I generally don’t put up political humor, but given how Net Neutrality affects every one of us, I’ll make an exception. Ajit Pai made it clear that he did not take our comments and opinions into account, nor did he have any intention to listen to us. He and his Republican cronies even made moves to prevent future actions by the FCC to reinstate Net Neutrality.
Call your representatives in Congress. E-mail them. Do not let them forget how the FCC’s move is profoundly stupid and corrupt. Pai is literally trolling the American people about how he is nothing more than a corporate shill.
Also, he has abnormally large rodent teeth.
How appropriate for a rat.
By Gianluca Burdon Sun Dec 17th 2017 at 10:42 pm
I don’t live in America. So it doesn’t affect me, nor can I do anything about.
Sorry 🙁
By Underdawg Sun Dec 17th 2017 at 11:22 pm
Don’t worry. If it happens there, it will spread soon enough.
By Greyman Tue Dec 19th 2017 at 9:43 am
Do worry.
By Agent 52 Tue Dec 19th 2017 at 7:27 pm
Actually this will. Any companies outside america will lose a large amount of customers in america if and when net neutrality goes away because companies could prevent people from seeing their ads or visiting their sites.
By Xero Thu May 17th 2018 at 3:29 am
Yea it will it will
It will slowdown all state based websites
By CTNC Sun Dec 17th 2017 at 11:14 pm
Why can’t we live in a world where Meat hunts blatantly corrupt soulless “people” like this?
By Quin Wed Dec 20th 2017 at 1:04 am
Because those “soulless people” have enough money to hire people like meat to prevent people like meat. Would be willing go bet ten go one “not superman” would arrive to save him before meat threw the first blow.
By Xero Thu May 17th 2018 at 3:30 am
Crimson claw can pay those same guysin perscription drugs wich TBH is a more stable currency
By Towering Barbarian Wed Dec 20th 2017 at 6:11 am
Do you really want Meat or anyone like him getting to decide who is and isn’t “soulless”? o_O
You might find the problems with that to be a lot worse then the problems associated with a public official making a decision you consider to be unjust. ^_^;
By Otaku Wed Dec 20th 2017 at 3:48 pm
Times like this I wish he had a Like/Dislike button because I want to second what Towering Barbarian said, but don’t have anything to really add. At least, not without going off on a tangent. 😉
By Wurm_king Fri Dec 22nd 2017 at 7:12 pm
says you. I know where my sole is so I would be fine. it in a jar on Satan’s mantel
By Otaku Mon Dec 18th 2017 at 1:14 am
The government is profoundly stupid and corrupt.. so let’s have them turn the internet into a utility so they can increase their control over it?
By Zappit Mon Dec 18th 2017 at 2:46 am
In this case, that control simply put rules in place to prevent the ISPs from treating certain types of traffic differently. It actually prevented censorship because the ISPs could not block or slow down certain sites. They were unable to demand extra fees from content providers like Netflix or Hulu. Prior to Net Neutrality, these types of shenanigans did occur. Treating the internet, something we all use and rely on, as a utility was not just about government control. It was about putting in rules that allowed Internet commerce and the free exchange of information without ISP interference. It was actually one of the best things the US government did for its people in the last twenty years.
Now a former Verizon executive gets in, jokes about being a Verizon puppet, and proceeds to do just about everything Verizon would want him to do. He then moves to gut the FCC’s authority. Do you really expect the ISPs to work for the best interest of their customers? Leave them unchecked and abuse will start slowly before it becomes rampant.
By Otaku Mon Dec 18th 2017 at 4:29 am
Zappit, I’ve spent the last 20-30 minutes trying to type up a response, but I finally figured what is tripping me up: “In this case, that control simply put rules in place to prevent the ISPs from treating certain types of traffic differently.” (emphasis added. You’re wanting major regulatory changes for a few incidents, and when I go to look up either, they aren’t as cut and dried as you make them out to be. When I look up what all this will do, I am finding things that apparently you don’t see, or are okay with, like the FCC being able to set rates. Yes, I’m seeing Verizon, a big company is against Net Neutrality. Do you know who I’m seeing for it? Facebook. Google. Youtube. These are companies known to mess with their own algorithms so that you see what they want you to see. I’ve already spent a lot more time on this than I should have, and I’ve barely scratched the surface. There is a lot I know that I don’t know. XP What I do know is that this doesn’t pass the sniff test, and I’m not convinced I really need to spend more time on it. You want to toss stuff like this into your comic… go ahead! It is your comic, do with it as you wish. 😉 I’m just not sure I want my Sunday evening lost to things like this the night before I need to get my blood pressure checked. Yes, really.
By Wizard Mon Dec 18th 2017 at 4:30 pm
In a free market, of course I expect ISP’s to work in the best interests of their customers. That’s the only way they can get my money. I don’t expect regulators to work in my best interests. Look up the term “regulatory capture”. Regulated businesses have every incentive to lobby for terms favorable to them, and usually have significant means to do so. Ordinary consumers generally lack the organization and incentive to wield any comparable influence. Therefore, regulators almost inevitably end up in the pockets of the very industries they’re supposed to be protecting us from. And unlike private businesses, the government can (and does) take my money at gunpoint, whether I want what they’re selling or not.
Most of the things you’re so worried about are either still prohibited, or else weren’t prohibited by the OIO anyway. If you’re worried about bad behavior by ISP’s, the best solution is to remove barriers to competition. If consumers have the option of taking their business elsewhere, companies are a lot more likely to think twice before screwing them over. (Example: I get my internet service from Comcast. I’ve heard plenty of horror stories about them, but I’ve received generally good service. Since I live in a city where I have genuine alternatives, they have to treat me decently if they want my business.)
Sorry if this is a bit rant-y, I’m just tired of all the hysteria and misinformation surrounding “Net Neutrality”.
By Badtux Mon Dec 18th 2017 at 6:18 pm
But there is no free market in Internet service. I have a choice of Comcast or, err, Comcast. So I pay what they want me to pay for whatever they want me to pay, or else.
Google tried to get Google Fiber in my area but Comcast (and AT&T) blocked them by blocking their access to the (privately owned) telephone poles, because Comcast is a member of the telephone pole consortium that owns all the telephone poles along with AT&T and PG&E. Without access to the poles, there was no way for Google to actually get service to my house. Then finally Google spun off their fiber operation as part of Alphabet and stopped even trying, as did everybody else who tried to get Internet service to my house.
That’s not a free market, that’s a monopoly. Just sayin’. I pay what they want me to pay, for what service they feel like providing (which is sub-standard compared to civilized countries I might add — and I’m in the Silicon Valley!), and that’s that. I *WANT* government intervention, because government, in a democracy, is We The People, and We The People have a right to say how monopoly services will be delivered to our homes. That’s democracy. I don’t know why some people hate democracy, but I have little patience with people who hate democracy.
By Garitheous Mon Dec 18th 2017 at 6:41 pm
Exactly Badtux! Where I live the ISP providers have the area chopped up into zones. Comcast here, Frontier over there, CenturyLink over in that area. In the middle they shall not mix. This was set up by the ISP’s during the Net Neutrality era, what the hell do you think they are going to do when they can do what ever they want?
By ev Mon Dec 18th 2017 at 10:19 pm
Lemme just say for the people below:
Without regulations, things like THIS:
http://www.crf-usa.org/bill-of-rights-in-action/bria-24-1-b-upton-sinclairs-the-jungle-muckraking-the-meat-packing-industry.html
have happened, do happen, will happen. Companies work in their own interests to make money. “the customer comes first” is the last thing on their minds.
Without regulations we’d have dirty food, sweat shops, child labor… Stopping this type of abusive behavior from companies is not “government overreach” it’s what the government is MADE to do to protect the best interests of the people. We need more people working in our best interests, not less.
(Well, that ended up being longer than I thought, but…examples and facts! 😀 and now…back to our regularly scheduled fantasies~)
By Wurm_king Fri Dec 22nd 2017 at 7:41 pm
in fact we have had these things before regulation. look at any major city before regulation during the Victorian era. that was not fog clouding the city streets of London or Manhattan, that was a pollution haze. food was prepped in the worst conditions possible, and there was no minimum wage. all this bullshit about companies acting in the interest of the customer in a free market is bullshit. for every company that does, there are 20 that don’t and the one that does is out of business in a year. that’s why the regulations were put into place, people got tired of this bullshit; of monopolies, company stores, and the like. now the right wing wants to go back to these days because they are to ignorant or to greedy to care.
regulations are needed because its human and animal nature to screw everyone else over to get ahead and survive. that’s why laws and governments exists, to force people to act in the best interests of someone other then themselves.
By Nomi Mon Dec 18th 2017 at 2:07 am
That’s spelled “mantel.” “Mantle” is the garment.
By Zappit Mon Dec 18th 2017 at 2:38 am
You’re right! Consider it fixed!
By Marscaleb Mon Dec 18th 2017 at 3:21 am
Okay, NO. I’m sorry, but THIS IS NOT TRUE.
There was a power-grab disguised as protecting Net Neutrality that gave the FCC a bunch of power, power that they could wield to crush Net Neutrality just as much as protect it, as well as do a dozen other things. Yet there was nothing erected to actually keep them in line. Nothing to stop them from taking bribes from ISPs and others to side in any particular way on any issue. We just handed over a bunch of power to a small group of non-elected government officials to just *trust* them to keep the net neutral.
Net Neutrality HAS NOT ENDED. We have it just as much as ever.
The problem we had been having before was that ISPs and lawmakers kept proposing ideas and changes that would destroy Net Neutrality, and we would all get nervous and write to our senators and stuff to try to keep Net Neutrality alive. We always had Net Neutrality, but people were nervous because we never had anything to guarantee Net Neutrality. Then there was the push to reclassify ISP’s as common carriers (a push that I will admit I thought was a good because I wasn’t looking at it close enough) which ended up with giving the FCC a crap ton of power about how the internet is managed. Now that that power has been revoked, everyone is crying “Net Neutrality is dead!” NO, it isn’t! We just lost a poorly-devised measure to keep it protected, one that didn’t actually do anything to protect Net Neutrality.
NOTHING HAS ACTUALLY CHANGED, and the potential for something to change has actually diminished.
A few bribes from Time Warner and we could have seen Net Neutrality disappear far faster than it can right now. We should all be breathing a sigh of relief.
By Shadrim Mon Dec 18th 2017 at 10:43 am
Net neutrality ? LOL
I do know that this should mean that ISP have to treat each and every data packet equally, effectively hampering any attempt to use throttling of unpaid/not “enough” paid traffic to sell premium plans for “top” speed connections.
No enforced net neutrality would also mean that instead of creating and maintaining a working network hardware wise, ISP could just throttle down any lesser paid traffic to sell an increasing amount of “top” speed while not doing anything to augment the base hardware at all.
Politically, there is not and never was “net neutrality”, not with all those funny little filters residing in DNS backbones and in other convenient places, leading to a “free” german resident being unable to view “Weird Al”s videos from the official canadian website – until i proxy myself as an unfree iranian. Funny how those seem to have access to content that somehow is blocked for “free” people.
Well looksie, theres some company friendly regulations in effect, even for DRM free stuff … If in doubt – lock it out.
Concerning the comic, i do not see anything outrageously offendable. Then again, with Merkel as chancelorette, who already looks disgusting enough without any attempts of mockery by cartoonists, i may be desensibilised a tad too much.
Personally,i would not pop a vein just because any batman-inspired cartoonist creates a comic that would suggest to give her a Joker surgeon treatment so that at least some kind of smile is finally possible for her.
By Wizard Mon Dec 18th 2017 at 4:06 pm
A couple of days ago, I saw a graphic about how much the EU supported net neutrality, preening in their moral superiority to the corrupt, corporatized US. Knowing of some of the restrictions European countries place on internet services and users, I nearly fell out of my chair laughing.
By Shadrim Tue Dec 19th 2017 at 6:06 am
Some overregulations do occur indeed, which is a bitter reminder what happens when lobbyist are the only contact that politicians have to anyone outside the ivory tower.(EU wise:Lightbulbs, cucumbers, bananas, vacuum cleaners…)
—
As such, the EU and germany are quite corrupt in at least that way, that neutral info is inaccessible to politicians who do not even try to change that issue.
They also still do not understand the long coming election results, featuring massive vote losses for all established parties in germany.
—
Rest assured, i would never rant about the corruptness of “the corporate state” without concerning the similar corruption in germany (Ok we have our “delaware tax issues” outsourced, financial guantanamo if you so please) and the EU.
—
On the other hand, in the EU, corporations have to prove that their products are not malfunctioning or being a safety hazard before they may be sold. This kind of “overregulation” is much more protecting customers lives than the US approach to be able to sell anything until proven harmful or fatal.
Then again, US damage compensation seems more attractive money wise so from my point of view, both stats/federal states (whatever the EU currently is ???)are not really comparable due to massive differences.
Even comparing the neighbors france and germany is nigh impossible (having friends there and speaking french does help a lot but still …), i wouldn´t even dare to assume to know enough about the US and any relevant amount of federal and state laws there – much more so as german and US law also differ systematically.
—–
What never occured before in germany was any serious issue with net neutrality (hardware / packet speed wise). Internet access is a monolithic block, not subdivided by “packages” at all here. ISP like Telekom have a sort of movie channel options and VOIP telephone plans, but those use other lines and do not impede on bandwidth for “regular” internet.
Thanks to the land of the free and the heartwarming example what companies do without neutrality regulations, there are currently several attemps to make sure that EU companies will adapt such ideas of the “free” market too enthusiastically.
—
Maybe that would be something for a supervillain to experience and get another headache on. Flying fortress in french or german airspace with never heard before strange laws and regulations inbound. 😉
In the current situation with germany having effectively some kind of “standby government” until the politicians actually start working on a new coalition or whatever, the brits considering an exit-from-brexit and the french president losing two thirds of his wannabe-party there are lots of other things where reality is more absurd than any webcomic i know. (including Schlock mercenary, OGLAF (nsfw) and other funny strips.)
By Andrew_C Tue Feb 19th 2019 at 11:49 am
You realize that the regulations on for example energy efficiency for light bulbs are perfectly sensible and the objections are scare stories? I’ve never felt the need for a 1500W vacuum cleaner and the new Henry cleans just as well as the old one and the parts are still interchangeable. More than you can say about any of those massively overrated Dysons, although from what I’ve hard the changes have forced them to get of their arses and design their first decent vacuums in years.
Changing to CF & LED bulbs has saved about 8% of our energy bill. And those regulations were actually introduced to the EU on the insistence of the UK government.
And the bananas & cucumbers bit are urban legends made up by Boris Johnson when his job at the Telegraph after getting fired from the Times for fabricating stories was to quote him “making up lies about the EU”.
https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2016/06/22/debunking-years-of-tabloid-claims-about-europe
https://blogs.ec.europa.eu/ECintheUK/euromyths-a-z-index/
https://ethicaljournalismnetwork.org/resources/publications/ethics-in-the-news/media-lies-and-brexit
By Wizard Mon Dec 18th 2017 at 3:59 pm
You are correct. All that happened was the roll-back of the “Open Internet Order”, which didn’t even have much to do with net neutrality to start with. The OIO didn’t even prevent ISP’s from censoring content, or doing most of the other things people are panicking about. It was nothing more than a blatant power grab by the FCC, an agency which has spent its entire existence coddling big businesses at the expense of consumers and innovators.
By darius404 Mon Dec 18th 2017 at 5:37 am
Setting aside any of the political issues involved, the physical and mental mockery of the man is petty and disgusting. I’ve heard him speak, he’s cautious in his language and has clear reasoning for the policy changes he supports. To throw that and any attempt at civilly addressing differences out the window for a cheap jab at his appearance is deeply disturbing and exactly what’s wrong with modern politics.
No one wants to actually listen to the reasons people have for their political preferences, just smear them as evil and stupid. That’s no way to live. Life is a negotiation, and when you give up on negotiating you basically give up any ability to have your interests served barring the application of your boot to someone’s neck. And as you can see, you can’t be sure it won’t be the other way around.
You’ve lost me as a reader today. Not because of your political opinions, nor because you’ve displayed them in your story. It is because of the vile caricature displayed here and wishing, even as pretend, terrible physical harm on a man you’ve never met.
By Siva Mon Dec 18th 2017 at 9:06 am
A man whose actions caused so much harm. I’ve never met Hitler, but I’m glad he’s dead. Never met Caligula either; ditto. You won’t be missed here. Probably, neither shall I once the lack of net neutrality means I can’t afford to view webcomics.
By Zappit Mon Dec 18th 2017 at 11:46 am
I’m sorry to hear that. I just see it as this:
He ignored the will of the vast majority of the American public. He literally said the comments weren’t considered.
He is currently ignoring multiple criminal investigations into identity theft related to NN comments.
He ignored an increasing number of Senate and Congress members who wanted a delay.
He put out a condescending video that basically trolls NN supporters.
He made a very smug “comedy” video where he basically admits to being a corporate schill.
Actions speak louder than words. He took action that ignored the voters, the law, and members of the government, then basically taunted them about his course of action. These are not the actions of a careful, considerate public servant.
And yes, I did use a caricature. All political comedy does. Nearly all political cartoonists portrayed President Obama having giant ears and a skinny, narrow head. Most portray President Trump with tiny hands. The only thing I really emphasized in mine was the teeth. Everything else pretty much matches up with the actual dimensions of Pai’s face. Everything but the teeth was kept realistic.
And while I do have my own opinion, I kept the characters in my comic true to themselves. This is how they would react. They’re criminals at the end of the day, prone to doing rotten things. There’s no sudden personality shifts or major character changes. This comic was just a one-off, and it’s back to the regular story on Friday.
By Otaku Wed Dec 20th 2017 at 3:44 pm
Maybe the guy is a total jerk and wrong about Net Neutrality… but I still wouldn’t have known who it was you were drawing if you hadn’t told me. Aren’t such exaggerations supposed to make it easier for the reader to identify the person, not harder? Well, maybe not. You are right that Claw and company are villains (supervillains! XD) and so they don’t have to behave even remotely “good” when they go about things… but it does help when we see the ramifications of such things, even if only in general. You’re right, this is a good, humorous comic that occasionally goes deeper. Sometimes, though, we can’t tell when you’re just trying to be funny and when you’re trying to go deeper.
By Darius Drake Fri Dec 22nd 2017 at 3:21 am
The exaggeration in political cartoons are both for mockery and recognition factors. However, the recognition is less about being easily recognisable and more a form of shorthand. If you have a single panel political comic with five people in it, having one of them having tiny hands shows that it’s Trump, while the other 4 would have their own “details” for those who know about it. I am not certain if Ajit Pai has been in enough, or any, Political Comics to have his own “signature”, nor do I know if Zappit reads enough Political Comics to know Ajit Pai’s “comic shorthand”, but I fully accept the fact that he made his own based on his teeth, particularly as his only other really defining appearance trait is his nose and it wouldn’t work as well as a joke for this comic.
By Ladon Mon Dec 18th 2017 at 12:13 pm
I was not expecting that. Has there ever been political commentary in comic before? Eh. For myself, I can’t say I know enough about this topic to comment. My main concern right now is Disney and their slow, inexorable rise to absolute power. But, uh, it’s cool that we have so much discussion in the comments. I learned a LOT. I mostly just learned how much I don’t know but… that’s a lot. And worth knowing.
By CosmoFan47 Mon Dec 18th 2017 at 3:03 pm
I’ll admit that I was more focused on Disney than Net Neutrality this week… but I really shouldn’t have been. I’m a pretty heavy internet user, seeing as I write on FanFiction.net and other fandom sites. I’m still not 100% sure I get what Net Neutrality means for the U.S., but I am pretty worried based on what little I actually understand.
By Ladon Tue Dec 19th 2017 at 2:53 am
What kinda stuff do you write? I like to write too but I don’t put anything on the web. I’d be interested in reading your stuff, see what I have to learn from you.
By CosmoFan47 Thu Dec 21st 2017 at 3:05 pm
I mainly write fanfiction for various animated series’, but I’ve written in other fandoms too. I’m a fan of a lot of different franchises, so I have a lot I want to write.
If you want to check my stuff out, then go on FanFiction.net and search for the writer CosmoFan47. That should get you to my page. Just be aware that my Fairly Oddparents fanfics are my early work, and not as good as the other fandoms I’ve written in.
By Shadrim Tue Dec 19th 2017 at 6:33 am
Let me assure you that (to my experience) there is always at least a hint of political comments in comics and also the comments section.
Even things as the pixel surgery on politicians and other celebrities is not rare at all. 😉
Some political discussions even happened in the comments of “unsounded”, comparing real life politics with those of that fantasy world.
As much as some people despise it (quite rightly so when discussions deteriorate into flamewars), politics are an inseperable part of our lives. Messed up politics even more so, when their outcome touches things we like – like a decent internet speed and content or harebrained EU concepts of outlawing normal light bulbs for whatever made up “environment” “reason”.
My wife – among other net based activities writing on two german fanfiction sites – is also embarrassed what might happen when servers physically situated in a “throttle allowed area” might gag any low profit lines or content.
Concerning Disney, i sense a disturbance in the force. As if billions of fans would cry out and then …. silence. Because nearly everything dear to those remembering the “real” starwars canon that grew over decades are shocked what little respect disney has for those achievements of millions of fans and contributors.
Some villains do not need flying fortresses, set attorneys to stun. 😛
By Verycoolname Mon Dec 18th 2017 at 5:12 pm
Republican? that ain’t republican… At least it shouldn’t be. It feels more and more that there are two sets of political parties nowadays: The ones the people believe in and the ones the corporations that bribe the government believe in.
By David Mon Dec 18th 2017 at 7:06 pm
” It feels more and more that there are two sets of political parties nowadays: The ones the people believe in and the ones the corporations that bribe the government believe in.” – I wonder how Hillary got 2x the donations of Trump for campaign financing and family went from net worth of 0 to 110+ million?
Not seeing big difference between political sides.
As for net neutrality, if one ISP dominates an area then I think properly enforced antitrust laws take care of things… if more than one ISP which combined dominate an area work secretly together, then same thing.
As for the rest, it is complicated, there are times when a lack of net neutrality can be useful… there are ways to cache/copy common data such as a TV show episode to many different servers to drastically reduce internet traffic so can do things at lower cost or better quality… IMO under ideal situation you let experiments happen then stomp foot down if the experiments hurt public.
IN current situation, copyright laws were suppose to last 14 or 28 years so like patents help the public in general as make more content available, then put it in public domain so it can be enjoyed forever. But copyright laws are extended to 100+ years which is against public interest, and what public wants… politicians on both sides care more for the campaign donations of mickey mouse then when is good for the people.
By David Mon Dec 18th 2017 at 7:09 pm
(If you can’t trust politicians to do what is good for public when it comes to length of copyright, how do you expect them to do what is good for public in managing the internet)
By Verycoolname Mon Dec 18th 2017 at 7:17 pm
I meant that there are citizen republicans and citizen democrats and corporation republicans and corporation democrats. The whole system has a bunch of gaping holes that the rich and corrupt are taking advantage of and they dress it up as a political when its just greed.
By Otaku Wed Dec 20th 2017 at 3:25 pm
There aren’t that many (if any) holes in the system, but the reason it seems like it are the apathetic, the corrupt, and the ignorant. Notice how I did not specify “rich” in those lists; being poor doesn’t make one automatically virtuous or vile. Not all corporations are rich, and even the ones that are may be owned by hundreds or thousands of people… some of whom may be working class or even poor (but still owning some shares). The perceived holes in the system stem from people not doing their part (self-governance, remember?), selling out to special interests (be they corporate, non-profit, whatever), and/or not understanding what it is they demand of their own government.
By Random Guy Tue Dec 19th 2017 at 6:15 am
Ijit Pie.
By Darius Drake Mon Dec 25th 2017 at 9:59 am
Okay, I know that nobody is likely to ever look at this, but I just saw this video that explains Net Neutrality by replying to a video done by someone else, explaining why he’s wrong. The person who uploaded it states they’re a network engineer, and their replies to this person explains what Net Neutrality actually is, why it’s important and why the arguments against it don’t make sense.
Problems with the video, the person’s language does get more frustrated/aggressive as the video goes along.
Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oInAlTKlw64
By Ahrakeen Fri Jan 5th 2018 at 8:51 pm
ajiit pai did you a favor. the so called net neutrality where protecting busnisses like facebook, google and so on. it also made it hard for new companies to be formed to offer internet access. since under net neutality internet was compared to telephon companies . and that means a boat loadf of paperwork to do anything
By Eiji Wolf Sat Feb 26th 2022 at 5:42 pm
I never understood why people insist on internet communism.
You want a big house? Probably gonna cost more than a small one.
Want a six-liter-engine car? Probably gonna cost you more than a motorized shopping bag.
Want a faster, stronger, bigger… anything? Probably cost more than its more modest counterparts.
You want more/faster mobile data? Probably gonna cost you more than slower/lower limit.
Oh hey! You want fast internet with a lot of bandwidth? Ooh! What surprise! It’s going to cost you!
But no, all of a sudden people snap and start advocating equality of outcome regardless of what you’re willing to pay.
Why did everyone’s brains suddenly short-circuit?
*facepalm*