Reply0

(11/23/2017)[-]

Your totally right dude, internets should be, like, free and **** ammirite because like, 60$ breaks the bank?

Oh wait, that's dumb as **** and wishfulthinking. $60 for 80 MB is a ******* good price in the US. Stop bitching that the world didn't hand you everything on a silver platter in supreme quality.

#39 to #37 - fatsigurd

Reply+1

(11/23/2017)[-]

Or even better, 125MB for 31€.
www.upc.at/internet/speed-pack/?CMP=a...

Any why? Because we don't have ******* monopolies that can get away with ****** deals and ****** customer service like Comcast.

#42 to #39 - anon id: 24c19647

Reply0

(11/23/2017)[-]

>>#41 I said 80 MB, not 80 mbs. Sounds like you guys not only do not know what you are talking about, but also have worse internet than I do and paying more by the rate.

Top ******* kek. Might want to read up more.

#57 to #42 - anonasdaasdasd

Reply0

(11/24/2017)[-]

>>#24, you wrote "mbs" here you retard.
nobody ever measures internet speed in megabytes, so even if you had written MBS I would assume you were just confused by how internet speeds work (which you are)
Not only that, but I've never seen anyone with a 640mbps connection, it just doesn't make sense. Plently have 500mbps or gigabit, but very few (if any) has anything inbetween, and it will always be advertised in mbps since it sounds like more.

#38 to #37 - fatsigurd

Reply0

(11/23/2017)[-]

It's a good price in the US.
I can get 75MB for 27€.

#41 to #24 - anonasdaasdasd

Reply0

(11/23/2017)[-]

Everything improves with time.
And you enjoy your American internet then, I'm happy with my 500mbps

#43 - alrarelpepe

Reply+3

(11/23/2017)[-]

**alrarelpepe used "*roll 1, Magic 8-Ball*"**
**alrarelpepe rolls Cannot predict now**Will there be micro transactions for the entire internet?

#44 to #43 - alrarelpepe

Reply+3

(11/23/2017)[-]

**alrarelpepe used "*roll 1, Magic 8-Ball*"**
**alrarelpepe rolls Cannot predict now**Will there be micro transactions for the entire internet?

#45 to #44 - alrarelpepe

Reply+2

(11/23/2017)[-]

**alrarelpepe used "*roll 1, Magic 8-Ball*"**
**alrarelpepe rolls Signs point to yes**Will there be micro transactions for the entire internet?

#46 to #45 - alrarelpepe

Reply+3

(11/23/2017)[-]

#48 to #46 - savageoro#99 on commentsRank#99

Reply+3

(11/23/2017)[-]

**savageoro used "*roll 1, Magic 8-Ball*"**
**savageoro rolls Most likely**

#49 to #48 - squeegeemccoy

Reply+3

(11/23/2017)[-]

**squeegeemccoy used "*roll 1, Magic 8-Ball*"**
**squeegeemccoy rolls Most likely** will there be IRL microtransactions?

#58 to #49 - savageoro#99 on commentsRank#99

Reply0

(11/24/2017)[-]

one breath of air could be in the next 100$ Premium-Lootbox

#4 - roflstorm#174 on commentsRank#174

Reply0

(11/23/2017)[-]

I've been told to hate this guy.

What's his name?

#5 to #4 - blerdegerb

Reply+3

(11/23/2017)[-]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ajit_V._Pai

#51 to #5 - rjgnal

Reply0

(11/23/2017)[-]

after pajeet got roasted 1 too many times online he decided to change his name and ruin the internet for everyone else too.

#53 - horsecrab

Reply+1

(11/24/2017)[-]

You ******* faggots support the guy who is against Net Neutrality.

#54 to #53 - scootabot

Reply0

(11/24/2017)[-]

oh god, he was against net neutrality? goodness gee, i better vote for hillary then, because she totally would've kept it and i should just forget about all the other stuff like keeping borders safe and not letting in unregulated amounts of rapefugees into my country and oh golly goodness we should enact those hate speech laws right this moment

#55 to #53 - megayoming

Reply-3

(11/24/2017)[-]

"Obama's Attack on the internet is another top down power grab. Net Neutrality is the Fairness Doctrine. Will Target Conservative Media."

Lets ignore that first bit.

"Obama's Attack on the internet is another top down power grab."

Now we have:

"Net Neutrality is the Fairness Doctrine. Will Target Conservative Media."

The last bit im not quite understanding so lets get rid of that. We are now left with this

"Net Neutrality is the Fairness Doctrine."

Net Neutrality is the subject, The Fairness Doctrine is the descriptor.

Fairness Doctrine: "The Fairness Doctrine was a policy of the United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC), introduced in 1949, that required the holders of broadcast licenses both to present controversial issues of public importance and to do so in a manner that was—in the Commission's view—honest, equitable, and balanced."

If anything this statement is in support of Net Neutrality and instead of pointing out Obama is doing something to get rid of it to attack the Conservatives.

I might just be autistic but that's what I'm seeing unless you can get me more information and Cite your sources I fail to see how this is an attack. Again I'm not saying your wrong but I'm going to need more evidence than a twitter post to understand the situation and make a rational conclusion.

#63 - mrjweezy

Reply0

(11/26/2017)[-]

think for a moment.
the people they say are violent are playing games and browsing the web to keep their stress down.
what do they thinks gonna happen when these hormonal, irrational thinking, wall punching, gamers are gonna do?

#52 - crucible#222 on commentsRank#222

Reply0

(11/24/2017)[-]

The internet will be okay

#50 - lednard

Reply0

(11/23/2017)[-]

Meme as DLC

Add Comment