Net Neutrality

  1. ‹ Older
  2. 6 years ago

    @MistakeMade -image-

    I know how you feel about this man. I have a 20 mbps and I get barely 12.
    It's funny how it doesn't even feel like it's 12. More like yours right now.

    It's bullshit because the internet package is combined in a 3 in 1 thing.
    You know, phone, internet and TV and other shit.
    Otherwise, I'd go individually for internet and phone & Mr. TV I never watch in one.

    Like that, I can order 50 mbps or more just for internet.
    I miss the 120 mbps in Germany. Fast as fuck man, downloaded a movie in 2 mins lol.

  3. Edited 6 years ago by Th3GreenGamer

    America's internet speeds are almost comedically slow.

    Mine:
    -image-

  4. @OtherGreenGamer Don't use my speed as a precedent to label all us ISPs as slow. I have an ISP near me that offers 100mbps but they don't offer it to people out of city limits like I am.

  5. Don't use a speed test service like that, most of them are designed to show false results because they're owned by ISPs. I use Google's. Just Google "speed test" and it'll ask you if you want to run one.
    -image-
    I'm okay with this speed but it's only barely good enough for YouTube and if someone else is watching something on the same network sometimes it bogs everything down. Downloads are okay but certainly not fast enough if I was in a hurry. America's internet speeds aren't very comedic if you live here, they're absolute shit and getting rid of net neutrality will only make things worse. Yay.

  6. On the contrary, the ISP is the only person who is really capable of measuring your actual throughput, the methods used by internet speed tests can be affected by a number of factors that aren't network speed related.

    That said Ookla and Google are solid speed tests, however they far from the best which is definitely http://speedof.me/
    due to the fact it's HTML5 and that reduces a lot of mitigating factors in speed tests.

  7. Deleted 6 years ago by Compos
  8. But what will happen to the server? Do we have to pay per month? Do we have to watch ads?

  9. @humfrydog We Americans need this also. greedy corporations and there minions are pushing to take away our net neutrality so they can charge us more for less. its crap and it should be considered a public utility along with be governed by free speech. twitter, google and youtube are all censoring what we see based on their personal politcis ad views, But we are supposed to be the land of the free and brave with freedom of speech and news without censorship or propaganda.

    Claps , best thing i seen on this thread you are dead on sir .

  10. @EnderConstructor Think that problem only affects North America or whatnot, Not the entire world anyways, thats what i've heard atleast

    @OtherGreenGamer It's only a problem in the USA as far as I know.

    It will have repercussions all around the globe, there are thousands of foreign countries that have their servers based in the US, and if this bullshit passes, we all will be affected.
    “As far as I know”

  11. Edited 6 years ago by WBlaine

    I am not the most informed with how internet traffic works, but I kind of fail to see how this would effect a minecraft server. The ISP's would be able to slow down the rates for consumers from various sources of content, but I don't think they would flat out slow down internet speeds or else their coverage would no longer be competitive (edit: of course, with the exception being areas where there is only one ISP). They would throttle speeds for content providers that have content that competes with their own content ( i.e. Video streaming services) and content they dont approve of (e.g. Controversial content). Maybe I am missing a part of the picture, but, I just don't see why they would target a minecraft server. And, before people assume otherwise, I by no means support the repeal of net neutrality.

  12. @WBlaine I am not the most informed with how internet traffic works, but I kind of fail to see how this would effect a minecraft server. The ISP's would be able to slow down the rates for consumers from various sources of content, but I don't think they would flat out slow down internet speeds or else their coverage would no longer be competitive (edit: of course, with the exception being areas where there is only one ISP). They would throttle speeds for content providers that have content that competes with their own content ( i.e. Video streaming services) and content they dont approve of (e.g. Controversial content). Maybe I am missing a part of the picture, but, I just don't see why they would target a minecraft server. And, before people assume otherwise, I by no means support the repeal of net neutrality.

    Microsoft owns mojang, and it might cost for them to create servers. So any minecraft server would have to pay to mojang or Microsoft so Microsoft can pay the ISP for the servers...

  13. But unless the ISP's have a stake in video games, they have no interest in video games. Also, mojang and Microsoft have nothing to do with hosting servers (other than realms). From my understanding, once they provide the JAR, microsoft and mojang have nothing to do with the interaction between the hosting server and the ISP.

  14. @WBlaine But unless the ISP's have a stake in video games, they have no interest in video games. Also, mojang and Microsoft have nothing to do with hosting servers (other than realms). From my understanding, once they provide the JAR, microsoft and mojang have nothing to do with the interaction between the hosting server and the ISP.

    The ISP is intrested in all internet service. They want to restrict all internet access, doesn't matter if it's for games or a video service.

    The other thing about Mojang's connection to servers is true, but when they update, they have to send that update to all servers. Maybe the server gets a ad on saying [Would you like to update to 1.13? (Pay 10$)].

    Even if that didn't happen to servers. Players might have to pay to keep up with the updates, making the server more empty for those that can't or don't want to pay in order to update.

  15. @MisterChris717 The ISP is intrested in all internet service. They want to restrict all internet access, doesn't matter if it's for games or a video service.

    I don't think you can just make blanket statements like that. If they are looking for a profit, they won't restrict all services because they can. It gets fuzzy it areas where there is one ISP and, therefore, no competition. Then, I guess, they can do what they want with the rates and not invest in infrastructure and increasing absolute internet speed.

    And I don't think the extortion of saying "Would you like to update to 1.13? (Pay 10$)" would happen. They can throttle Mojang's speed, which may just mean a slower downloads of Mojang's content, which is only relevant on those few occasions you need an update. It would be Mojang's decision to pay the ISP for faster speed and then charge the consumer to compensate for those expenses. I don't think occassional slow updates would cause Mojang to make such a decision that would further harm their business. But, again, the ISP doesn't have a strong incentive to throttle Mojang.

    I am open to accepting that the repeal of net neutrality would effect minecraft servers, but I don't find these arguments very compelling.

  16. I don't wanna be American anymore xD

  17. @Sirchristopher10 I'm hoping the senate will reverse it. The US has more freedom than any other country fyi.

  18. @MistakeMade @Sirchristopher10 I'm hoping the senate will reverse it. The US has more freedom than any other country fyi.

    Except for the freedom of internet

  19. Edited 6 years ago by HaloNest

    @MistakeMade @Sirchristopher10 I'm hoping the senate will reverse it. The US has more freedom than any other country fyi.

    Belgium has freedom
    Italy has freedom
    The UK has freedom
    Germany, France, JAPAN have freedom
    And right now New Zealand, Hong Kong and Neterlands are stated to be the countries with the most freedom and if we're talking about economical freedom then Hong Kong and Singapour are leading.
    The USA, isn't Leading the world in anything relevant (from my own point of view).

    (Apart from the number of incarcerated citizens every year, adults that believe that Angels are real, Flat earthers, and spending)

    I don't want to be the triggering spark of a debate on weather the US has the most freedom or not, back to the main theme.


  20. O no guys, the situation isn't getting better

  21. @HaloNest Belgium has freedom
    Italy has freedom
    The UK has freedom
    Germany, France, JAPAN have freedom
    And right now New Zealand, Hong Kong and Neterlands are stated to be the countries with the most freedom and if we're talking about economical freedom then Hong Kong and Singapour are leading.
    The USA, isn't Leading the world in anything.

    (Apart from the number of incarcerated citizens every year, adults that believe that Angels are real, Flat earthers, and spending)

    I don't want to be the triggering spark of a debate on weather the US has the most freedom or not, back to the main theme.

    I like how you say you don't want to trigger a debate on whether the US has the most freedom or not, after you just argued against it using points (bad ones) from a Newsroom video.

    "The USA, isn't Leading the world in anything.

    Apart from the number of incarcerated citizens every year, adults that believe that Angels are real, Flat earthers, and spending)" Ok, bud. The US leads the world in GDPSource 1 ,
    Military Source 2 , Most Foreign aid, Most Generous people Source 3 , Most Billionaires, Most Top Universities, and many more. I didn't discuss freedom I know but It's evident that the US is more free than the rest of the world, if there is a country that you believe is more free be sure to throw it my way I will attempt to show why the US is more free.

  22. Newer ›

or Sign Up to reply!