Explore
Featured
  • 3
  • 1,123

D.A.D.

MisterMetokur Follow Politics & News
  • 1,123
  • 3
It's what would happen if a Faustian bargain and a Pyrrhic victory made love. ------------------------- Links ------------------------- Minds: https://www.minds.com/MisterMetokur Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/MisterMetokur DeviantArt: http://mistermetokur.deviantart.com/ Youtube: https://youtube.com/c/mistermetokur Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/MisterMetokur Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/MisterMetokur
show more
Next post →
Up next
    Tips
    Upvotes (232)
    Comments (38)
    Sorted by:
    • [ – ] winter__leaf reply I'm fucking ready to watch some shit burn.
    • acoemusic reply *Drops EVERYTHING to listen to Jim*
    • [ – ] freerangehobo reply The left reside under an illusion that there are way more of them than there are of us. At some level though, they have to be aware that their armies consist of those whom they have rendered: "Shitfor brains" minions who lost control of their dream world in the last election. They know they are up against a much smarter, informed crowd who are incapable of buying into their crap. All they have left for their defense is panic driven control over the only thing they understand: Technology. Let's wreck their high-flying dreams of world domination, and turn And their technology against them. We obviously have the crowd support, but we have to glean from that source, the brains who are able and willing to construct And launch 🚀
      • [ – ] rddnkk parent reply The only problem with the empowerment that being a victim provides is it collapses if you move past victimhood. The Russian collusion narrative is collapsing so they're trying for the racist collusion angle. It's a moral equivalency, if you support trump you must be a racist. Same thing Hillary tried with the whole deplorables spiel. They think we've forgotten how bad they're credibility was damaged with the Hillary absolutely can't lose debacle. Fuck Zuck 2020 🖕. Trump 2020👌👌👌
        • TrainStation parent reply This was predicted by Trump before he ran for election... https://mobile.twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/532608358508167168?lang=en
    • Auceza reply Build independent networks with many, many people linked to each other. They can't neither ignore nor destroy this.
    • [ – ] Lonecomplex reply As people have already said - foremost, I think you'd see ISPs get with the Hosting companies to strike a deal. The power the "user" wields is nebulous and decentralized. It is difficult for us to band together by the nature of what an amalgam of anon users is. Meanwhile a public corporation with a big pool of money that can be steered around, brokered with, execute contracts and otherwise negotiated with on the up-and-up? They'd be more capitulate to them than they would us, IMO, if only because they're easier to understand and their power is centralized. Our best option rather than MAD or a boycott would be to devise a tool that is beyond their reach. As others have said: something that mirrors the nature of anon. A decentralized, fully encrypted protocol that works on the cutting edge of tech. The kicker to this is twofold: One, by the nature of an open-source like design, make it impossible to copyright or profitable to duplicate. And two, make it as user-friendly as poss...moreible to the lowest common denominator of user and push it into every feasible part of the digital space as possible. I think some of this is already being worked on with decentralized cloud based storage. Now consider decentralized cloud based content hosting. Ideally, it would displace them. At the very least even if adoption was only say 10% of their potential userbase, that is 10% revenue lost. These moves they're making to drop Dailystormer and others are reactionary based on current events. They're worried about their bottom line. The only thing they will appreciate is their bottom line, so attack their bottom line. As I've said before - easiest way to do this to any tech company (to include social media) is to make them obsolete and take their paying customers away to another product or service.
    • Hopeavalo reply The tactic Jim proposes wouldn't work. Big corporations would just pay ISPs and then we would be stuck in a scenario were users have to pay ISPs for their internet but also pay ISPs extra to access services other than e.g. Youtube and ISPs own service. Probably also pay for e.g. Youtube to access it in the first place since this cost would be transferred to users. And the big corporations would still shutdown the smaller competitors or create conditions were the growth potential for smaller competitors is near zero. Furthermore the number of users which is needed to enable this would be just enormous. I also see other potential problems for giving the Saint Peter's keys of the Internet Access to ISPs. Decentralisation of social media other internet services would work better. However that isn't a problem free scenario either.
    • paranoidlurker reply in before it's "politics&news"
    • TheHumanoidCreature reply Why am i here at 4am
    • [ – ] Merlynn reply Copying this here for people to reads. Net Neutrality is a non-issue anyway. If it gets taken away,it's gonna cause a lot of problems,but they'll sort themselves out when the big ISPs lean on websites for more money and smaller ISPs offer completely free internet. I like to put it as a choice between having a Ferrari that's walled into a room and a compact that can be used normally that will ultimately be upgraded. Yes,it will take time. Yes,it'll be a hassle. But let's face it,it's always going to be a hassle to keep this shit going. And sometimes,you have to let businesses fail when they stop being about providing service and more about agendas and shitting on people. So the big "content providers" fail because they're already bleeding money and won't be able to "pay to play" and the big ISPs will fail because their greed will keep them from being competitive. Yes,it'll mean having to switch ISPs,but we're already being hassled with finding new content providers,so why not just cle...morean out the whole thing? People want a free internet. They will pay for a free internet. I'd rather have ISIS recruitment videos and kiddie porn over being prosecuted for "thought crime". To be clear,I'd rather have none of those things,but seeing as that seems to be the choice,I know which of those evils seems lesser to me. Remember,kids,law and order doesn't always mean fairness and justice. You have to have some say in the whole thing or it's just someone else ordering you around. And isn't that why we fight evil?
    • PILLB0XGAMING reply lol net neutrality is being pushed by big companies like Google. So if big companies like google want net neutrality what makes you think this is a good idea? Google is the one that is censoring everyone.
    • Natanahel reply I wouldn't mind destroying the internet for a while, it's better than allowing FB and such to own everything.
    • ikki6567 reply Thing that will stop the Silicon Valley oligarch's will be monopoly break-up's.
    • jefaus reply This will work for a time, until the SJWs invade the ISPs and start colluding with the content provider. Shifting content onto VPNs or TOR is a better medium term idea. What they can't see, won't bother them. It will take them longer to both discover and shut down. After that happens, we might have to get inventive.
    • Squiggles reply I'm not sure if I'm on board with this idea. I think it "could" work but it seems like a tactic that requires widespread support. It also relies on social media platforms to give a shit and realize why it's user base is siding against net neutrality. Does YouTube or Twitter even believe in the power of its users? Does Twitter actually think we can decide whether or not to keep net neutrality? Because I don't believe we do. And then what happens when we lose net neutrality and users are still getting censored? There is no limit to stupidity. Even if users need to pay a premium to access YouTube they will pay it. And what's worse is Google will continue their SJW bandwagon in a desperate attempt to save its dying userbase. Personally I believe all these companies are too big to fail, and we're gonna get fucked right between both sides.
    • SirRidealot reply Will not happen though. The only thing we can do is raid them with thumb down campaign and starve them of our data, money and ad revenue. But we have to unite to do that effectively.
    • firaro reply But the problem is it'll be the big corporations that will survive this the best. They'll pay ISPs to censor their competition. You'd unlock the nukes then give the launch button to the highest bidder, and google will win that bidding war.
    • mathphysicsnerd reply While a clever idea, I don't think this will work. Ultimately, the internet (or something similar) will have to be developed from miniaturized local networks being able to temporarily transmit information without being locked into an infrastructure-like setup. Either that or some basic aspect of the internet will have to be nationalized, though that has potential to blow up even more horrifically than the shit situation we're in now. Where we are right now is just a really bad place and it will take some strange and extreme ideas being put into action to ensure that this resource which has improved life for so many people in the modern era is around for not only our current lifetimes, but those after ours.
    • ArekusRyse reply We either have Free Speech or Violence. The tables of negotiations are closed- time to act. 100% agreed with da Mister...
    • BigghairBooks reply The BlockChain is providing us the tools to create an uncensorable fully encrypted internet - it's just a matter of time.
    • Fexel reply DAD birb approves.
    • MysticChicken reply I am with you jim.
    • mistrx reply I think it is better to have net neutrality and build and use new platforms. Let that shitholes of Gulagool etc. for others and we can move elsewhere
    • paddyelpladypus reply I feel like using net neutrality as a club to combat content providers could only come back to bite us in the ass in the long run, and would just add gas to the fire.
    • aciDC14 reply This is some Metal Gear shit right here.
    • ALIEN-ADDICT reply Spot on my friend
    • EmptyHero reply McCarthey was right
    • TheBaconFromHell reply Up you go
    • Nicodemous52 reply If we are not allowed freedom on the internet, then why should we care about neutrality? Honestly, this makes some measure of sense. I fear it maybe playing with fire, but perhaps much like the prairie of old, perhaps it needs to burn once in a while to renewed.
    • Transdude1996 reply Cloudfires current reason for taking down Daily Stormer is that the site made the claim that Cloudfire supported them. Whether this is true or not is unknown at this point, but one of the biggest mistakes to make is to act on emotion instead of on facts.
    • JimmyRustlerJohn reply Jim this is a terrible idea. There is zero chance that weaponising net neutrality would fix this problem. It will only open the door to even greater abuse of the end user.
    • Halifax_Shadow reply How about bitchute?
    • TrainStation reply https://mobile.twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/532608358508167168?lang=en
    • JerellEmina reply Soooo the free market?
    • suroka reply The /mlp/ interpretation of the Samson Option is the only way. If they take our internet, we take the real world. Imagine the summer Pokemon GO, but with Bronies, /pol/acks, weeaboos, etc. flooding every city in the world.
    • TiberiusDuraga reply I like your style Jim
    • GSP-4ME reply Love it!
    • fast_wind_speed_high_velocity reply But what if the ISPs side with SJWs and go full feminist too? I'm guessing you're saying it doesn't matter because there's censorship anyways, so we might as well throw a wrench in the works.
    • Ice7Ruler7King reply Oh my fucking god yes.
    Download the Vidme app!
    © 2017 Vidme