What is net neutrality?
Created on: June 22nd, 2006
What is net neutrality?
Don't let OUR internet get ruined by a few greedy ISPs :( Sites listed (and more that will be added soon): http://www.google.com/help/netneutrality.html http://www.savetheinternet.com/ http://itsournet.org http://www.handsoff.org/ http://dontregulat

Sponsorships:

Vote metrics:

rating total votes favorites comments
(4.28) 482 21 113

View metrics:

today yesterday this week this month all time
1 3 2 2 17,180

Inbound links:

views url
52 https://www.bing.com
5 http://www.google.com.hk
3 http://www.stumbleupon.com/su/
1 http://ytmnsfw.com/sites/most_comments/month
1 http://216.18.188.175:80

Add a comment

Please login or register to comment.
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
Prioritizing sites is bad, but prioritizing packets, which is what the proposed laws would ban, is not bad. Regulating the internet canbe a very bad thing, just need to protect the freedom to surf the net
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
http://www.handsoff.org/ and http://dontregulate.org/
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
http://www.internetofthefuture.org/
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
SAVE THE INTERNET!
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
Keeps ISPs from choosing what you see, but at the same time you need to be beable to let them prioritize information so that everything works better. Allow us to have freedom to visit what sites we want, but don't allow these strict government regulations
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
YUO FORGOT POLAND. NOO I CANNOT EVER FORGOT
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
Net neuttality deprioritizes information. That's not what we want. We want to just keep ISPs from blocking access. Change this YTMND so it doesn't mislead people into thinking that net neutrality is a good thing.
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
Are you getting paid for this or something Virty?
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
Don't trust anything Virty says. Handsoff.org is a fake site put up by telecom interests, and so are others. Just take one look at dontregulate.org and you can tell right away.
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
You make wild accusations. Net Neutrality does not save the internet, it will hinder it. It will slow down this new fiber optic direct connection. We need to make laws to prevent prioritizing sites, not packets of information. True neutrality will slow down the internet.
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
Furthermore, how the f*ck could ensuring all traffic gets treated equally (like it is TODAY) be a bad thing? Oh yeah, it is if you're a conservative sucking the cock of business interests.
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
Conservative? What the hell? This isn't a right-vs-left issue. It's a technical one. Without prioritizing, information will arrive late and create lag. Information is prioritized right now. Without it, there would me alot more lag, and online games would become unbareable
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
Net neutrality sounds like socialism to me. It's all about supply and demand, if you don't like what the telcos are charging, go elsewhere.
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
this is much better than that moby video on myspace. 5'd.
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
this sh*t is bad. i've been seeing it alot lately. if you really pay attention to the sh*t trying to get passed, the usa is slowly turning into one of those scifi totallitarian control states.
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
Virty, the telecom companies were given 200 billion dollars in the 90's to lay down open fiber cables but they did not so shut your keyboard.
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
The backbone of the internet are those fiber optic cables. Internet 2.0 will have it so that the direct connection to those fiber optic cables are through fiber optic cables.
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
GOOD. Should be at the top of YTMND in no time.
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
Anyone who is taking Virty seriously is a retard. It's blatantly obvious he's joking.
(0)
step by step they'll turn the internet into a corporate money making machine. and that'll be the end of ytmnd.
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
DONKEYPUNCH, it wouldn't be a bad idea if you stopped drinking the neocon Koolaid that makes you believe that ANY kind of government law or regulation designed to protect the citizenry from corporate abuse amounts to communism. That's just plain nonsense and it does nothing for intelligent debate.
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
net nuetrality FTW.
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
Put the adresses in Description please, it went too fast for me.
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
the balogna is in the nest, the pastrami is recyclable.
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
I'm talking about the technical issue here. You don't want companies to choose what sites you see, but you shouldn't stop them from being able to prioritize packets of information.
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
EVERYONE NEEDS TO SEE THIS. Seriously, could anyone sponsor this? (I can't spare anything right now, sorry.)
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
http://www.internetofthefuture.org/ Net Neutrality will cause alot of harm. There are already laws in existence that stop ISP from doing such a thing.
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
The Internet is NOT having a wonderful time. http://savetheinternet.com
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
I understood there was a law to create (not abandon) net nutrality. We have it now and we shouldn't mess with it by passing unneeded laws. I guess it dosen't matter create or destory we have net nutrality now and don't need anything to change that.
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
THIS MUST BE MADE AWARE TO THE PUBLIC.
(0)
So what, we're now creating Diet Internet now? I'm sorry, but you can't disallow websites for nothing but your personal dislike to them... Peadophilic websites and KKK websites and generally illegal sites, sure it's good... But when websites are doing nothing illegal, shutting them down is just impeeding freedom of speech, which is becoming more and more of a joke every day.
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
5'd more people need to know about this.
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
5'd and faved...people need to know this...f*ck the phone companys...theyre fossils of a gladfully forgotten age....check out www.eff.org and www.pirate-party.us
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
you forgot haddaway
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
info-tainment FTW. also, shinsenbaka, why downvote this if you clearly agree with what he's saying?
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
Virty's either presenting a straw man argument, or unintentionally making a fool of him/herself. Either way, it's disgusting.
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
You should change it to, like, Net Neutrality: The Unfunny Truth.
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
If u DV this, u dhould be killed. 5'd for fricken caring
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
public service announcements on ytmnd is a no, but i'll 5 it because it needs to stay up because of the message
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
ppl need to know about new neutrality, it could be one of the biggest f*ckups that congress will do in the last 20 years
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
5'd for publicity sake (and for gods sake!) the more ppl that see this the better ftw
(0)
I don't think enough people know how serious an issue this is.
(0)
Its already happening to me whenever I go to Youtube...
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
Companies spend millions on advertisement already, if they put those millions towards making their pathetic sites (that not many visit) faster, is just plain pathetic.
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
Whatever those stupid american politicans decide about the Internet won't be possible. They cannot control the Internet. The Internet is not something that can be controlled. They might make claims, but they won't be able to put them into action. To relax people, don't listen to what they say, cause it doesn't really matter.
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
NET NEUTRALITY FTW!
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
Hey, DONKEYPUNCH? Most countries are mixed economies, including the U.S. - we're capitalists and socialists. Regulation keeps the capitalists from running amok, from harming you, your health, and your rights. Back away from the Cheetos and get an education, mmkay?
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
I take what I said back. This is terrible. I never thought that it could be done. I can't belive that american politicians actually are allowed to recieve money from lobbies. I'm glad I don't live in America.
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
This makes me sad. There are already laws that help prevent ISPs from doing that, Net Neutrality is just unnecessary government regulation that can slow the internet by deprioritizing information.
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
Agreed. Save the net people.
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
Okay, what the f*ck? Selling the internet?
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
virty must be joking... those sites are fake
(0)
loll funnaaaayyyy :)
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
5'd for serious issue.
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
The kind of law I would want overthrowing net nutrality would be something like Virty says-keeping ISPs from picking and choosing what your Internet is, but able to prioritize info. This is not that law.
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
Yep, Virty's sites are corporate-sponsored, designed to look "grass roots". Sucker.
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
5 for spreading the truth.
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
Jesus christ. I'm sending this thing out. f*cking hell.
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
change the music.
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
The sites are real, and they contain no lies. They are sponsored by those that want to save the internet, to keep it from government regulation.
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
Morons. Guess what happens if companies start doing this? other compaies will come out with internet service that does not control your traffic. Company sucide to try and force someone to watch TV. This would be like if cable companies tried to only make you watch Life and Bravo and took the other channels away. Your going to just sit there and watch life? Learn how the world works . com imo
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
Public hosting companies like Geocities already charge for bandwidth per site, I don't see how this is any different.
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
OH sh*t!
(0)
Alert the internet!
(0)
Fived for great justice. And Virty is an ass.
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
Guess what? Earthlink is a Scientology corp! 5 all the way.
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
5 for great justice.
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
This is a real problem.
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
Although I do think that this is a problem that needs to be addressed I think that ForScience is right. If this is passed and companies do regulate sites, other companies will just non-regulation as a selling point.
June 22nd, 2006
(0)
i was expecting the "what is love?" fad, but this is just as good :}
June 23rd, 2006
(0)
thats no good!
June 23rd, 2006
(0)
Net neutrality is good. It has been the working principle of the Internet since the WWW was created. To turn the entire Internet into private enterprise is a bullsh*t move by the telecos to take over the last form of mass communication (just like they did with radio and TV.) Just look at who is supporting "Hands off the Internet," the same telecom companies who are giving our phone records to the government. It's all a motivated by greed. Keep Net Neutrality. check http://www.savetheinternet.com
June 23rd, 2006
(0)
I agree with you in principle, but not in tactics. When does writing Congress and/or supporting non-profit organizations ever work for issues like these? These guys always end up getting what they want (eventually). They don't play fair, so tactics must be changed.
June 25th, 2006
(0)
the thing is that if congress sees this as a factor that could get the youth vote out then it could be a determining factor in their vote, so the more we bitch the better, andreally, are you doing anything so important to not spend five minutes bitching at some elitest douchebag
(0)
It's not 'love', apparently.
June 26th, 2006
(0)
You're all way late, we're already f*cked: http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9588_22-6081882.html
June 27th, 2006
(0)
this is retarded. they will never get it off the ground if an owner of a blocked site has a somewhat decent lawyer.
June 27th, 2006
(0)
you guys do realize that whatever happens, there will alwais be a way to counter it, hacking programs and sh*t. Hell if they block, we deblock, simple.
June 28th, 2006
(0)
Things get passed though the House of Reps all the time. That doesn't mean the Senate will let it pass.
June 29th, 2006
(0)
DEFEND NET NEUTRALITY!!! Also, still can't sleep, scientologists will get me.
July 4th, 2006
(0)
The laws proposed would have changed the way how information can be handled, not just keep ISPs from unlawfully blocking sites. New laws need to be proposed that are not pro-neutrality.
July 8th, 2006
(0)
Shut the hell up, Virty. Nothing good could come of "prioritizing" anything. Data shouldn't be treated differently based on who forks up the most money to the phone company. If that were to happen, then it would only be a matter of time until free speech is gone, and the internet turns into business backed television commericals.
July 10th, 2006
(0)
5'd for justice.
July 13th, 2006
(0)
Hippies and other various morons made me love capitalism, but this net neutrality debate made me realize it isnt the end-all be-all. Our country has some serious problems and our insistence on pure capitalism is killing us. And if we dont do something, it will soon kill the internet.
July 13th, 2006
(0)
VIVE L'YTMND!
July 14th, 2006
(0)
THE INTERNET IS SERIOUS BUSINESS.
(0)
Ahhhh FATHERLAND!!!
(0)
Compliments from your friendly neighborhood upvoter!
July 16th, 2006
(0)
THE INTERNET IS THE FATHERLAND! Without it, i'm nothing.
July 19th, 2006
(0)
PROTECT THE FATHERLAND! The Fatherland is serious buisness!
July 25th, 2006
(0)
you gotta be f*cking kidding me...
July 31st, 2006
(0)
STOP f*ckING USING THAT MUSIC! IT WAS GOOD THE FIRST TIME NOW ITS GOING IN THE sh*tTER.
August 3rd, 2006
(0)
Save the internet!!
August 3rd, 2006
(0)
1'd | oh pwned...
August 5th, 2006
(0)
ALERT THE INTERNET!
August 9th, 2006
(0)
informative'd!
August 10th, 2006
(0)
Keep Sen. Stevens away from my tubes!
August 11th, 2006
(0)
5'd for awesomeness, but god damnit this song creeps me out D:
August 12th, 2006
(0)
Omg, Ted Stevens was right. OMFG
August 14th, 2006
(0)
The internet has given me so much throughout my life... now there's a chance for me to repay the internet for all that it has provided! Viva la revolucion!
August 17th, 2006
(0)
lol, I was expecting what is love musing with Ted Stevens and some others dancing.
August 23rd, 2006
(0)
See comment: ForScience
August 26th, 2006
(0)
Umm at the end there was a phone number. 1. why should we call it? 2. is it your number? if not then whos?
August 26th, 2006
(0)
Calling my senators and emailing them tomorrow. Ones against and ones undecided. Everyone, please do the same.
September 3rd, 2006
(0)
For f*cks sake max doesn't have enough money as it is, if you haven't done your part and signed a petition, and called your senator(do at least the first), you don't deserve to use the internet.
September 4th, 2006
(0)
Anti-freedom leftist propaganda
September 5th, 2006
(0)
Thanks for making this! I was planning on doing it myself because it would directly effect the business my father and I started, but you did a pretty good job, so I don't think it will be necessary. You may want to edit it and mention that all those Ted Stevens YTMNDs are about this. He's the one who wrote the bill that will get rid of Net Neutrality. Man, what a dumbass.
September 5th, 2006
(0)
Irony: A plethora of mini-monopolies, created by the left, now cooperating and possibly threatening mass censorship with the right's blessing. And you want the guys who MADE this probelm to FIX it. Brilliant. Stop relying on the government to fix problems. Deregulate internet access to increase competition, and it one company decides to ban YTMND, switch to one that doesn't. Problem solved by YOU, not some Washingto beaurocrat.
September 9th, 2006
(0)
so... in summary, is net nutrality good or bad?
September 15th, 2006
(0)
PurseMonster: Alot of people don't have the ability to do that. In my area there are only two ISP's (but since a guy from the other ISP that i'm not paying for came over install it I'm presuming they are atleast partners). All other ISP's provide dial-up only in my area. Conclusion: If this bill passes, living on the Oregon Coastline will really suck.
November 15th, 2006
(0)
Thank you for making this known to me
August 3rd, 2007
(0)
lol
July 31st, 2018
(0)
I am glad we got rid of the some net neutrality laws. Sure they can prioritize sites, but they can also prioritize data like gaming and videos to make it run faster so fight me.