Silly hobbies like driving vehicles or cooking pot roast with a pressure cooker?
Driving vehicles is an excellent comparison. Vehicles are crazy dangerous; therefore we have many regulations involving registering, inspecting and insuring those dangerous devices. Also licensing and testing the drivers. I agree with you, we should have similar regulations for firearms.
Pressure cookers, though... I'm a poor cook but the most likely terrible result with a pressure cooker is a ceiling covered in strained gravy and veggies. Also, unlike vehicles and firearms, I'm not likely to be killed by your incompetence with a pressure cooker unless you tie me up next to your stove.
I don't want a doctor who learned how to learn. I want a doctor who actually learned.
I'm the opposite. Some of the facts a doctor learned when they were in school 30 years ago have since been found to be completely wrong. We've made some impressive leaps since then. But a doctor who learned how to learn will not depend on the old facts and will instead continue to learn new techniques and diagnostic methods.
Ther's a middle ground though. When they say "no lectures", it implies no discussions, no intro material, etc.
No, it really doesn't. "Active Learning" tends to mean that you studies the material beforehand (read the book, watched an online lecture, whatever) and then in class you discuss, practice, ask questions about whatever you didn't quite understand, etc.
The goal is that the intro material is absorbed by the student without a teacher present. Then the class is the discussion. So you have the teacher for the parts where having a thinking human is useful, and for the parts where in the past a human would blather at you, have Youtube blather at you instead.
Google, Comcast, Spectrum, etc want it. Those guys are "Big Telco."
What is "it" in this context?
Google wants NN. It does not count as "Big Telco" in any way shape or form. Fi and Fiber are tiny, and Google Voice is not big either (and not useful without an actual Telco).
Comcast and Spectrum are "Big Cable", but the difference between Big Cable and Big Telco is rather academic now since both offer the same services. And they don't want NN.
So I have no idea what "it" you have in mind that Google and Comcast both want? Money? Customers? But not NN and not "charge for the type of data traffic as well as the amount of data traffic".
If that was the goal, it failed. Nearly all small and mid-sized ISPs want net neutrality. It helps them, too, and outside if a handful of small ISPs who are taking a political, rather than business, stance, they all see that.
This is false.
If that were true, it seems easy to prove. What small ISPs are against Net Neutrality? Because most of them really seem to want it. It's mostly huge ISPs (Comcast, Verizon, etc) who are against Net Neutrality.
Which makes sense. Small ISPs cannot leverage their power to extort money from Netflix, Youtube, and other (media) competitors. So NN is not a big burden to them. Large ISPs can and do, so NN will make them less money. As always, follow the money.
When big ISPs extort money from media competitors, those competitors have to raise prices to cover the difference. So consumers pay more. Also, when big ISPs have media competitors the free market makes prices fall. NN means less monopoly power and more free market, so lower prices.
Not sure why you want less free market, but to each their own.
It was to be a short stay, but she illegally remained in the country for months.
Wow, talk about burying the lede. The Trump campaign was colluding with illegal immigrants! Who, I have been told, are all criminals and rapists. Or is that just the brown skinned ones? I don't follow the latest racist rantings.
It's true that when someone says "unemployment is 5,3%" they don't go into the exact details of the number, and how there are other (possibly more valid) numbers that people could use.
It's also true that when someone says "it's hot today" they don't go into the physics behind temperature and kinetic energy in particles, and that "hot" is a completely relative term.
What's not true is that when someone uses the shorthand version (of either unemployment or temperature), it's because they are trying to deceive. Using U-3 unemployment is perfectly valid, especially because it is easily comparable to the U-3 number from last year. If you feel we should be using a different U-number, then you should explain which one is more valid and why. But complaining about "politicians" and "a rosier picture than reality" implies that you don't want a more valid number, you just want to whine.
They are something that you're letting out into the environment. They aren't something you're injecting into a single person.
Not to worry, things you inject into a person cannot possibly get into the environment. Nope, can't happen. Never, no way, no how.
GMOs are like Dick Cheney deciding he owns your house because his out of control dog shat on your lawn.
I think you are confusing "GMOs" and "GMO patents". It's fair to dislike GMO patents. Disliking GMOs because you dislike GMO patents is like disliking literature because you don't like copyright law.
It sounds like you're trying to resolve the cognitive dissonance between "GMOs bad" and "cancer treatment (with GMOs) good". I submit that a better solution would be to look at why you dislike GMOs and see how logical that dislike is.
The only thing 'new' is that some very large companies (google and facebook) have inserted themselves between the news organizations and their customers, and those companies keep most of the revenue generated by the news organzations work.
First: Google and Facebook didn't "insert themselves". They made products, and people have chosen to use those products.
Second and more important: "keep most of the revenue". What revenue does Google make from Google News? You click on a story and then read that story on the news site, with ads placed by the news organization. (I don't use Facebook; do they also just link to the story or do they post the whole story on Facebook?)
The problem is that nobody is buying news (paper, magazine, whatever) subscriptions anymore. This is a problem, because we need news and news organizations need money to make good news stories. But the solution is not to try to strong-arm Google and Facebook. I'm not sure what the right long-term solution is.
(My current solution is to subscribe to a few newspapers and to donate money to my local NPR station, and to still find stories via Google News, but this may not scale.)
Note, I think that $1200 is a ludicrous amount of money to spend on a phone, but really, so is $400 and I pay that and more regularly.
A phone will not play games as well as your full-featured gaming computer, but it will be slightly more portable. It's a completely different device, and I know people who spend $600/year on their gaming rig (amortized) who use their gaming machines a lot less than they use their phone. So while $1200 for a two-year phone is crazy to me, it's not necessarily a bad idea.
Eventually yes, but not for a while. Oil-based fuels will still be the most energy-dense solutions many years, so the need for oil will continue, sadly. But if the demand for oil decreases, the flood of income into that part of the world will also decrease. Which seems like a fine idea to me.
This is not some secret tinfoil-hat stuff, it's all quite open for anyone who looks.
Oh good, then you can post a reference please. Because as far as I can tell, CALEA applies to both Title I and Title II.
It's just that nobody who wants what the politicians call NN, including the MSM, wants to talk about it.
Yeah, I played the SJGames Illuminati card game too. "Punk Rockers control the NSA, which controls the Democrats and Big Media, all controlled by the Servants of Cthulhu". Fun game (though it needs updated groups), but if you're using it for real life then you've got a problem.
Your ISPs are already happy to sell you unrestricted lines for $200/month; you can run businesses, servers, bittorrent, and anything else you want on those.
Bzzzzzt, try again. Once again, you show that you don't know how routing works. I have Verizon Business FIOS at my house. That means I can run servers at my house just fine, but you know how Verizon doesn't provision enough bandwidth to Netflix (and refuses to allow Netflix caches in their datacenters)? Well, that means that Netflix is just as shitty for business as for residential service.
Be that as it may, you obviously have an excellent idea of how it works, which is why you are lobbying for others to be forced to subsidize you.
As I said, I pay for business service because residential service is uniformly terrible, so I'm not sure what you're going on about, I'm paying for a fast connection from Netflix (among others). Verizon doesn't want to give me a fast connection from Netflix unless they also get Netflix to cough up some money. So it doesn't really matter how fast my connection is, if I cannot get bits from the places I'd like. You may like businesses double-dipping, but I don't. I'd prefer not to have the government step in, but if that's the only way to stop the double-dipping, then that's what we need.
There is no net neutrality right now, so that's delusional. What is stopping your ISP from delivering poor service is that you wouldn't be interested in buying poor service from them.
Explain to me, please, how I can vote with my wallet when the only two ISPs in my area are two of the ISPs who lobbied hard against NN?
They are pretending that they are doing it for the benefit of Internet users and small startups, when their actual motivation is to screw over users by having them pay for delivering unwanted ads and to screw over startups by killing a lot of business models and perpetuating an ad-based business model.
Wow, you really have no idea how the internet works. I mean, this is not your usual "I don't really understand the details" and is instead master-level "LA LA LA IF I IGNORE REALITY THEN I CANNOT BE WRONG" delusion.
Trump could not do that, but Congress could. The courts would probably be unhappy about that of course; Congress can delegate their authority (as they do for the EPA, FDA, FCC, and many others), but giving it up wholesale seems sketchy. But Congress could pass that law, and the Trump-boy will sign anything Pence puts in front of him.
But, its true. Nowhere in the previous US of A's was the office whose duty is to protect the environment, actually damaging the environment and cited to court for that.
You must be very young. During republican administrations, the EPA regularly tries to damage the environment. Actually, that's not directly true. They try to give benefits to their main constituents (various companies who donate heavily). This involves letting those companies make and keep lots of money, often by damaging the environment, so the end result is the same.
When they're out of power, Republicans claim that government is completely incompetent. When they're in power, they prove it.
The default is a powerful motivator. Most phones have Google as the default search engine. Most people seem to have Google as their default desktop search engine due to it being the default in Chrome and Firefox or their company.
While the default IS a powerful motivator, I don't think that's what's happening here. My wife's work did not allow any browsers except for IE; whenever IE got an update, the search engine would be set back to the default (bing). At which point her co-workers would all bug her to help then change the search back to Google.
People don't use Google because it's the default. They go through a reasonable amount of effort to change from the non-Google default. It's a bit freaky, actually, but it's true.
I'm a "Tech Employee" and American citizen, but many of my co-workers were born in other countries and I am very nervous that Trump's anti-immigrant rhetoric is causing them problems. I am nervous that many of my talented co-workers may have problems staying in the US, and that future potential-co-workers will not be hired because of the legal changes.
Note that some companies abuse the H1B visa program, and I'm happy with changes to fix that. But what I hear is "all immigrants BAD", which is stupid. I feel like the prevailing attitude is "the US's borders should have been closed the day after MY ancestors got here".
If you're in the US, you are the descendant of immigrants. (Though full-blooded native americans at least have a stringer claim than the rest of us.)
The technical term for parents who teach abstinence is "grandparents". This is demonstrable. Look at the teenage pregnancy stats for various US states. Seriously, look it up. In general, the more conservative, the more pregnancies. It's not that liberal states have less teenage sex, they just have more available birth control and more kids who know how important it is.
The average time between puberty and sexual activity hasn't changed all that much throughout history. It used to be that kids had later puberty and early weddings; now it is very early puberty and late weddings.
Authors are allowed to create whatever they want (or at least, whatever they can convince someone to fund.) I'm allowed to watch whatever I want.
But authors don't have the freedom to force me to watch what THEY want. You seem to be missing that. If I want to watch the author's movie with the dirty bits cut out, that's my freedom and has nothing to do with the author, as long as their original version exists.
Note that if this legally holds up, then I would expect similar services to pop up which add swearing and nudity to movies. Seems equally valid.
Note that I think that trying to protect children from language and sex is pointless and IMO more harmful than showing it to them and discussing the context with them. But people have the right to be stupid, and kids mostly turn out okay in the end.
Slashdot Mirror
Silly hobbies like driving vehicles or cooking pot roast with a pressure cooker?
Driving vehicles is an excellent comparison. Vehicles are crazy dangerous; therefore we have many regulations involving registering, inspecting and insuring those dangerous devices. Also licensing and testing the drivers. I agree with you, we should have similar regulations for firearms.
Pressure cookers, though... I'm a poor cook but the most likely terrible result with a pressure cooker is a ceiling covered in strained gravy and veggies. Also, unlike vehicles and firearms, I'm not likely to be killed by your incompetence with a pressure cooker unless you tie me up next to your stove.
I don't want a doctor who learned how to learn. I want a doctor who actually learned.
I'm the opposite. Some of the facts a doctor learned when they were in school 30 years ago have since been found to be completely wrong. We've made some impressive leaps since then. But a doctor who learned how to learn will not depend on the old facts and will instead continue to learn new techniques and diagnostic methods.
Ther's a middle ground though. When they say "no lectures", it implies no discussions, no intro material, etc.
No, it really doesn't. "Active Learning" tends to mean that you studies the material beforehand (read the book, watched an online lecture, whatever) and then in class you discuss, practice, ask questions about whatever you didn't quite understand, etc.
The goal is that the intro material is absorbed by the student without a teacher present. Then the class is the discussion. So you have the teacher for the parts where having a thinking human is useful, and for the parts where in the past a human would blather at you, have Youtube blather at you instead.
Google, Comcast, Spectrum, etc want it. Those guys are "Big Telco."
What is "it" in this context?
Google wants NN. It does not count as "Big Telco" in any way shape or form. Fi and Fiber are tiny, and Google Voice is not big either (and not useful without an actual Telco).
Comcast and Spectrum are "Big Cable", but the difference between Big Cable and Big Telco is rather academic now since both offer the same services. And they don't want NN.
So I have no idea what "it" you have in mind that Google and Comcast both want? Money? Customers? But not NN and not "charge for the type of data traffic as well as the amount of data traffic".
If that was the goal, it failed. Nearly all small and mid-sized ISPs want net neutrality. It helps them, too, and outside if a handful of small ISPs who are taking a political, rather than business, stance, they all see that.
This is false.
If that were true, it seems easy to prove. What small ISPs are against Net Neutrality? Because most of them really seem to want it. It's mostly huge ISPs (Comcast, Verizon, etc) who are against Net Neutrality.
Which makes sense. Small ISPs cannot leverage their power to extort money from Netflix, Youtube, and other (media) competitors. So NN is not a big burden to them. Large ISPs can and do, so NN will make them less money. As always, follow the money.
When big ISPs extort money from media competitors, those competitors have to raise prices to cover the difference. So consumers pay more. Also, when big ISPs have media competitors the free market makes prices fall. NN means less monopoly power and more free market, so lower prices.
Not sure why you want less free market, but to each their own.
It was to be a short stay, but she illegally remained in the country for months.
Wow, talk about burying the lede. The Trump campaign was colluding with illegal immigrants! Who, I have been told, are all criminals and rapists. Or is that just the brown skinned ones? I don't follow the latest racist rantings.
It's true that when someone says "unemployment is 5,3%" they don't go into the exact details of the number, and how there are other (possibly more valid) numbers that people could use.
It's also true that when someone says "it's hot today" they don't go into the physics behind temperature and kinetic energy in particles, and that "hot" is a completely relative term.
What's not true is that when someone uses the shorthand version (of either unemployment or temperature), it's because they are trying to deceive. Using U-3 unemployment is perfectly valid, especially because it is easily comparable to the U-3 number from last year. If you feel we should be using a different U-number, then you should explain which one is more valid and why. But complaining about "politicians" and "a rosier picture than reality" implies that you don't want a more valid number, you just want to whine.
They are something that you're letting out into the environment. They aren't something you're injecting into a single person.
Not to worry, things you inject into a person cannot possibly get into the environment. Nope, can't happen. Never, no way, no how.
GMOs are like Dick Cheney deciding he owns your house because his out of control dog shat on your lawn.
I think you are confusing "GMOs" and "GMO patents". It's fair to dislike GMO patents. Disliking GMOs because you dislike GMO patents is like disliking literature because you don't like copyright law.
It sounds like you're trying to resolve the cognitive dissonance between "GMOs bad" and "cancer treatment (with GMOs) good". I submit that a better solution would be to look at why you dislike GMOs and see how logical that dislike is.
The only thing 'new' is that some very large companies (google and facebook) have inserted themselves between the news organizations and their customers, and those companies keep most of the revenue generated by the news organzations work.
First: Google and Facebook didn't "insert themselves". They made products, and people have chosen to use those products.
Second and more important: "keep most of the revenue". What revenue does Google make from Google News? You click on a story and then read that story on the news site, with ads placed by the news organization. (I don't use Facebook; do they also just link to the story or do they post the whole story on Facebook?)
The problem is that nobody is buying news (paper, magazine, whatever) subscriptions anymore. This is a problem, because we need news and news organizations need money to make good news stories. But the solution is not to try to strong-arm Google and Facebook. I'm not sure what the right long-term solution is.
(My current solution is to subscribe to a few newspapers and to donate money to my local NPR station, and to still find stories via Google News, but this may not scale.)
Why not?
Note, I think that $1200 is a ludicrous amount of money to spend on a phone, but really, so is $400 and I pay that and more regularly.
A phone will not play games as well as your full-featured gaming computer, but it will be slightly more portable. It's a completely different device, and I know people who spend $600/year on their gaming rig (amortized) who use their gaming machines a lot less than they use their phone. So while $1200 for a two-year phone is crazy to me, it's not necessarily a bad idea.
A bold move! But it makes sense. The most expensive electrons are usually the best electrons! That's just logic, my friend.
Eventually yes, but not for a while. Oil-based fuels will still be the most energy-dense solutions many years, so the need for oil will continue, sadly. But if the demand for oil decreases, the flood of income into that part of the world will also decrease. Which seems like a fine idea to me.
With base stations that are "up to 50 feet away", I have more problems with the word "mobile", actually.
This is not some secret tinfoil-hat stuff, it's all quite open for anyone who looks.
Oh good, then you can post a reference please. Because as far as I can tell, CALEA applies to both Title I and Title II.
It's just that nobody who wants what the politicians call NN, including the MSM, wants to talk about it.
Yeah, I played the SJGames Illuminati card game too. "Punk Rockers control the NSA, which controls the Democrats and Big Media, all controlled by the Servants of Cthulhu". Fun game (though it needs updated groups), but if you're using it for real life then you've got a problem.
Your ISPs are already happy to sell you unrestricted lines for $200/month; you can run businesses, servers, bittorrent, and anything else you want on those.
Bzzzzzt, try again. Once again, you show that you don't know how routing works. I have Verizon Business FIOS at my house. That means I can run servers at my house just fine, but you know how Verizon doesn't provision enough bandwidth to Netflix (and refuses to allow Netflix caches in their datacenters)? Well, that means that Netflix is just as shitty for business as for residential service.
Be that as it may, you obviously have an excellent idea of how it works, which is why you are lobbying for others to be forced to subsidize you.
As I said, I pay for business service because residential service is uniformly terrible, so I'm not sure what you're going on about, I'm paying for a fast connection from Netflix (among others). Verizon doesn't want to give me a fast connection from Netflix unless they also get Netflix to cough up some money. So it doesn't really matter how fast my connection is, if I cannot get bits from the places I'd like. You may like businesses double-dipping, but I don't. I'd prefer not to have the government step in, but if that's the only way to stop the double-dipping, then that's what we need.
There is no net neutrality right now, so that's delusional. What is stopping your ISP from delivering poor service is that you wouldn't be interested in buying poor service from them.
Explain to me, please, how I can vote with my wallet when the only two ISPs in my area are two of the ISPs who lobbied hard against NN?
They are pretending that they are doing it for the benefit of Internet users and small startups, when their actual motivation is to screw over users by having them pay for delivering unwanted ads and to screw over startups by killing a lot of business models and perpetuating an ad-based business model.
Wow, you really have no idea how the internet works. I mean, this is not your usual "I don't really understand the details" and is instead master-level "LA LA LA IF I IGNORE REALITY THEN I CANNOT BE WRONG" delusion.
and when whatever they try fails BLAME SOMEONE ELSE for their lack of understanding.
It's not that bad. In fact, it's downright presidential.
Trump could not do that, but Congress could. The courts would probably be unhappy about that of course; Congress can delegate their authority (as they do for the EPA, FDA, FCC, and many others), but giving it up wholesale seems sketchy. But Congress could pass that law, and the Trump-boy will sign anything Pence puts in front of him.
But, its true. Nowhere in the previous US of A's was the office whose duty is to protect the environment, actually damaging the environment and cited to court for that.
You must be very young. During republican administrations, the EPA regularly tries to damage the environment. Actually, that's not directly true. They try to give benefits to their main constituents (various companies who donate heavily). This involves letting those companies make and keep lots of money, often by damaging the environment, so the end result is the same.
When they're out of power, Republicans claim that government is completely incompetent. When they're in power, they prove it.
Not just that; they are also useful for downloading Chrome, apparently.
Most of my streaming is via Chromecast, which Amazon has chosen to not support well. So even though I have Prime, I almost never watch Amazon videos.
The default is a powerful motivator. Most phones have Google as the default search engine. Most people seem to have Google as their default desktop search engine due to it being the default in Chrome and Firefox or their company.
While the default IS a powerful motivator, I don't think that's what's happening here. My wife's work did not allow any browsers except for IE; whenever IE got an update, the search engine would be set back to the default (bing). At which point her co-workers would all bug her to help then change the search back to Google.
People don't use Google because it's the default. They go through a reasonable amount of effort to change from the non-Google default. It's a bit freaky, actually, but it's true.
I'm a "Tech Employee" and American citizen, but many of my co-workers were born in other countries and I am very nervous that Trump's anti-immigrant rhetoric is causing them problems. I am nervous that many of my talented co-workers may have problems staying in the US, and that future potential-co-workers will not be hired because of the legal changes.
Note that some companies abuse the H1B visa program, and I'm happy with changes to fix that. But what I hear is "all immigrants BAD", which is stupid. I feel like the prevailing attitude is "the US's borders should have been closed the day after MY ancestors got here".
If you're in the US, you are the descendant of immigrants. (Though full-blooded native americans at least have a stringer claim than the rest of us.)
The technical term for parents who teach abstinence is "grandparents". This is demonstrable. Look at the teenage pregnancy stats for various US states. Seriously, look it up. In general, the more conservative, the more pregnancies. It's not that liberal states have less teenage sex, they just have more available birth control and more kids who know how important it is.
The average time between puberty and sexual activity hasn't changed all that much throughout history. It used to be that kids had later puberty and early weddings; now it is very early puberty and late weddings.
Why not all freedoms?
Authors are allowed to create whatever they want (or at least, whatever they can convince someone to fund.) I'm allowed to watch whatever I want.
But authors don't have the freedom to force me to watch what THEY want. You seem to be missing that. If I want to watch the author's movie with the dirty bits cut out, that's my freedom and has nothing to do with the author, as long as their original version exists.
Note that if this legally holds up, then I would expect similar services to pop up which add swearing and nudity to movies. Seems equally valid.
Note that I think that trying to protect children from language and sex is pointless and IMO more harmful than showing it to them and discussing the context with them. But people have the right to be stupid, and kids mostly turn out okay in the end.