can I bully you?

The reason I asked about age is: I used to buy a bunch of different T-shirts. now I generally wear the same sort of outfit on the day-to-day.

I'm thinking it's just a thing that comes with age.

You can try

I, low key, side with WHAT in this matter.

That's nice, a bit commie, but go for it

To be fair, he did ask politely to bully you.

Just remember to setup a safeword and you're good.

Typically lefties

Giant Energy Penis you qualify for bullying as well

>implying

I'm right wing, there isn't much left that can offend me

how right wing are u bro

I'm already hitler

Classical right

what do you mean by that

Like not Richard Spenser

2 genders

spencer is a dirty socialist

but are you like a traditionalist orrrr

like a paleo-conservative

I'm not anything in all, just a tad bit of each

ok bro

are you American?

Slightly libertarian, slightly right

Fuck no, Australian

hahahahahahahahahaha

Ah yes.

Do you come from a land down under?

The land of 80% price hikes.

Yes, I cum from down under

The safe word is 🍍

I feel bad for anyone that's into computers in Australia.

I feel bad for anyone that pays Australian prices

Decent answer.

Hey, so does Tim recognize that most of his fanbase seems to be rightwing or not? Also his Thumbnails can be click-baity as fuck and look like right-wing propaganda sometimes

Yes. He knows that.

Except...

The common thread isn't conservatism

It's libertarianism.

Yeah

well a ton of people are libertarians

I think Tim hasn't quite comprehended that right vs left is... still valid to people like us, but to the media he is on the right

I think maybe you haven't.

hm?

@RyeNorth

Or maybe it really doesn't matter anymore whether or you're left or right.

Right vs. Left isn't remotely where the divide is being drawn.

It's across authoritarian and anti-authoritarian lines.

to some extent yes

Down here on the Libertarian side of things, we actually talk to each other

we actually disagree

and we actually coexist

Any classical left is currently on the right for what it's worth, and most right wing views are in deed classical left views

Almost everything the right fights for as a whole are classical left views

I mean, you can say Tim's audience is conservative, sure

But when you consider you're a conservative actually agreeing with a center-lefty

That should kind of change your perspective on what's ACTUALLY happening here.

If nothing else, most of the people I've heard talk in here are libertarian/individualists.

Free speech is an entirely left view, censorship is a right view.. Yet the left censor everyone and the right want free speech

I'm still pretty moderate but I've been pushed to the right in the last year. In terms of the American Democrat-Republican sense.

Democrats and Republicans don't operate on the same political spectrum as their constituents

yeah

It's why there's so much disenfranchisement.

Someone should start the Leave-It-The-Fuck-Alone party.

put I have to participate in that system and I agree with the Republican party more because they stand for more normal American values

but

Kind of like the Rent Is Too Damn High party, but for libertarians

Left/right was stupid in my mind the moment I realised you couldn't be okay with gays as well as guns without having to drop one to go for the other.

👏clap👏between👏words👏party👏

The libertarian party in the US is retarded though lol

Definitely.

did you see their debates

..Do I even want to know.

Closest thing to following the libertarian party I've done is seeing what rand paul's been doing.

yeah, funny though because both political parties are going through ideological changes rn

conservatism is changing

And the two party system was a mistake.

Maybe we'll be lucky and it'll dissolve after this.

i don't know about that

I doubt it'll happen. But I can dream.

imagine all of the gridlock with many parties

having to form coalitions like in Europe

that's not good

Maybe. Excess bureaucracy's kind of just one of those side effects nobody's really figured out how to fix in a system that tries to be clean but. Well the system in place right now definitely isn't anything remotely close to that.

Two party system but it's still in a near constant state of gridlock.

the failure of the libertarian party could also be a reflection of the fact that people might just inherently gravitate towards authority

We either need a serious third contender or a dissolution of political parties.

Hell

ergo giant bureaucracy

I'd settle for a second.

dissolution of political parties isn't realistic

I know it's not.

humans form groups

And a full unfiltered democracy would be nothing short of terrifying.

yeah

It's nearly impossible to ask someone with power to give up power.

I mean, look at all the people lemming for Net neutrality to be kept in place, just shows the mob is retarded

Yeah, until you realize that Net Neutrality wasn't really officially a legal concept until during obama's second term

and that the internet did just fine without it thank you very much.

A fair number of the people arguing for net neutrality are definitely doing it in idiotic ways but the concept still isn't bad unfortunately.

yes it is

net neutrality is bad

Well okay, let me rephrase.

Purely from an open market perspective, it's bad.

Net neutrality isn't great. But the alternative is much worse.

Is it?

also wrong

Giant corporations that game the system and change laws to benefit themselves while screwing over anyone smaller than them.

The problem in place is the inability for a startup internet provider to be able to operate.

Stories of tiny ISPs trying to make ground getting shafted when they're basically legally crushed by the likes of comcast and verizon.

The market needs more freedom, not more restrictions.

Net Neutrality doesn't solve that.

indeed

net neutrality neuters competition

and innovation

I wouldn't go that far, necessarily

It's a distraction from what the real problems are, though.

the problem of small ISPs is high costs of entering the market

Disagree.

the infrastructure is very expensive, but competition could lessen those costs

There really isn't any competition though.

The infrastructure is impossible.

In a lot of places you see service from a single ISP.

also selective throttling is good in a variety of applications

I'm in one of those areas.

Next town over, it's another ISP but their spheres of influence don't intersect.

There's no choice.

I pay about 80 bucks to get bent over by my ISP

There's no competition.

5 mbps up, 10 down

I used to be on gigabit.

free market can create competition

And if you lose service for the better part of a week and they take their time dragging ass, there's nothing you can get outside of maybe a tiny bump in how much you pay that month.

Well that's just it. The shit from before net neutrality wasn't much better.

not an argument

Even Google, troubled company it may be

In fact if the constant stream of reports are anything to go by, ISPs have been lying about pretty much everything that was supposed to be beneficial for decades.

We were supposed to have 1:1 up/down speeds by 2000.

has had their bids shut down in some prospective markets

due to lobbying.

In order to set up infrastructure

You generally have to have a city's permission.

Lobbying by who? It didn't happen to be due to direct influence by comcast or at&t's lawyers did it?

I have a whole google doc of evidence against net neutrality

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/09/att-sues-nashville-in-bid-to-stall-google-fiber/

https://www.reporternewspapers.net/2015/12/17/google-fiber-hits-brookhaven-roadblock-with-zoning-denial/

Ah, I see where you're coming from.

Question though.

By your definition, what is net neutrality.

Pretty sure it's the same as yours.

Except my point is not going at it from a legislative standpoint.

Legislation creates roadblocks.

that lawsuit was because google was permitted to physically tamper with AT & Ts equipment which was technically illegal

You know this brings to mind a point.

How much crap's been tied to the net neutrality bill by this point?

The fact that the lawsuit stalls a potential competitor doesn't factor in at all?

"The Ordinance thus purports to permit a third party (the Attacher) to temporarily
seize AT&T’s property, and to alter or relocate AT&T’s property, without AT&T’s consent and
with little notice" -from the lawsuit

Because my understanding of it is still "no fast lanes, all data must be treated equally."

Ties into the whole title 2 thing and how major ISPs were cutting people off of certain types of data arbitrarily.

Consider, for a moment, that their 'property' happens to be the cables, where they sit on the line.

are you talking to me @RyeNorth

Yeah.

okay, are you arguing with me orrrrrrr

Vaguely.

`Can we just have a discussion without it being an argument lol`

I don't get what you're trying to say

the lawsuit was filed because a competitor was allowed to tamper with their property without consent

What I'm saying is, the infrastructure as it exists are the power, telephone, and cable lines within a city.

To what degree were they tampering?

possibly seizing and relocating it

Are they referring to the lines?

which could have an affect on AT&Ts services

not the lines I think but certain modules

Because I don't think they could've possibly been relocating their stations or anything like that.

and also the poles themselves are AT&T property

Are they really? Huh.

I'd figure a neutral party would have to be in charge of those, like the city.

Nope.

And that's kind of the problem.

well, yeah.

It's a problem regardless of who owns them

Something something title 2 let them handle the infrastructure, including improvements, which they've basically been slacking on because there's no reason to whatsoever.

or, sorry, i think they own many modules attached to the poles

Like I said

And the companies have gotten so big that the little guy isn't going to be able to bring them down.

5 up

10 down

I'm living in the past.

Net neutrality is definitely ugly, if you don't trust the government.

I don't.

But that's the only patchwork solution we have right now.

and they were concerned because any disruption of their equipment could harm thousands of customers' service

Create a different solution then.

The other option is 5 up 10 down with the threat that you're getting 1 up 2 down for everything that isn't Approved by Comcast™.

Because that's how everything seems to be poised to go.

Either that or them vacuuming up your data because there's no viable alternatives to the big 3.

that's entirely wrong dude

Many of the fears that you have about a lack of control with the FCC

removing net neutrality opens the door to competition and innovation, creating better service

the FTC already handles

abuses were handled before NN was established

and there rarely were abuses

there were like 4 but 3 of them were dismissed in court

ah-ha!

but you admit there WERE abuses!

Ban Fully Automatic Assault ISPs

https://a.uguu.se/77bvcwK1Zlvm_firefox_2018-05-07_01-17-39.png

Hmmm.

are u kekkin' on me rn fr

/sarcasm

i know vro

GEP what was that

I'm a little behind on the times. Wasn't aware they pushed the FTC as the replacement for net neutrality.

what are u saying vro

It was never pushed

it always existed.

FTC is the federal trade commission

I may have cited the wrong organization...

They've been doing a really shit job of it then.

are u kekkin'?

The warranty stickers thing was a great step in the right direction but their handling of ISPs has been shit at best.

uhhhm no

they're doing fine

Yeah. Artificial speed limits when there's no issues with throughput are totally great for the end consumer.

dude you are living in fantasy land

I can understand slowdown if there's huge amounts of data going all at the same time.

go read a huffpost article

5000ms and sub 1mb up/down because you weren't paying enough at the time.

And 20 or 30 phone calls doing nothing.

that is false

That ain't right.

I'm speaking from personal experience.

:okliberal:

Few years back on comcast. Parents stopped paying for the good service and went for the basic 5:1 service.

OH. JEEZE. IT JUST GOT REALLY ADHOM IN HERE.

Ain't that the fucking truth.

But yeah. They paid for the basic service. It was still comcast and it should've been 5:1.

calm down @RyeNorth lol

So we got 0.1:0.01 instead.

It was a great time. Couldn't do anything. A basic 5mb torrent took two weeks to finish.

Comcast is a whole 'nother animal.

I'd like to see what was going on there

Comcast is just another ISP.

Well again.

It was only while we were paying for basic service.

Comcast is ~~just another~~ The Only ISP.

My mother eventually gave up because I kept complaining and the moment she switched services it went right back to being totally perfect with pings below 10ms.

Just flipped a switch.

We didn't even change modems.